Constitution Party Wants Supreme Court Justices Impeached

CNSNews.com ^ | 07/04/03 | Jeff Johnson.

[DonQ]

So James Clymer has now decided that the Constitution Party is the official third party (even though its vote count puts it way way behind the Reform Party and Libertarian Party), and has decided to call himself "a legal expert". He is, in fact, a very ordinary lawyer in Lancaster, Penn., who has been rejected repeatedly by the voters, especially those who knew who he was.

As for impeaching the Justices because of their decision in a hotly debated case (where there were real legal experts lined up on both sides), this a definite departure from the American pattern of an independent judiciary.

Clymer still has a lot to learn about the American Constitution.

[Captain Shady]

I agree with the Constitution party on this.

[breakem]

the same place people get the idea that all human rights must be listed in the Constitution.

[breakem]

It's also pretty silly that you think the government in eaxh state has to power to restrict these personal freedoms. It was not silly however to say that historically there have been many laws which took away human rights or liberty. Silly that some people just don't believe that should continue. Damn silly!

[Cultural Jihad]

the same place people get the idea that all human rights must be listed in the Constitution.

Perzactly. We have the right to expect that all members of our society adhere to the kindness of religious morality, and we have the right to decide what kind of a society we are to live in, and our children and grandchildren have a right to their own innocence.

[GatekeeperBookman]

Mind-numbed robotic slaves of the government. They have been raised to serve the master-the government.

[Cultural Jihad]

LOL! Thanks for the tour of ideologue dementia!

[Duramaximus]

"Weap for the republic....it's not long for this world."

I agree... unfortunately, this is only the beginning. It is my opinion it will get worse.

[varon]

At that point, Baez said, the political party in power would have to decide whether or not it wanted to risk retaliation from the current minority party in the future.

"One party may be in power today and may be able to boot a justice from the other party," he said. "But then, of course, four years or eight years later, it may be reversed.

"It's a dangerous game," Baez concluded, "because what goes around comes around."

A good example of how the constitution is held hostage by the two party system!

[GatekeeperBookman]

El Gato asked, "Where do some people get the idea that every social problem must be solved, or can be solved, at the federal level and that everything is the buisiness of the federal courts?"


I answer-"Mind-numbed robotic slaves of the government. They have been raised to serve the master-the government."

You are amused & call me idiot. Hmmm. Your position seems clear & the limits of your abilities profound.

[Cultural Jihad]

So sorry. I retract my statement.

[GatekeeperBookman]

Well then, you are but a jester, an irritant who seeks to parry, confuse & frighten a weak minded person like me. You take advantage of my dementia. You are a rascal.

[furnitureman]

bump

[furnitureman]

Join Farah's Supreme Court impeachment drive http://mail.worldnetdaily.com/cgi-bin/subunsub.pl?list=impeach

[ImphClinton]

I suppose you think that Sodam and Gomorah were also not destroyed because of homosexuality. Right I suppose you think Christ was a homosexual. You, I fear, serve Satan. You certinally do not serve GOD.

God will not tallerate it for long. If it continues the US will not nast another 40 years. God will not allow it.

[breakem]

I suppose you're right. Yaaaaawn!

[breakem]

Well you made up some new rights there, tell us all about your right to make everyone in your image.

[Cultural Jihad]

Made up rights? Who says the rights enumerated in the BOR are the only ones? You?

[breakem]

"Perzactly. We have the right to expect that all members of our society adhere to the kindness of religious morality, and we have the right to decide what kind of a society we are to live in, and our children and grandchildren have a right to their own innocence."

The fact that all rights are not listed in the constitution does not allow you to make them up. Where did you get the idea that anyone has to adhere to your idea of "the kindness of religious morality." The constitution specifically prohibits government from support yoiur religion. So tell me how your view of religious morality must be adhered to by others and why it does not interfere with their rights to force your view upon them.

I was here one night when another poster explained to you that rights are an individual concept and not collective. I guess you didn't get the gist.

When you say you have the right to decide what kind of society you live in, you are correct. You can move to a theocracy that imposes your beliefs upon others or you can live in the US where we are free from such impositions. And who is "we" anyway?

[Cultural Jihad]

No one is being forced to attend Church, or to worship God, or to cross themselves from left to right instead of from right to left, or to fast on Fridays, or to refrain from eating shellfish. These are simply the customs and usages of religion, not religious morality.