Court blocks anti-abortion group's videos

[Mac-7]

I do .. I'm simply asking you why you think your ridiculous claim is coherent.

Liberals cannot win using the democratic process.

They needed bullies on the Supreme Court to give them abortion and gay marriage over the will of the people.

[exotix]

Liberals cannot win using the democratic process.

They needed bullies on the Supreme Court to give them abortion and gay marriage over the will of the people.

I think that was what tallyho was babbling about ... your ire when a decision goes against your obviously biased ... if not wretched ... agenda.

[Safety]

It's inline to the position you brought up saying the courts always rescues the left.

What's wrong, you don't like being proven wrong?

The left always tries to use the courts to silence people. They aren't always successful

The citizens United decision has nothing to do with the Planned Parenthood controversy.

[Mac-7]

I think that was what tallyho was babbling about ... .

It's common knowledge.

Even among the brighter liberals I suspect.

[Tahuyaman]

It's inline to the position you brought up saying the courts always rescues the left.

What's wrong, you don't like being proven wrong?

I don't mind being wrong. That's how one learns new things. What I dislike is continually using the courts to overturn the will of the people simply because a small, angry and vocal group disagrees and wants to force their views upon others.

[Safety]

I don't mind being wrong. That's how one learns new things. What I dislike is continually using the courts to overturn the will of the people simply because a small, angry and vocal group disagrees and wants to force their views upon others.

If the SCOTUS's job is to interpret the constitution and apply it as needed in decisions, how is the small, angry and vocal group, forcing their views upon others? I mean, if it's unconstitutional, it's unconstitutional regardless, if the big, angry, vocal group disagrees.

[Tahuyaman]

If the SCOTUS's job is to interpret the constitution and apply it as needed in decisions,

And that would be fine if we actually had a majority on the court who believed that. As it is, we have Supreme Court justices who have supported their positions based on current European laws. That's a perversion of our system.

[Safety]

And that would be fine if we actually had a majority on the court who believed that. As it is, we have Supreme Court justices who have supported their positions based on current European laws. That's a perversion of our system.

Was there fraud in selecting the current batch of supreme court justices, or was the same process used since the beginning, as it is spelled out in the Constitution?

[Tahuyaman]

Was there fraud in selecting the current batch of supreme court justices, or was the same process used since the beginning, as it is spelled out in the Constitution?

No fraud, just partisanship.

Supreme court justices are supposed to determine whether laws pass US constitutional muster. Not check to see if they mesh with european law. Plus, they are not charged to rewrite laws which are ruled unconstitutional.

[MisterVeritis]

Was there fraud in selecting the current batch of supreme court justices, or was the same process used since the beginning, as it is spelled out in the Constitution?

Actually no. This "power" was not granted. It was taken. It should not have been allowed to stand.