er of the bench will be a mix of Jewish and Catholic faiths, and both the left and right will be entirely Catholic, which is kind of fascinating.) As much as I hope this nomination won't make it to a vote on principle, given how badly the Republicans screwed over a legitimate nominee four years ago, and given that turnabout really is fair play here, I'm going to reserve judgment. I never would have expected Roberts to become the new swing vote, for example.
I'm more concerned with her propensity for constructionist interpretation of the Constitution. Of all the opinions I've read, I literally have never agreed with a single opinion that any of the constructionists have written, even when I agreed with their conclusion. Their reasoning has been, IMO, fundamentally unsound. That's not to say that she won't be better, to be fair — I shouldn't automatically assume that every constructionist has no clue about the practical ramifications of their decisions, or that they are all perfectly willing to throw the general welfare under the bus over pedantry — but years of experience has taught me to be worried.
But he could have picked a far worse choice. Far, far worse. Technically, someone nominated for the Supreme Court doesn't even have to have a law degree or be a U.S. citizen. The possibilities are almost endless. Ostensibly, he could have even nominated himself.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Jesus Fucking Christ. (+1)
sarren1901 21 hours ago
If this new judge gets the appointment and if the Democrats win, they will just expand the court to 11 members and appoint two more liberal judges so they are only down by 1.
That's what will probably happen if Trump doesn't win.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Jesus Fucking Christ. (+1)
nagora 7 hours ago
I've known Catholics to be many things, but nutcases, they usually are not.
So, you haven't seen what they believe in, then? Belief in gods should be an automatic bar to being a judge at any level since, clearly, the person is unable to judge wisely.
I never would have expected Roberts to become the new swing vote, for example.
I'm more concerned with her propensity for constructionist interpretation of the Constitution. Of all the opinions I've read, I literally have never agreed with a single opinion that any of the constructionists have written, even when I agreed with their conclusion. Their reasoning has been, IMO, fundamentally unsound.
I feel the opposite - given their axioms their reasoning is generally sound. However, their axioms are worthless and even rather silly.
That's not to say that she won't be better, to be fair — I shouldn't automatically assume that every constructionist has no clue about the practical ramifications of their decisions, or that they are all perfectly willing to throw the general welfare under the bus over pedantry — but years of experience has taught me to be worried.
But he could have picked a far worse choice.
It is all too common to justify some awful choice by finding some even worse option and then expect to be praised for not taking it.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Jesus Fucking Christ. (+1)
dgatwood 2 hours ago
I've known Catholics to be many things, but nutcases, they usually are not.
So, you haven't seen what they believe in, then? Belief in gods should be an automatic bar to being a judge at any level since, clearly, the person is unable to judge wisely.
What Catholics believe in? You mean treating others the way you would want to be treated, even if they have treated you badly? Feeding the poor, clothing the naked, forgiving those who hurt you, etc.? Yeah, these are all clearly signs of bad judgment....
Whether you personally believe in a deity or not, most of the founding fathers did. Clearly, they didn't see a problem with the religious sitting as judges, even after settling a whole new country largely so that religious groups could be free from interference by other religious groups. I trust their opinions on who is or is not a fit judge a lot more than some random person casting an ad hominem attack at 1.2 billion people, most of whom that person has never met.
I never would have expected Roberts to become the new swing vote, for example.
I'm more concerned with her propensity for constructionist interpretation of the Constitution. Of all the opinions I've read, I literally have never agreed with a single opinion that any of the constructionists have written, even when I agreed with their conclusion. Their reasoning has been, IMO, fundamentally unsound.
I feel the opposite - given their axioms their reasoning is generally sound. However, their axioms are worthless and even rather silly.
Fair point. But I guess what I mean is that often their interpretation of the original meaning flies in the face of evidence. The meaning of words has generally not changed all that much in 200 years, and interpretations that contradict the surface meaning of those words should be met with serious skepticism.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Jesus Fucking Christ. (+1)
Malays2 bowman a day ago
Fine, lets just pack everybody in offices during these Covid times, and have people waste time out of their lives that they can never get back, and gas/electricity to do so. Because, ya know, those socialist Democrats and stuff.
Reply Share
Flag
Maybe it is time...
LordHighExecutioner a day ago
...for these young employees to think about getting married and settling down ? Or is the "brogrammer" lifestyle so well suited for their persons ?
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+2, Insightful)
geekmux a day ago
...for these young employees to think about getting married and settling down ? Or is the "brogrammer" lifestyle so well suited for their persons ?
I love how you assume "brogrammers" can just whip out a keyboard and compile a spouse, as if the single life is the "well suited" choice the majority are coding for.
And when technically inclined men who make a good living take a look at divorce rates and especially how unbalanced divorce court can financially go for them, go figure a lot of them have gone MGTOW.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+1, Insightful)
Malays2 bowman a day ago
I think this whole "grow up and get married & have kids" thing society is still fixated on is just some obsolite social pressure that dates back to when America was a much poorer and mostly agricultural country, and the mortality rate was much higher.
Who cares if so and so gets married or not? This and other outdated cruft needs to be cleaned out of the American mindset.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+1)
geekmux 9 hours ago
I think this whole "grow up and get married & have kids" thing society is still fixated on is just some obsolite social pressure that dates back to when America was a much poorer and mostly agricultural country, and the mortality rate was much higher.
While that may be true, I have a feeling nationalism is going to become rather popular the world over after COVID. It sounds strange, but I'm already starting to hear "doomsday" stories about how the US is declining in population, as if there's some extensional national threat from that.
Who cares if so and so gets married or not? This and other outdated cruft needs to be cleaned out of the American mindset.
OK, hold on there a minute. Marriage provides stability for a child growing up, and there are considerable portions of our society that have seen single motherhood rates grow almost exponentially in the last 30 years. While marriage may be viewed as "outdated cruft", the concept of properly parenting a child and fatherhood is certainly not.
And to sum that up in a common saying? Weak Men create Hard Times.
That's the problem with abandoning marriage. Humans constantly fucking with no regard.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+1)
Malays2 bowman 11 minutes ago
"OK, hold on there a minute. Marriage provides stability for a child growing up, and there are considerable portions of our society that have seen single motherhood rates grow almost exponentially in the last 30 years. While marriage may be viewed as "outdated cruft", the concept of properly parenting a child and fatherhood is certainly not"
Sadly, trying to get everyone else to fall in line with this is just about impossible. Divorce is no longer seen as a drastic act or a mark of shame, and this is why we have absentee fathers who are treated like shit and expected to be little more than a child support wallet. Of course, this damages the kid and leads him or her to a life of crime. And yes, the 'system' is highly biased against fathers. Then comes the "live in boyfriend" that often sexually abuses and kills the kid.
Many men and women have no business getting married and raising children, and this is why I consider pressuring people to do so is outdated cruft. This is something that no longer fits in today's cultural mindset.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+1)
Cederic 11 hours ago
go figure a lot of them have gone MGTOW.
I think most of them still seek a partner, many of them still want a family.
They're just not necessarily going to accept the financial risks involved in marriage.
Or perhaps you treat long term relationships as GTOW? I wouldn't.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+3, Insightful)
SuricouRaven a day ago
Marriage is not the purpose of life. You marry if you want to, but don't look down on other people just because they can be happy without sticking to the rigid track of tradition.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+1)
gweihir 20 hours ago
These days, marriage is pretty much a trap. I am thinking it basically was always that way: Tie people close together and they deal with each other and their issues most of the time, and they are suddenly far easier to control.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+1)
SuricouRaven 14 hours ago
The function and working of marriage has changed a lot through history and across cultures.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+1)
gweihir 5 hours ago
Sure. But there is a common theme. Well, mostly.
Reply Share
Flag
Re: Maybe it is time... (+1)
Malays2 bowman a few seconds ago
"These days, marriage is pretty much a trap. I am thinking it basically was always that way: Tie people close together and they deal with each other and their issues most of the time, and they are suddenly far easier to control"
We also have an entire divorce lawyer *INDUSTRY*, and a child support system that his hugely biased against men.
Yes it is a trap, and now this outdated societal pressure for people to get married takes on an ulterior motive.
Reply Share
Flag
The entertainment value (+1, Troll)
Sqreater a day ago
I'm on the other side of the country and I must say from this distance the entertainment value of hyper-liberal California is just off the scale as it attempts (rather successfully it seems) to destroy itself. And let me point out, people, that 3 days becomes 7 days/24 and "home" can be anywhere in the world in this internet age. All you will do is smear your companies all over the world like cream cheese on toast and create a workforce that has absolutely no loyalty to or affinity for your company whatsoever. Question: does H1B have any meaning if your workers are working from "home?"
Reply Share
Flag
Re: The entertainment value (+5, Insightful)
SuricouRaven a day ago
You want the workers to be loyal to the company, but why would they do that when the company is not loyal to the workers? The days when a person could enter a company on the ground floor and expect to work their way up the ranks over a career are long gone now - such people are notable because they are so unusual. The relationship between an employer and employee is purely transaction now: Money for labor, and that transaction can be ended as soon as either party feels they are no longer benefiting. Usually by the employer, as it's easier for a company to find a new employee than for an individual to find a new job.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.