Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Time for a New Conservative Supreme Court!

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Even though the decision on property was complete #e last week, we need to get some of these stupid laws and decision that have come out of the Court since the 80's to cease and desist.


Roe v Wade for one....




posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Come back from Oblivion, oh thread!


Other than Roe v. Wade, what decisions are you talking about?



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid


Other than Roe v. Wade, what decisions are you talking about?


C'mon ECK. You know Ed means all the decesions that involved something the 'tulipwalkers' had a hand in passing!



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 02:41 PM
link   
No more TULIPWALKING legislation!!!!


I want to know what that is.



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Right here and now, I want to hear who members think will be the next Supreme and why.



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Hope to God he/she is not a liberal winnie.



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Hey Ed, you still havn't told us what legislation you're referring to.

What legislation do you not like, that you think should be overturned?

Let's hear it!



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Even though the decision on property was complete #e last week, we need to get some of these stupid laws and decision that have come out of the Court since the 80's to cease and desist.


Roe v Wade for one....


Seeing as though Roe Vs. Wade was in 1973......how is this even slightly related to Sandra Day O'Conner?

edited: to erase the "personal" attack. Sorry Ed.

[edit on 2-7-2005 by MacMerdin]



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by MacMerdin
Seeing as though Roe Vs. Wade was in 1973......how is this even slightly related to Sandra Day O'Conner?


Waiting for Ed's reply..




[edit on 7/2/05 by EastCoastKid]



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Wasn't getting personal. Isn't this sight about DENYING IGNORANCE?

Ok...legislation that needs overturned......how about the medical marijuana issue. It's ok to use opiates (which are far more addicting and harmful) for pain but not a weed that can be eaten? But that's just one I have a problem with...still waiting for Ed's legislation that needs overturned.



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by MacMerdin
Wasn't getting personal. Isn't this sight about DENYING IGNORANCE?

Ok...legislation that needs overturned......how about the medical marijuana issue. It's ok to use opiates (which are far more addicting and harmful) for pain but not a weed that can be eaten?


I thoroughly agree with your above position. Outlawing mary jane for medicinal purposes or anything other than, to me, is just as wrong and ignorant as the ban on booze was.


It has everything to do with two groups: the religious right and the private prison industry. Both of which get two thumbs down from me!


[edit on 7/2/05 by EastCoastKid]

[edit on 7/2/05 by EastCoastKid]



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   
You're right ECK.....I edited my post.

I'm trying to think of more legislation.....I'm sure I'll come up with some.



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 06:04 PM
link   
I'm sure there's quite a bit of legislation both sides would like to ammend. The private property debate is one that I am most interested in. Their ruling was abominable to the little guy. Ed - that's you and me, brother.



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Edsinger if social consertives like you had there way you would be living in a London slum you wouldnt be posting on PTS because you would have no education.
Remember all those radicals who wanted to give women the vote? Turns out they were on the right side of history.
Consertive Econmics makes a lot of sense but trying to impose someone elses morals on society is asking for trouble.
Edsinger dare I say your not a consertive sure your views are to the right of political spectrum .You seem to be one of these people who are trying recreate a utopia that never existed.

[edit on 2-7-2005 by xpert11]



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11

Edsinger dare I say your not a consertive sure your views are to the right of political spectrum .You seem to be one of these people who are trying recreate a utopia that never existed.


Whatever floats your boat, you socialists sure have made the workd grand havent you?



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger


Whatever floats your boat, you socialists sure have made the workd grand havent you?


You really dont get it do you? Having progressive social views dosnt make you a socialist. If you ever bother to get over the small mindness that has infected american politics we may share simila views on some econmic issues.

[edit on 2-7-2005 by xpert11]



posted on Jul, 2 2005 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Probably at least half of current U.S. law is unconstitutional due to an overly broad interpretation of the commerce clause...off the top of my head I'd say the Controlled Substances Act, the Clear Air Act, the Americans With Disabilities Act...many more...

[edit on 7/2/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Jul, 3 2005 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Wait DJ and Ed, according to you everything good is evil, and everything evil is good.

"How dare veterans want to be taken care of after they get a leg blown off! Damn Socialists taking care of the cannon fodder after it isn't useful to the corporation anymore."



posted on Jul, 3 2005 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Edsinger, this is your thread. I've asked you several times what legislation other than Roe v. Wade you oppose.

Can you elaborate? For the sake of discussion...



posted on Jul, 3 2005 @ 03:12 AM
link   
If this affected me I wouldnt be happy but I think that it raises an important issue.

I think we can agree that there is nothing wrong with having a fair judiciary. One that is comprised of both conservatives and liberals. The problem with this administration is that some of the people they pick for the judiciary are not upstanding conservatives, but extremists. Extremism is dangerous friends, because on whatever side its on it will only alienate most of us, be it moderates, independents or the opposing 'side'.

When you live in a nation you must realise that there are others you must live with and who have different beliefs than what you do. No level of the government should be changed so that it alienates the people just to please one group, because the government is the people and is supposed to reflect society as a whole.

thanks,
drfunk





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join