THE SEPARATION OF LAW AND MORALITY

[Dementia_Madness]

http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave202.htm

THE SEPARATION OF LAW AND MORALITY

 

By Coach Dave Daubenmire
August 5, 2010
NewsWithViews.com

Moral— “Founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities…
Legal— “Established by or founded upon law; lawful.”
Lawful— “Allowed or permitted by law; not contrary to law.”
Right— “In conformity with fact, reason, truth, or some standard or principle; correct.”
Amoral— “Having no moral standards, restraints, or principles.”

So, the folks in California were wrong. How dare they think that they knew what marriage was.

That is what judges are for. They are the arbiter of right and wrong. Their years in amoral law school have enabled them to rise above the common folks, far above the ignorance of “religion,” having rendered themselves “the deciders” of all things “legal.” Teddy Roosevelt said “To educate a man in mind, and not in morals, is to educate a menace to society.”

Judges are a menace to society and they are destroying America. No other group of individuals has been able to wreak such ruinous havoc as the “terrorists in black robes.” The atheistic-ruling judges have done more to destroy America than the Islamic terrorist could have done in a thousand years.

Just this week the will of the people has been overturned twice by a black-robed terrorist. The people of the state of Arizona went to the polls and voted to enforce America’s immigration laws. The citizens of the state of California journeyed into their polling stations to declare that marriage was a union of one man and one woman.

In both cases, the courts “struck down” the will of the people. In both instances, one woman, and then one man, booted our Republican form of government to he curb. If the vote of the people can no longer change the laws of the land; when the “opinion” of one judge can over-rule the “opinion” of the majority of the people we have descended into unspeakable tyranny. America is teetering on the precipice.

My friends, America is broken and no one is more culpable than the courts. Our “domestic” enemies have done in sixty years what our “foreign enemies” could never have accomplished. While America’s young men were fighting to preserve liberty with guns and grenades, the real insurgents were using legal briefs and atheistic lawyers. All of the great moral terrorism levied on this nation was done, not by those dressed in a burka, but by those dressed in legal robes. Not by those trained in Islam, but by those trained in law. The “terrorist in black robes” have destroyed this nation.

Folks, court opinions are not law. Courts cannot make laws, they can only interpret them. Only the Congress or the people can make laws. Allow me to say it again. Courts cannot make laws. When will America wake up? The rendering of a court “decision” carries no lawful weight. As Andrew Jackson is reported to have said regarding a John Marshall Court decision, “Marshall made his decision, now let him enforce it.” It is time to stand up against the secular mullahs masquerading as “judges”. There opinions are not laws and it is time we started acting like it.

Our Constitution was designed with a “separation” of powers, not a “balance” of powers. Despite what you have been taught in public schools the three branches of government are not “co-equal” in power. In our Constitutional Republic the power rests with the people. As we have learned once again this week, the “power of the people”, inherent in the sanctity of the vote, has been usurped by the Judicial branch. History will judge it as a “non-violent” coup-e-tat. An oligarchy of black-robed judges now rule the nation the same as the caliphate rule Iran. When they render a decision there is no appeal.

 

read more at

http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave202.htm

[Just Win]

http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave202.htm


 

read more at

http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave202.htm

Good post Darth. Great thinking piece. It appears our republic is about to enter a dark period of imperial judicial tyranny. The cultural barbarians are at the ramparts of civilization ready to reign destruction down upon our freedom and liberty.

[NCVol]

That's a frightening article, actually.  I don't think the man has the slightest grasp of the constitution and the point of having a document that will prevent the majority from trampling on the minority.  He doesn't agree with the decision.  Fine.  Lots of people thought slaves were a good idea too, and limiting the ability of blacks to see a movie, marry another race, hold office, vote, etc. was also a good idea.  Thank God we have a constitution that allows us to correct injustice without the need for revolution.

It is seriously scary first that the man has an audience with such contempt for the country and the very purpose of having a constitution, and second, that you all agree with that distorted view of how this country should work.  By advocating that we ignore judicial rulings, he's arguing for doing away with the very foundation of this country. 

[LTC]

NCVol, is is very apparent that the extemists on the right favor anarchy over our constitutional government. 

[Flummoxed Lummox]

Basic human rights are not up for popular vote. That is why we have a Constitution and why judges often overrule majority opinion. As NC Vol points out, if the majority were still the law, blacks would not be allowed to sit with whites on a bus (and relegated to the back seats); drink from the same water fountain as whites; nor be allowed to attend the same schools as whites in many states.

The federal government had to use military force to allow blacks to attend the same schools as whites because popular opinion opposed racial integration. We look back now at that time of history and most rational people are embarrassed at the behavior of the majority (mostly whites) who predicted the end of the world if blacks were allowed to attend the same schools as whites. It was shameful then and the behavior of conservative, "Christian" whites is equally appalling and disgraceful today.

I have no doubt in 40 or 50 years people will look back at the blatant homophobia over gay marriage and ask "How could they have been so bigoted and closed minded?" much like we do today over the behavior of racists in the 50's and 60's over equal rights for African-Americans.

Why allowing homosexuals to enjoy the same rights as heterosexuals is such anathema to you hypocritical "Christians" on the far right is beyond me. Thank goodness we have courts who look at the Constitution and not popular opinion as the basis for their decisions.

[Flummoxed Lummox]

As late as 1967 fourteen states had laws on the books banning interracial marriage, owing no doubt to popular opinion about the role of Blacks in our society and opposition to equal rights. Thank goodness the courts didn't rule based on popular sentiment at the time.

You homophobes will eventually lose this battle too.

[Dementia_Madness]

Basic human rights are not up for popular vote. That is why we have a Constitution and why judges often overrule majority opinion.

I agree...however if we look at our own history, say the Dred Scott case we learn that the supreme court can get it wrong as well..judges not judging from a moral standing often can, and will get it wrong, that is the whole point of a morality based judgment system....let us look at homosexuality since this is the topic most sited other than abortion. I would like to point out your hypocritical argument that abortion is legal "because it is the law of the land" even though it robs those unborn human babies of their most vital basic human right, the right that all other rights spring from and depend on, without life there are no other rights to protect. Interesting.

Your argument is that basic human rights are not up for popular vote....is being gay a basic human right? I do not see that anywhere in the constitution....in fact most people would agree that sexual deviancy is criminal and vile behavior. If we want to argue that one form of sexual deviancy should be tolerated, then it is also an argument for others, if not all forms of sexual deviancy, after all other deviants do believe that their vile acts are perfectly okay....but we do not let the criminals decide whether or not their crimes are okay or not, that is unless of course we remove morality from the picture, and in turn put the inmates in charge of the asylum, which is what we have here.

I believe strongly in the constitution....I believe that we have rights, but even the constitution and the bill of rights acknowledge that those rights do not come from them, or from judges, or from our legal system, they are endowed by OUR CREATOR. The first and major RIGHT we have is our right to LIFE..this means all humans..no matter what nation they are from, or geographical location, be it in a room or in a womb. In fact our constitution tells us that no state has the right to deprive anyone of their right to life without due process of law, in other words, only people convicted of crimes worthy of death can be morally put to death by a government within its own system.

I suppose since we are talking constitutionality, we should acknowledge other rights we have endowed by our creator….the right to sufficiently defend yourself and your property… even against your government. The right to be free to have faith and profess that faith…the right to succeed or fail, the right to a duly elected government…we can go on and on….

Now let us go back to “the law of the land” like I pointed out earlier FL likes to argue that popular opinion matters when he believes it happens to agree with him….but has no problem ignoring it when the wind is blowing in the OTHER direction. I stated also that I do not believe that laws should be based on popular opinions nor should they be based on minority opinion, or even a single persons opinion, even if that person is a judge. Majorities should not be able to bully minorities, nor should minorities have the same ability over a majority…individuals, and groups of all sizes should have the exact same protections and rights, I agree 100% with all of that. In fact right now IF we look at marriage, everyone has the exact same rights when it comes to marriage, after all marriage is not simply and solely about sex..but about much much more…

Right now I have the right to marry someone of the opposite sex…period, homosexuals have that same right..we are both equal…sex is not the driving force behind marriage…just as race is not the driving force behind immigration. So no one is being discriminated against by acknowledging the truth of marriage, that it is a covenant recognized by God and Government between a man and a woman for the main purpose of protecting that union which fosters a safe environment for healthy procreation and family growth. It is not until we redefine what things are, by taking the moral basis from what they mean, we redefine family, we redefine safe, we redefine healthy and we redefine marriage. However by redefining things we do not actually change the thing itself…we simply confuse other things with what they are…let us take for example sex change….sex change does not actually change the sex of an individual, it gives the illusion of change…but the truth is a person who undergoes a sex change is still 100% the same individual they were before. The same with trying to redefine what marriage is…in the end no matter what you call it, it’s not the same thing, it’s different, it’s deviant, and we should not acknowledge lies as truth in order to make sick wicked vile people (of which I am one you are one we all are one) feel good about themselves. We do not make murder legal in order to make murderers feel good about themselves, we do not make stealing legal so thieves feel good about themselves, and we do not make lying legal so liars feel good about themselves.

Oh and fwiw….Love is not sex, bible approved love is brotherly love, men can love men and women can love women, that is God’s way..however sexually deviant behavior is not love, it’s about self gratification, it’s about selfishness..and not love, that sign also recommends that we shouldn’t have a problem between NAMBLA or other perverts.

Moral— “Founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities…
Legal— “Established by or founded upon law; lawful.”
Lawful— “Allowed or permitted by law; not contrary to law.”
Right— “In conformity with fact, reason, truth, or some standard or principle; correct.”
Amoral— “Having no moral standards, restraints, or principles.”

[NCVol]

Oh and fwiw….Love is not sex, bible approved love is brotherly love, men can love men and women can love women, that is God’s way..however sexually deviant behavior is not love, it’s about self gratification, it’s about selfishness..and not love, that sign also recommends that we shouldn’t have a problem between NAMBLA or other perverts.

I don't think you have the slightest idea what it means to be gay.  How can you possibly judge that ALL homosexual relationships are about selfishness.  And then pretend that a man and a woman don't enter into relationships based on self gratification and selfishness.  Of course, some of both types of relationships are based on instant gratification and selfishness.  We can look at people like Newt Gingrich, thrice married, serial adulterer and critic of the recent decision, for evidence of that, and also of many broken gay relationships.  We can also identify same and opposite sex couples that remain committed for decades. 

And it is damn offensive to compare the relationship between adults, who have the capacity and the experience and the maturity to enter into a relationship, with an abusive sexual relationship between an adult and a CHILD.  Good gosh, in one relationship there is no victim, and in the other, the child is ALWAYS a victim since the child has no ability to make an informed choice to enter into that relationship.  It's as offensive as comparing RAPE to consensual sex between adults.  Totally offensive and totally bigoted.

[Flummoxed Lummox]

Oh and fwiw….Love is not sex, bible approved love is brotherly love, men can love men and women can love women, that is God’s way..however sexually deviant behavior is not love, it’s about self gratification, it’s about selfishness..and not love, that sign also recommends that we shouldn’t have a problem between NAMBLA or other perverts.

Speak for youself. Love and sex very much go together for most people, including homosexuals.

I don't give a damn what the Bible says about love. We don't base our laws on ancient, antiquated mythologies, nor religious beliefs, thank Buddha.

Homosexuals, despite what religious bigots like you and Gray say, are NOT "perverts." They behave exactly like nature made them.

[MRM]

If nature intended for men to be with men and women to be with women, then all of us would have both a penis and a vagina.

[Dementia_Madness]

Ncvol it does your cause no good to compare wrong behavior with other wrong behavior (adultery) to defend it. That simply strengthens the fact that BOTH behaviors are wrong…not that we should ignore or acknowledge either as okay.
And as to what I know about being gay? How many gay people do I know, and how many do I love? Do you know? I bet you do not, you have no clue (which must be what your name means) as to what I know and do not know…once again you must define YOUR version of me in order to attack it…. I have gay friends and gay family members….and I do know this…they love people just as I do…but their relationships are not based on mainly LOVE they are based on SEX…if this was not true they would be able to have sex with people of the opposite sex…because in a loving relation the sex is not the driving force, it is a shared, experience..one with both biological and emotional significance, but it’s main purpose is procreation…and that can only happen between male and female…so IF your main driving force is sex, and it’s main purpose is not procreation, it is about satisfaction and gratification, that is why homosexuals have so many partners, because in truth it’s less about who they are with, but what they do with them and less about an emotional commitment.  

it is damn offensive to compare the relationship between adults, who have the capacity and the experience and the maturity to enter into a relationship, with an abusive sexual relationship between an adult and a CHILD.

I did not make that comparison, that is the argument of NAMBLA so go talk to them if you have a problem with it, I am sure they will be offended by your attempt at forcing your morality and opinions on them. What is the difference between you/gays being offended by NAMBLA comparing themselves to homosexuals....and homosexuals comparing themselves to heterosexuals, is our offense any less justified than yours, perhaops we both have the same valid point?

[Dementia_Madness]

Homosexuals, despite what religious bigots like you and Gray say, are NOT "perverts." They behave exactly like nature made them.

some "not perverts" http://www.zombietime.com/up_your_alley_2008/  yup that is normal behavior.

I suppose FL has never been to a gay rights parade, or if he has he considers it "normal" behavior.

Did nature make serial killers? Did nature make liars? Did nature make animals....that kill and eat their own young? What differentiates human from animal...do we succumb to the bestial impulses of nature..or do we hold ourselves to  a higher standard?