Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Politics
 DumbMasses
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

GeeMack
SFN Regular

USA
1093 Posts

Posted - 03/16/2006 :  20:27:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GeeMack a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by THoR...

Yes, they would be interpreting state law vs The Const...a power not granted the Supreme Court by ANY provision of our charter.
As hard as you might try to back pedal, you're still just babbling irrelevancies. The US Constitution, directly contrary to the first sentence from your essay in the opening post, requires interpretation. And whether or not the Supreme Court is currently outstepping its originally intended bounds, Article III of the Constitution indeed does empower the judicial branch to be responsible for judgment in cases arising under the Constitution. To effect such judgment, they must absolutely interpret the Constitution.
quote:
Easy to attack the messenger - impossible to attack the message
Maybe you don't understand. The messages, both your essay in the opening post and your complaints about the criticism of it, are bullshit. The essay opens with a blatant falsehood, which virtually destroys any opportunity you might have to communicate any of your following concerns. And your response to the criticism of that has so far amounted to nothing more than whining. Even if the messenger, you, hadn't proven yourself to be a mouthy jackass, the message would still be bullshit.
Go to Top of Page

THoR
Skeptic Friend

USA
151 Posts

Posted - 03/18/2006 :  18:00:39   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit THoR's Homepage Send THoR a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by GeeMack

quote:
Originally posted by THoR...

Yes, they would be interpreting state law vs The Const...a power not granted the Supreme Court by ANY provision of our charter.
As hard as you might try to back pedal, you're still just babbling irrelevancies. The US Constitution, directly contrary to the first sentence from your essay in the opening post, requires interpretation. And whether or not the Supreme Court is currently outstepping its originally intended bounds, Article III of the Constitution indeed does empower the judicial branch to be responsible for judgment in cases arising under the Constitution. To effect such judgment, they must absolutely interpret the Constitution.
quote:
Easy to attack the messenger - impossible to attack the message
Maybe you don't understand. The messages, both your essay in the opening post and your complaints about the criticism of it, are bullshit. The essay opens with a blatant falsehood, which virtually destroys any opportunity you might have to communicate any of your following concerns. And your response to the criticism of that has so far amounted to nothing more than whining. Even if the messenger, you, hadn't proven yourself to be a mouthy jackass, the message would still be bullshit.



Oh, cut me to the quick. You really put me in my place, didn't you. Is this where I'm supposed to respond to your pointless ad hominem (go look it up) tantrum with a put down of my own.
GeeMack, I'd gladly insult your intelligence, but that's impossible to do, instead it must suffice for me to say that you are a glowing example of the true meaning of brotherhood...thou art, indeed, thy brother's father.
Edited by - THoR on 03/18/2006 18:05:38
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26022 Posts

Posted - 03/18/2006 :  19:02:16   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
I'll ask again: without interpreting anything, can you, THoR, tell me what the words "free exercise," "well regulated," "unreasonable," "probable cause," "speedy," "excessive," "cruel and unusual" mean in absolute terms related to the Amendments in which they can be found?

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.09 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000