posted on Jul, 11 2008 @ 04:09 PM
Here is an interesting read.It's been translated from french to english.
"We must punish them. Otherwise, woe! Anyone who hesitates
"Is a soul night that the demon visit;
"The judge read indulgent crime like a dog;
"Whoever does not know these things knows nothing.
Published by Clouseau at 29.4.08 Links to this post
Labels: JUDICIAL ACTIVISME
Monday, February 25, 2008
Upon the issue Everyone's drooling with a homosexual cards and a baveux who think from the thigh of Jupiter, last night at Radio-Propaganda
homosexual and abortion, the brother-mason Dalton-long chin asking its guests decide on the fifure (homosexuality). As Radio-Propaganda has long
reputation as a nest of homosexuals, see featherbed on this blog, it's not surprising to see guests powdered despise those who do not bite the hook
liars humanists . This item is not the only one to give us this kind of reply:
Is there still who are against abortion or homosexuality!
As David Suzuki, the Green Hell's Angel, they want to imprison their opponents.
A few years ago, a woman who had crossed the limits of safety of a clinic killers of children was sentenced to six months in prison. When she wanted
to explain, the judge, a good humanist, he was sharply told to shut up and do his time in prison.
What is extraordinary, murderers are only one sixth of their sentences, and it systematically.
Christians were put to the kernel for refusing to rent a room for homosexuals, a man was put to the kernel for making one ad denouncing homosexuality,
the Bible is regarded as a book by hate courses. If you believe the environmental Greens tomorrow will not succeed to imprison their opponents, you
should think twice.
A person who is not doing its credo of abortion, the fifure and the greenery is not working in the liberal media. It's as simple as that.
Published by Clouseau at 25.2.08 Links to this post
Labels: JUDICIAL ACTIVISME, ABORTION, HOMOSEXUALITÉ
Saturday, September 23, 2006
MILITANTISME JUDICIAL: appointees who are not accountable to anyone
There is good reason for the disruption of the social fabric in Quebec and here's one answer:
On 6 September 2004
Prices lead in the culture war
Interview with the American judge Robert H. Bork
A war of culture takes place in Canada in which courses brazenly trying to reorganize Canada to agree to the vision of his appointees who are not
accountable to anyone.
This culture war has become clearly apparent in 2003 when the liberal judges of Courts of Appeal of British Columbia and Ontario, have ignored the
fact that since ancient times and in all cultures and major religions World, marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Instead, the courts have
declared that marriage also includes a union between members of the same sex. Nothing illustrates the destructive power of tyranny that this legal
The Canadian court decisions on gay marriage have now poisoned the Etats_Unis, where on November 18, 2003 the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, relying
heavily on Canadian courts, in a decision of four against three, have declared that homosexual couples in this state had the legal right to marry
under the constitution of the state.
Former presidential candidate for the post American, Gary Bauer, now president of the organization American Values, "said:
"For those who did not understand the cultural struggle today is the perfect illustration. Four individuals robe trying to seize power of the people
of Massachusetts and their elected representatives and order a cultural outcome of their choice. These unelected judges try to impose what no elected
legislature would dare consider. And in fact, they ordered the unprecedented destruction of marriage despite tremendous public support for the key
component of society. Prices are digging in fact the voice of the people, ignoring their own version of social progress. "
The American judge Robert H. Bork is a central figure in this ugly culture war distorting the U.S. and Canadian companies. Formerly a judge of the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the District of Columbia in 1987 he was appointed by President Reagan to the U.S. Supreme Court.
After a concerted smear campaign by special interest groups, his appointment has not been confirmed and a new word entered the American language: "To
bork." That means launching a relentless and systematic attack against a candidate, particularly by the media. Some social conservatives consider
Robert Bork as an eloquent spokesperson in the world délabrant. Judge Bork has written a new book, Coercing Virtue (Vertu Binding), in which he
discusses extensively the acquisition of control by the courts of the
culture. What follows is an edited version of an interview with Judge Bork
which appeared in the Meridian Magazine (November 19, 2003). His comments and thoughts directly apply to the situation in Canada as well.
Q. In your recent book you describe a judiciary which took a lot of power and which routinely reverses the will of citizens. The judges have become
agents of change
Cultural _ what many of us would call the cultural deprivation. Do not sont_ils checked and controlled? The founding fathers created a system ont_ils
wrongdoing that would allow a judiciary escaped become unelected legislators?
A. There is a defect. The Founders had no idea that a court could become. The courses they knew were modest in their ambitions and in their decisions.
They have not planned
court assumed the power to make laws. That is why they have failed to provide meaningful checks and balances regarding the judiciary. Nobody means to
the judiciary. [Editor's note: We have in Canada article S.33 of the Charter, the notwithstanding clause, which is not used.]
Cover this court activist of a culture that is increasingly lax and do not make moral judgments and you have a portrait of where we as a society. The
court becomes a part
crucial in developing a culture of radical individualism where no one has the right to criticize anything on a basemorale.
Q. What does "legal activism"?
A. The term is so much noise that it must be defined. The judges embark on activism when their decisions can not plausibly be connected to the
constitution they claim to uphold. Such imperialism is now characteristic of most Western nations. This suggests that the problem is not simply due to
some unfortunate appointments to the Supreme Court. It is inherent to the men and women who were given power without democratic accountability.
Q. What can people do about this? Sommes_nous to remain there doing nothing while the restructure our world?
A. People are resistant to certain things that are taking place. They pass laws, for example, against pornography and cancel the court. One thing that
might be to have judges who understand the legal role, which is much smaller than their current behaviour not shown.
Q. We received a letter from a reader who said she had worked hard to pass Proposition 22 in California to define marriage as between a man and a
questioned whether a court could destroy all its efforts in this valait_il sentence? When judges remove the expression of the general will of citizens
by denying their laws, it sape_t_il the will of the people? They apprend_il they are unable to govern?
A. A horrible thing the decision on abortion is that it came from the judiciary. In all other Western nations, it is a legislative decision. Our court
has removed from the will of the people _ including the horror called partial birth abortion. The predisposition of people to homosexuality is in a
spectrum. Some people in their formative stage can be leurrées in this lifestyle and it is a pity because it is an unhappy life. We must talk about
the impact that homosexuality has on the psychology of a person instead of always talking about other things. The rates of mental illness and suicide
attempts are 3 to 4 times higher among homosexuals. The usual response to these facts is that this is the fault of discrimination against homosexuals.
However, in countries like Pays_Bas and Belgium where we allow homosexual marriage, these disparities in mental health still exist.
So there is the question of diseases that are frantic among homosexuals. We owe it to the youth to preserve them to marry this lifestyle and the only
way is to keep
the difference between heterosexuality and homosexuality.
The marriage would be completely debased by allowing homosexual marriages. Why serait_il something special if people could only sign to marry on the
basis of activity
sexual? The reports homosexuals are not usually characterized by fidelity. The rate of promiscuity among them is much higher. The heterosexual bear
much of the blame for
what happened to marriage. Admitting this does not mean we should be doing more down and destroy it completely.
Q. What can citizens while they watch their world make this drastic social change?
A. The public must be alerted that we systematically reversing their culture with a global vision lax, individualistic, non_judiciaire enforced by the
courts. Now you can show caresses oral sex on cable TV, you can show the simulated child pornography on computer. This is not just a bad decision
isolated from the course to force this viewpoint, but a systematic progression.
Q. Why this liberal philosophy a_t_elle flowers while the Conservatives seem asleep at the wheel?
A. The Liberals are more aggressive, but in doing so, the Conservatives do not control the major means of education. The Liberals control the
universities. They give the chairs.
They control the news agencies, which are uniformly on the left. The public denounced Fox News as terribly arrested in his opinions. We do not hate it
because it is conservative, but because this is not liberal and it is enough to be denounced. The Liberals control the media, radio, television, many
bureaucracies church, many clergy, museum staff, staff foundations and Hollywood. These educational opportunities are very left and, of course, they
are rewarded for giving young people.
Q. There is a way to completely change it so that social conservatives have more influence?
A. I have no idea. If I knew I would be there to explain how. Irving Kristol said: "There is no war culture. There was one, but the other side won.
"Kafka said:" There is hope, but not for us. "T.S. Eliot said: "For us it only remains to be tested. The rest is not our case. "Of course it is
our case, that is why we try. You are fighting everywhere you can deliver the struggle and never relent.
Q. Where the cultural war trouve_t_elle its worst expression?
A. In his aversion to religion. The biggest divisions between pseudo_intellectuels and the rest of the world is religion. They are very indifferent or
hostile to religions. It is perfectly clear and this has been explained clearly in the book by Philip Hamburger: Separation of Church and State. There
is no possible basis for this separation wall, but classes are moving forward to erase religion from the public square. The religion is the politeness
and restraint in our society, which
disappears as a religion as it is being marginalized and expelled from the debate. The Supreme Court has played a large role to do that.
Q. If the courts take a legislative role and trample something as important to most people as religion, why, as the polls say, generally tiennent_ils
the Supreme Court in such high esteem?
A. They believe that the Court decides in principle while legislators are opportunistic. They do not include courses or nature of what is happening.
Q. Est_il possible to help people understand that such courses will, culture goes? They must pay attention to what kind of judges support their
A. I do not know if people will never be educated enough to realize that they are governed by liberal judges. They say they speak on behalf of the
Constitution and is a revered document, so people believe that this must be true. Even the Conservatives, if they like something, believe it must be
in the Constitution. I had a bitter debate with conservatives who felt that banning abortion would be in the Constitution. Whatever your feelings
about abortion, this is not in the Constitution. There is nothing that speaks of the topic. Conservatives often share the sins of liberals, they are
Q. You say that too many judges activists seeking to push the views of the intellectual elite on us all. Who are these people?
A. World Vision has a shape. It is utopian. They have a version of virtue they want to impose on us. This class, the intellectual elite, can not be
distinguished by intellectual ability. There has been no particular intellectual accomplishment to Barbra Streisand Hollywood does Peter Jennings of
the media, but they think they know how things should be and they will let us swallow force.
In a debate at the University of Michigan, I said that the Supreme Court had gone too far in removing certain decisions of local communities. A man of
the Union American Civil Liberties (ACLU) stood up and called me a fascist. We were made there. Allowing people to vote is fascism, but a judge who
makes the laws for them is democracy?
Q. So they see us as a band of peasants unlucky waiting to be lit and reorganized by them? What pouvons_nous do?
A. I do not know if the situation can be returned, but I intend to cause as much trouble as I can out.
I do not have a solution. We can not predict the future, but something has to change.