View Poll Results: I voted "no" because gender and ethnicity shouldn't matter so far as ruling on cases

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    8 36.36%
  • No

    14 63.64%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 44
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    So one may think... However, I doubt a female Supreme Court justice will rule more "female", or a hispanic more "hispanic", or a black one more "black" - whatever female, hispanic or black ruling may be. I guess other factors are much more important (liberal vs. conservative comes to mind ).

    Still, I feel more comfortable, too, when minorities (or even majorities in the case of women ) are represented.
    Agreed. One would be hard pressed to fill the seats of an entire bench solely with individuals thinking only of the absolute best scenario for everyone - all the while following the letters of the law.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by Oops
    Since Justices Ginsburg and O'Connor's IQ and ability to make a coherent sentence is far exceeding that of Justice Thomas, I think your theory doesn't hold water. So pick up the mop monkey and start cleaning. Hey, you missed a spot!
    I don't mop, that's a job for women, or neutered males.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by mediasi
    thinking only of the absolute best scenario for everyone - all the while following the letters of the law.

    Pamela
    That might be mutually exclusive
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  4. #24  
    THey shouldnt...i voted no...but of course they do

    I love this line best:

    "Mitch Gilliam: There's no such thing as white-collar crime. And there's definitely no such thing as black-on-black crime. Crime is crime. Let me explain something to you. I don't care if you have a white collar or a tank top. If you rob me, I'm gonna whup your a**." Head of State (2003)
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by hofo_mofo
    THey shouldnt...i voted no...but of course they do

    I love this line best:

    "Mitch Gilliam: There's no such thing as white-collar crime. And there's definitely no such thing as black-on-black crime. Crime is crime. Let me explain something to you. I don't care if you have a white collar or a tank top. If you rob me, I'm gonna whup your a**." Head of State (2003)
    Yep - same thing for hate crime. Why should someone who beat up a guy just cause the guy stared at his girlfriend get off with less time than someone who beat up a gay? Sorry, a crime is a crime and violent crimes should all carry the maximum penalty regardless.

    I'm also a believer that crimes against animals should also carry the maximum. A guy drove onto the sidewalk and hit my dog (years ago, prior companion), and broke her leg. She was on a leash WITH ME. I fought against this guy, his insurance company, everything I could do - hospital and surgery fees and rehab were more than $3,500. But, since it was a DOG and not a HUMAN, they found ways to wiggle out of it every step of the way.

    Ummm, the guy committed a crime, shouldn't matter if he hit a kid, a dog or a pet hamster. He should be liable.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by mediasi
    Yep - same thing for hate crime. Why should someone who beat up a guy just cause the guy stared at his girlfriend get off with less time than someone who beat up a gay? Sorry, a crime is a crime and violent crimes should all carry the maximum penalty regardless.
    I think the argument that comes out of this is that because we want to deter more crimes than others (for whatever policy reasons) then we need to have stiffer penalties for those types of crimes (*assumes that the deterrence works).

    Quote Originally Posted by mediasi
    I'm also a believer that crimes against animals should also carry the maximum. A guy drove onto the sidewalk and hit my dog (years ago, prior companion), and broke her leg. She was on a leash WITH ME. I fought against this guy, his insurance company, everything I could do - hospital and surgery fees and rehab were more than $3,500. But, since it was a DOG and not a HUMAN, they found ways to wiggle out of it every step of the way.
    I am sorry to hear that . I love animals (and yes I do my best to even be a vegetarian ) but there are obviously situations when human lives outweigh animal lives (unfortunately).

    Quote Originally Posted by mediasi
    Ummm, the guy committed a crime, shouldn't matter if he hit a kid, a dog or a pet hamster. He should be liable.
    No doubt here...although when it comes to liability, you have to weigh in on the persons 'intent' when they committed a crime (which goes to the issue of 'circumstances'...was the person a minor, mentally incompetent, intoxicated, high on drugs, depressed, etc...all those issues would probably be considered in sentencing) .
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  7. #27  
    Yes. The person should be either male or female. And, said person should be a U.S. Citizen.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Yes. The person should be either male or female. And, said person should be a U.S. Citizen.
    Shop...you missed this over the holiday...

    July 01, 2005
    Democrats Recommend Foreign Judge to Replace O'Connor
    WASHINGTON, DC --- With the announced retirement of Sandra Day O'Connor, Democrats suggested that this was a prime opportunity for President Bush to appoint a unique person to the Supreme Court. Having already appointed people of different races, sexes, religions and sexual preferences to the Supreme Court, the Democrats believe it's time to appoint a foreigner to the Court.


    "What a great opportunity to take the first step in making our Supreme Court into a World Court," said Senator Hillary Clinton. "We could actually start to make the United States more in line with the rest of the world. I think it's finally time for us to take this step in moving the country forward. I hope the president will take this opportunity to do the right thing and appoint a foreign judge to the Supreme Court."


    Senator Harry Reid also had a warning for the president if he didn't appoint a foreign judge. "We're not going to stand for extremists," said Reid. "If he doesn't have the courage to appoint a foreign judge, then anyone to the right of Karl Marx will be filibustered. I shudder to think what could happen to this country if a foreign judge isn't appointed. No same-sex marriage. Limits on baby killing. Inability of the government to take property from private citizens to give to other private citizens. We're digging in our heels."
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  9. #29  
    Claire: were you just making that up? I googled the phrase because I couldnt believe those people would say that and found the following article:

    http://www.chronwatch.com/content/co....asp?aid=15501

    You really should use smileys
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Claire: were you just making that up? I googled the phrase because I couldnt believe those people would say that and found the following article:

    http://www.chronwatch.com/content/co....asp?aid=15501

    You really should use smileys
    this same guy had another story about what Dems said about the the australian hostage and I could not find any confirmation for it. I have emaile asking for sources, but he has not yet responded....I don't really expect one from him. Click on the link above and then click on his name and just read some of the titles of some of his articles. Unless he comes back with confirmation of his store, I think he is a right wing wacko.
  11. #31  
    Parody. It's called parody
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Parody. It's called parody
    Under normal circumstances, yes.

    But with a website called:

    Jerhad!com
    One man's jihad against liberalism
    http://jerhad.typepad.com/jerhad/

    And with the look of his website......I think he thinks he might be serious.
  13. #33  
    You should see your faces...hahaha

    ohh...ohh...cite
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    I am sorry to hear that . I love animals (and yes I do my best to even be a vegetarian ) but there are obviously situations when human lives outweigh animal lives (unfortunately).
    Not for someone like me, who doesn't have children. Our dog and two cats ARE our family.

    In this case, I don't think anything was outweighed. We were off the road, he drove off the road.

    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    No doubt here...although when it comes to liability, you have to weigh in on the persons 'intent' when they committed a crime (which goes to the issue of 'circumstances'...was the person a minor, mentally incompetent, intoxicated, high on drugs, depressed, etc...all those issues would probably be considered in sentencing) .
    How about just too old to drive and prior tickets for driving too slow and hitting mail boxes? Shouldn't that make him MORE liable?

    He literally drove off the road, yet I was responsible for everything. He even tried to take off, and my friend - on foot - chased him down.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Parody. It's called parody
    I thought it was called Satire?
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Under normal circumstances, yes.

    But with a website called:

    Jerhad!com
    One man's jihad against liberalism
    http://jerhad.typepad.com/jerhad/

    And with the look of his website......I think he thinks he might be serious.
    He might be but his little disclaimer at the bottom told me everything I needed to know:
    About the Writer: Jeremy Robb is a San Francisco resident and satirist who notes that he is on a "one man's jihad against liberalism."
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    You should see your faces...hahaha

    ohh...ohh...cite
    With all the stuff that gets posted on here (and it was coming from you...) can you blame me for wanting to know where it came from
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by mediasi
    Not for someone like me, who doesn't have children. Our dog and two cats ARE our family.
    My Jackson is my second son.


    Quote Originally Posted by mediasi
    How about just too old to drive and prior tickets for driving too slow and hitting mail boxes? Shouldn't that make him MORE liable?
    You would think so but at least in criminal law, the intent is important. Most criminal statutes require a certain level of intent to be proven before liability can be assessed. If the person is old, mentally deficient, etc...then its arguable that he shouldnt be found guilty if for instance the level of intent required was purposeful (however if the level of intent was negligent, then you'd have him).

    Quote Originally Posted by mediasi
    He literally drove off the road, yet I was responsible for everything. He even tried to take off, and my friend - on foot - chased him down.
    Obviously I dont have all the facts. If just your dog was hit, then I am sure the criminal statute probably doesnt cover hitting an animal (Im guessing). Its unfortunate to say the least.

    (As a side note...Im surprised that you didnt go after him in civil court under the tort of Conversion and maybe Trespass to Chattels?)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    He might be but his little disclaimer at the bottom told me everything I needed to know:
    I realize I missed that when he emailed back saying:

    it's a satirical website. Think "The Daily Show" for conservatives. Although I know the left is so radical these days that the quotes could actually be believed. :-)
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    My Jackson is my second son.
    And my Johnson is my best friend, but I'll not post a pic of that!
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions