Stare decisis is latin for

… The phenomenon where you can boil a frog alive by very slowly turning up the heat. The water gets hot so slowly that the frog feels no distress and doesn’t hop away.

John Roberts is a disaster, but probably the best that can be expected from Republicans.

Vote Constitution Party!

It being a settled matter to be given respect as law does not mean that the highest court cannot reverse itself if the right case is brought before it. Roberts has not said it cannot be overturned nor that it was correctly decided.

[quote=Angainor]… The phenomenon where you can boil a frog alive by very slowly turning up the heat. The water gets hot so slowly that the frog feels no distress and doesn’t hop away.

John Roberts is a disaster, but probably the best that can be expected from Republicans.

Vote Constitution Party!
[/quote]

“Stare decisis” is Latin for “let the decision stand”. That answers your question. As for your comments, since they don’t have any substantive content and are based solely on your opinion, they don’t warrant a response. (However, they do strike me very strongly as baiting. Forgive me for taking a pass.)

[quote=Angainor]… The phenomenon where you can boil a frog alive by very slowly turning up the heat. The water gets hot so slowly that the frog feels no distress and doesn’t hop away.

John Roberts is a disaster, but probably the best that can be expected from Republicans.

Vote Constitution Party!
[/quote]

All he’s said is he believes it is a legal precedent (it is). He has said precedent needs to be looked at and respected in many cases (not the same sentence that he was speaking about Roe). He has refused to say much about Roe at all as it may come before him. Finally, he’s married to a vocal anti-abortion woman. The chances he would overturn Roe when presented with a reasonable argument are pretty good.

As for the Constiution Party, I’ll pass. Their foreign policy platform is dangerous, naive, and destructive. What’s more, their stances on many other issues are IMO crazy. But that’s for another thread, and I’m not sure which forum that would be in. I’d be happy to comment in PM though.

[quote=Angainor]… The phenomenon where you can boil a frog alive by very slowly turning up the heat. The water gets hot so slowly that the frog feels no distress and doesn’t hop away.

John Roberts is a disaster, but probably the best that can be expected from Republicans.

Vote Constitution Party!
[/quote]

And the basis for your analysis is? The fact that he was able to answer 9 hours of questioning off the top of his head without the benefit of notes doesn’t strike you as profound? This guy was able to cite case law that the Senator’s weren’t even familiar with. I would like you to justify your remarks please.

:eek:

Where is the flaming smiley emote?

The job of the Supreme Court is to uphold the constitution. Not the whims of the senators on this committee. How did Ted get that job anyway?

There isn’t any bias with the constitution party, eh?

Roberts will be great in the job!

[quote=Jennyanydots]The job of the Supreme Court is to uphold the constitution. Not the whims of the senators on this committee. How did Ted get that job anyway?!
[/quote]

must…resist…temptation…should…not…open…large…can…of…verbal…whoopass…on… ted…kennedy…

[quote=Jennyanydots]The job of the Supreme Court is to uphold the constitution. Not the whims of the senators on this committee. How did Ted get that job anyway?

There isn’t any bias with the constitution party, eh?

Roberts will be great in the job!
[/quote]

The Constitution Party held my interests for about 2 months until the began sounding and rhetorical as the Democratic Party, and offer about as many viable alternatives as the later. They seem content to bad-mouth the DNC and even moreso the GOP and their platform is about 60 years out of date. We live in a post-nuclear, post-commercial jetliner, post-internet world. Things are different.

How did Ted Kennedy get his job, ask the people in Massachussets. I don’t understand how they have the two most liberal Senators on the planet, and one of the most conservative Governors in the country. :confused: I don’t understand New ENgland politics, which is probably why I left for a solidly conservative state.

[quote=Jennyanydots]The job of the Supreme Court is to uphold the constitution. Not the whims of the senators on this committee. How did Ted get that job anyway?

[/quote]

Ted Kennedy got his job through his father’s influence with the unions through the likes of Jimmy Roselli, Carlos Marcello and James “Whitey” Bulger, just to name a few. Ditto for his brother John. Ted continues to get elected by hanging the carrot in front of his constuency.

Can you say “Chappaquiddick”?

[quote=Scott_Lafrance]And the basis for your analysis is? The fact that he was able to answer 9 hours of questioning off the top of his head without the benefit of notes doesn’t strike you as profound? This guy was able to cite case law that the Senator’s weren’t even familiar with. I would like you to justify your remarks please.
[/quote]

Just archive this thread and come back to it in a decade.

I’m just prognosticating recklessly.:thumbsup:

[quote=Scott_Lafrance]The Constitution Party held my interests for about 2 months until the began sounding and rhetorical as the Democratic Party, and offer about as many viable alternatives as the later. They seem content to bad-mouth the DNC and even moreso the GOP
[/quote]

In a way I agree with you. They are not yet really pragmatic enough yet. On the Presidential level they knew they couldn’t win and were content for the moment with rhetoric. When they win a few smaller races they will mature.

Having said that, I feel I must point out that while the alternatives offered by the Constitution Party*** may ***not yet quite viable as is, I know for a fact that alternatives offered by Republicans and Democrats are definitly not viable in the long term. There are living examples around the world if you just look.

I would rather take my chances that the Constitution Party can refine itself into offering true workable solutions.

[quote=Scott_Lafrance]and their platform is about 60 years out of date. We live in a post-nuclear, post-commercial jetliner, post-internet world. Things are different.
[/quote]

:nope: I simply disagree.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.