Regarding Separation of Powers, Judges, and Discrimination

How much time do you spend reading the news every week?

<1 min	0.0%	[ 0 ]
1-5 min	16.7%	[ 2 ]
6-10 min	8.3%	[ 1 ]
11-15 min	0.0%	[ 0 ]
16-20 min	0.0%	[ 0 ]
21-25 min	8.3%	[ 1 ]
26-30 min	8.3%	[ 1 ]
31-35 min	0.0%	[ 0 ]
36-40 min	0.0%	[ 0 ]
41 min +	58.3%	[ 7 ]
Total Votes:			[ 12 ]

[the reverend silver]

Mars the Clumsy

the reverend silver

Mars the Clumsy

the reverend silver

Mars the Clumsy

You are free to have this bias but you should never deprive others of this beneficial help only because you don't see it as beneficial. Same with judges. Judges are a big part of the system of checks and balances written on the Constitution of the United States. The president is also someone who is one person and this person will always have as much power as he is granted (unless impeached by the current Congress.)

I'm not saying remove it, I'm saying give us a legal defense voucher program so the private sector lawyers, you know, the good ones, become affordable.

I'm against the government spending more money than it has to when the lawyers offered to you are competent.
You should give me money.

The government should spend all its money so it becomes apparent to all how useless a dollar is. .
Boy, that'd really ******** the hood up, money no longer being worth anything. All this get-money work ethic gone to s**t.

I really hope you don't vote.

I'm gonna vote like a ********, but only to legalize weed.

[Aetherius Lamia]

the reverend silver

I'm gonna vote like a ********, but only to legalize weed.

A demonstration of Poe's Law, but also perhaps of why we need to undo the "popular vote" for federal representatives, returning to when they were selected by the state legislature.

But returning to the topic, the judge must interpret the Constitution according to its authors' intent, not "however he feels like it".

[IPhantomSilver]

Mars the Clumsy

the reverend silver

Mars the Clumsy

It is up to a judge to interpret the Constitution or any law the way they see fit. This is a critical role of government that, if questioned, should have the judge removed rather than questioning the Judicial system.

This system is obviously not perfect, as bias and racism can impede or influence judgement. However, it is a system which the founding fathers saw was important. This system blocks regimes or agendas by having someone of free will rather than a 'government entity' decide on cases.

No one man should have so much power.

Read my entire message rather than pointing out one sentence. I stated why it is important to have judges. A municipal judge does not have a final say. His/her decision may be appealed and, if successful, a higher court decides. This decision can also be appealed. There is also the option of having a trial by jury, which equals 12 people, but that's a different matter.

Having judges ensures that there are proper checks and balances in our government. Nine people have a final say on how to interpret laws or on personal affairs. Please read a bit on the decisions the Supreme Court of the United States have made and the effects of them. Some favor the government while others favor the people. It is thanks to these judges that we have more freedoms and in turn guarantee that the executive and legislative branch do not hold an excessive amount of power over their constituents.

We as humans will always have opinions that differ from others and as such there should be a moderator, or a judge, to decide. This has worked for hundreds of years.

The president is one person and he has more power than a judge. A president's power is defined in the Constitution. Here is a link to an article regarding presidential powers. Our president has much more power than one judge does.

Not necessarily. The President is unable to make laws, he can only approve them because he acts as the head of our Military. Congress is responsible for all laws and finances to be passed which then limits President's military authority to 90 days of action unless an act of war is approved. They also have the ability to cut funding to the troops or law that the president signs if they later decide against it. The SCOTUS (Supreme Court) has the final say on laws after they go through the court of appeals, and the district court... which is all after the initial trial. They are responsible for deciding the Constitutionality of a law, as well as the general effect on the people. Why do their decisions matter so much? Because if its not in the Constitution, then they tend to go off Common Law practice. Meaning any and every court case which was over a similar issue can be brought up for consideration in that trial; that then leads to a decision on the current issue. Over all, it is a very interesting system, one which works well even if it works slowly. The only thing that looks like it's becoming necessary is Term limits for Congress.

[Mars the Clumsy]

IPhantomSilver

Mars the Clumsy

the reverend silver

Mars the Clumsy

It is up to a judge to interpret the Constitution or any law the way they see fit. This is a critical role of government that, if questioned, should have the judge removed rather than questioning the Judicial system.

This system is obviously not perfect, as bias and racism can impede or influence judgement. However, it is a system which the founding fathers saw was important. This system blocks regimes or agendas by having someone of free will rather than a 'government entity' decide on cases.

No one man should have so much power.

Read my entire message rather than pointing out one sentence. I stated why it is important to have judges. A municipal judge does not have a final say. His/her decision may be appealed and, if successful, a higher court decides. This decision can also be appealed. There is also the option of having a trial by jury, which equals 12 people, but that's a different matter.

Having judges ensures that there are proper checks and balances in our government. Nine people have a final say on how to interpret laws or on personal affairs. Please read a bit on the decisions the Supreme Court of the United States have made and the effects of them. Some favor the government while others favor the people. It is thanks to these judges that we have more freedoms and in turn guarantee that the executive and legislative branch do not hold an excessive amount of power over their constituents.

We as humans will always have opinions that differ from others and as such there should be a moderator, or a judge, to decide. This has worked for hundreds of years.

The president is one person and he has more power than a judge. A president's power is defined in the Constitution. Here is a link to an article regarding presidential powers. Our president has much more power than one judge does.

Not necessarily. The President is unable to make laws, he can only approve them because he acts as the head of our Military. Congress is responsible for all laws and finances to be passed which then limits President's military authority to 90 days of action unless an act of war is approved. They also have the ability to cut funding to the troops or law that the president signs if they later decide against it. The SCOTUS (Supreme Court) has the final say on laws after they go through the court of appeals, and the district court... which is all after the initial trial. They are responsible for deciding the Constitutionality of a law, as well as the general effect on the people. Why do their decisions matter so much? Because if its not in the Constitution, then they tend to go off Common Law practice. Meaning any and every court case which was over a similar issue can be brought up for consideration in that trial; that then leads to a decision on the current issue. Over all, it is a very interesting system, one which works well even if it works slowly. The only thing that looks like it's becoming necessary is Term limits for Congress.

The president also has the power to not sign legislation into law (even if the law can still be passed if there is a majority) and he has the power to pardon any prisoner. He can also use his executive action privilege to make changes (although only small) but yes what you said is true so thank you. cool

[the reverend silver]

Aetherius Lamia

the reverend silver

I'm gonna vote like a ********, but only to legalize weed.

A demonstration of Poe's Law, but also perhaps of why we need to undo the "popular vote" for federal representatives, returning to when they were selected by the state legislature.

But returning to the topic, the judge must interpret the Constitution according to its authors' intent, not "however he feels like it".

Uh, 'scuse me, for all the s**t you're talking* you seem to have forgotten something. We aren't the ones making everything s**t because we don't have any power. Change the method of selection to further enable cronyism and you will have created a ******** the likes of which you have never seen before.

Obviously you don't want to be ruled by me and I don't want to be ruled by you, so, what's wrong with a little self-governance? All governance is, is an attempt to control people to create an outcome pleasing to the controller.

[QUAIT_2]

the reverend silver

Aetherius Lamia

the reverend silver

I'm gonna vote like a ********, but only to legalize weed.

A demonstration of Poe's Law, but also perhaps of why we need to undo the "popular vote" for federal representatives, returning to when they were selected by the state legislature.

But returning to the topic, the judge must interpret the Constitution according to its authors' intent, not "however he feels like it".

Uh, 'scuse me, for all the s**t you're talking* you seem to have forgotten something. We aren't the ones making everything s**t because we don't have any power. Change the method of selection to further enable cronyism and you will have created a ******** the likes of which you have never seen before.

Obviously you don't want to be ruled by me and I don't want to be ruled by you, so, what's wrong with a little self-governance? All governance is, is an attempt to control people to create an outcome pleasing to the controller.

"All", "Every", and "Always" are bad words. you shouldn't use them to describe things relevant to human behavior.

[the reverend silver]

Tuaiq

the reverend silver

Aetherius Lamia

the reverend silver

I'm gonna vote like a ********, but only to legalize weed.

A demonstration of Poe's Law, but also perhaps of why we need to undo the "popular vote" for federal representatives, returning to when they were selected by the state legislature.

But returning to the topic, the judge must interpret the Constitution according to its authors' intent, not "however he feels like it".

Uh, 'scuse me, for all the s**t you're talking* you seem to have forgotten something. We aren't the ones making everything s**t because we don't have any power. Change the method of selection to further enable cronyism and you will have created a ******** the likes of which you have never seen before.

Obviously you don't want to be ruled by me and I don't want to be ruled by you, so, what's wrong with a little self-governance? All governance is, is an attempt to control people to create an outcome pleasing to the controller.

"All", "Every", and "Always" are bad words. you shouldn't use them to describe things relevant to human behavior.

. . . Have I said those? I'm not supposed to have, I know that.

Although sometimes I use them on the basis that we should have come to an understanding about this s**t by now; people should automatically know I mean "almost every/all/always" and "in my experience" along with it.

[QUAIT_2]

the reverend silver

Tuaiq

the reverend silver

Aetherius Lamia

the reverend silver

I'm gonna vote like a ********, but only to legalize weed.

A demonstration of Poe's Law, but also perhaps of why we need to undo the "popular vote" for federal representatives, returning to when they were selected by the state legislature.

But returning to the topic, the judge must interpret the Constitution according to its authors' intent, not "however he feels like it".

Uh, 'scuse me, for all the s**t you're talking* you seem to have forgotten something. We aren't the ones making everything s**t because we don't have any power. Change the method of selection to further enable cronyism and you will have created a ******** the likes of which you have never seen before.

Obviously you don't want to be ruled by me and I don't want to be ruled by you, so, what's wrong with a little self-governance? All governance is, is an attempt to control people to create an outcome pleasing to the controller.

"All", "Every", and "Always" are bad words. you shouldn't use them to describe things relevant to human behavior.

. . . Have I said those? I'm not supposed to have, I know that.

Although sometimes I use them on the basis that we should have come to an understanding about this s**t by now; people should automatically know I mean "almost every/all/always" and "in my experience" along with it.

assumptions tend to go wrong over the internet.