Flash Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 COMMENTARY | According to Fox News, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg advised the people who are writing Egypt's new constitution to not use the U.S. Constitution as a model. It was a curious statement for an American jurist to make. Ginsburg, whose job on the Supreme Court is to uphold the U.S. Constitution, has a curious but sadly widespread disdain for that document. A recent New York Times article suggested the American Constitution is losing its allure around the world. The main reason is it does not guarantee the right to, among other things, food, health care and education. In other words, Ginsberg and others on the left feel the Constitution is slanted too much toward preventing the government from doing things -- like putting people in jail without due process -- and not toward requiring the government to do things -- like providing people with a whole array of social services that liberals believe it should. Of course the right to food, health care and education has to be paid for, meaning people will be deprived of their property for that purpose. Barack Obama, in an infamous 2001 radio interview, suggested the Constitution is "deeply flawed,"according to Newsmax. According to an article in the Daily Caller, Obama has taken a casual view where it comes to adhering to the Constitution. Obama has violated the Constitution in a number of cases, from requiring an individual mandate under health care reform to defying the federal courts in imposing a deep water drilling ban in the Gulf of Mexico. http://news.yahoo.com/ruth-bader-ginsburg-trashes-constitution-she-impeached-232200921.html She should've been fired on the spot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted February 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh_BT82kxp8&feature=related Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkr Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) if you actually cared about the constitution so much(and actually passed a basic US government/history class), you would be aware that she can't be fired no matter how much you bitch for something like this. if she had actually done something, then an impeachment process would be the way to go. you disagree with her view that a constitution written in the second decade of the 21st century should be more modern than a constitution written in the 18th century? the constitution had its flaws when it was written, and its flaws were even commented on by the authors ffs. Edited February 15, 2012 by Lkr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted February 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 if you actually cared about the constitution so much(and actually passed a basic US government/history class), you would be aware that she can't be fired no matter how much you bitch for something like this. if she had actually done something, then an impeachment process would be the way to go. you disagree with her view that a constitution written in the second decade of the 21st century should be more modern than a constitution written in the 18th century? the constitution had its flaws when it was written, and its flaws were even commented on by the authors ffs. I know that under the constitution she can't be relieved of her duty but its pretty alarming that someone who's job is to uphold the constitution pretty much thinks its useless. That's scary to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NomarFachix Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Whose * Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted February 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Whose * http://www.otrbasketball.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NomarFachix Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Just helping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkr Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I know that under the constitution she can't be relieved of her duty but its pretty alarming that someone who's job is to uphold the constitution pretty much thinks its useless. That's scary to me.She doesn't think it is useless, she thinks that you can't be basing a government established in the 21st century on one that was built in the 18th century. There are many things I'm sure she believes should be incorporated from the US Constitution, but is making a point that in this day and age, there are many more things that people should have rights to. A lot of the things originally put in the US constitution would make no sense for a country the size of Egypt, and quite honestly, don't make sense in today's age to be honest. I don't see why it is scary that someone is criticizing the government, seeing as that was how the United States came to be in the first place. Democrat/Republican labels aside, I would have no problem with this statement coming from any government official, because it just makes sense. In my opinion, the media is blowing this way out of proportion and is trying to put a big swing on it that simply isn't there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoastNiner Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) She doesn't think it is useless, she thinks that you can't be basing a government established in the 21st century on one that was built in the 18th century. There are many things I'm sure she believes should be incorporated from the US Constitution, but is making a point that in this day and age, there are many more things that people should have rights to. A lot of the things originally put in the US constitution would make no sense for a country the size of Egypt, and quite honestly, don't make sense in today's age to be honest. I don't see why it is scary that someone is criticizing the government, seeing as that was how the United States came to be in the first place. Democrat/Republican labels aside, I would have no problem with this statement coming from any government official, because it just makes sense. In my opinion, the media is blowing this way out of proportion and is trying to put a big swing on it that simply isn't there. Read the first line, disregarded everything else. You're the one always trying to bring up PAST actions of Catholics in comparison to Muslims (mainly extremists) today, yet you now want to disregard something built in the 18th century. http://files.sharenator.com/interdasting_RE_story_of_my_life-s685x567-247518.jpg Edited February 15, 2012 by EastCoastNiner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkr Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 lol @ ecn logic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nitro Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 It's definitely a little odd considering her job is to uphold the constitution, but I don't think she should be fired over it. I mean, when I work for a company there are plenty of things I disagree with and things that I feel should be ran differently, but that doesn't mean I am not comptetent at completing tasks in the way I was hired to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teletopez Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 You're the one always trying to bring up PAST actions of Catholics in comparison to Muslims (mainly extremists) today, yet you now want to disregard something built in the 18th century.I don't even... Wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted February 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 He did say extremists though, not all Muslims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teletopez Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) He did say extremists though, not all Muslims.That's not what I was reacting to. What you mentioned is a whole other conversation. I was just shocked at his ridiculous connection that he thought would prove his point. Edited February 17, 2012 by Brooklyn Bound Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoastNiner Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) I don't even... Wow. What don't you even? He wants to throw out laws and amendments formed many years ago that are still used today, yet he always wants to bring up the actions of Catholics from many years ago when someone mentions religion or says that Muslim extremists and Islam are causing lots of problems today. What's so difficult to understand about that? He doesn't want to acknowledge the actions of Muslims (MAINLY extremists) today and what problems Islam has created in the world today. It's alright to want to defend a religion, but it's dumb to try and defend it blindly. I'm not going back a few hundred years because I know what Catholics did was wrong, but I'll leave you with this. Where are most of the violent problems in today's world? Are they in the U.S. and civilized European countries, or are they in the Middle East and Africa where Islam is the dominant religion? You can call it a coincidence if you want, but we both know that isn't true. "Religion of peace". Edited February 17, 2012 by EastCoastNiner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teletopez Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 I'm on my phone so I'll look tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkr Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 hey guys molesting little boys and restricting women's rights is no big deal. blowing up buildings in norway is totally cool. just thought i'd let you all know Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoastNiner Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 I'm on my phone so I'll look tomorrow. Never-mind. I saw your post above, so you can ignore my post. I'll just delete it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoastNiner Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 hey guys molesting little boys and restricting women's rights is no big deal. blowing up buildings in norway is totally cool. just thought i'd let you all know You know what's even cooler? Placing mass murder's in "prisons" like this and trying to "rehabilitate" them, and think it's a good idea to not give them a life-sentence. http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1989083_2144217,00.html Damn, that's a such a tough life for a mass murderer, Catholic or not. I mean, damn, 21 years is such a long time for committing such a brutal and cowardly act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lkr Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 what does that even have to do with anything? once again you suck at making "points" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoastNiner Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 what does that even have to do with anything? once again you suck at making "points" It makes ten times more sense than your post. Who is saying it's good to molest boys? Who's saying it's good to restrict women's rights? I know you're referring to the contraceptives issue, which isn't restricting their rights. They can buy them elsewhere. What was your point again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted February 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 I see the point ECN is making here but to know you'd have to visit the Catholic Church thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teletopez Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 What don't you even? He wants to throw out laws and amendments formed many years ago that are still used today, yet he always wants to bring up the actions of Catholics from many years ago when someone mentions religion or says that Muslim extremists and Islam are causing lots of problems today.This logic is hilarious. If a law is obsolete and simply doesn't work in today's world, then what's wrong with calling for an adjustment? Isn't that how amendments come about in the first place? As for the other part of that argument, if you think that the actions of a religion's followers define the religion itself (and based on what you go on to say in this post, you do), then why should it matter if the example is from the sixteenth century? Religion doesn't change, or in the case of Christianity, the core of the religion hasn't changed since the sixteenth century. It's alright to want to defend a religion, but it's dumb to try and defend it blindly. I'm not going back a few hundred years because I know what Catholics did was wrong, but I'll leave you with this.But I take it that you wouldn't dare blame Catholicism for those problems? Because if you wouldn't, then that's hypocritical. Where are most of the violent problems in today's world? Are they in the U.S. and civilized European countries, or are they in the Middle East and Africa where Islam is the dominant religion? You can call it a coincidence if you want, but we both know that isn't true. "Religion of peace".Or you can use some common sense to tell that a religion that means peace and preaches peace isn't the problem. Here's a fun fact. No Islamic country in the world today properly practices Shariah law. Let me ask you this. What's your point? If you really think Islam is a problem, then what is your solution to it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted February 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 ECN you threadjacked the [expletive] out me right now...but carry on. Someone post the Dis Gon Be Gud gif. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted February 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) http://www.foxnews.c...uicide-mission/ Dropped this in here since we're on the topic. It was only of time before Al-Queda ditched the elaborate plots and tried something like this. Thoughts? Edited February 17, 2012 by Flash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.