Turn Off Ads?
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 52 of 52

Thread: Clarence Thomas: Judges should be evaluated by God, not Constitution

  1. #46
    Potential Lunch Winner Dom Heffner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    6,055

    Re: Clarence Thomas: Judges should be evaluated by God, not Constitution

    He got in with the same score he wanted to deny minorities of using to get into college.

    You have to love the guy.
    If you're watchin' a parade, make sure you stand in one spot, don't follow it, it never changes. And if the parade is boring, run in the opposite direction, you will fast-foward the parade. --Mitch Hedberg

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    Potential Lunch Winner Dom Heffner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    6,055

    Re: Clarence Thomas: Judges should be evaluated by God, not Constitution

    Also- no idea what possessed me to mention Cooter's. I was sad to hear it closed down awhile ago.

    I remember shooting pool behind the chain link fence and all the ties hanging from the ceiling. And I also remember going to the place across the street....Burgundy's, maybe?????

    I had been going there for like a year, then quit for a year and then went back and it had went from a pop/top 40 place to totally rap. I payed 6 bucks to basically go from the entrance straight out the door.

    Anyway, happy to please.
    If you're watchin' a parade, make sure you stand in one spot, don't follow it, it never changes. And if the parade is boring, run in the opposite direction, you will fast-foward the parade. --Mitch Hedberg

  4. #48
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,763

    Re: Clarence Thomas: Judges should be evaluated by God, not Constitution

    On "legacies," while I understand why colleges have the system so as to increase the chances of getting big donations from alumni, I oppose the "legacies" system for the same reason I opposed certain affirmative action systems-I find both to be fundamentally unfair.
    I do not oppose a system of admissions that recognizes that an applicant with a slightly lower SAT or ACT score may deserve a "boost" in the rankings when other factors are considered: For example, did the applicant come from poverty, without all the advantages a wealthy applicant which contributed to the higher score of the richer student? What were the extracurricular activites of the applicant?
    I don't support an admission policy whereby say, a weathy applicant with a lower SAT or ACT score is automatically preferred over another applicant solely because he or she is a member of a minority group or because the applicant's father or mother attended the same school.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."

  5. #49
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,763

    Re: Clarence Thomas: Judges should be evaluated by God, not Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by RedFanAlways1966
    On this topic... I am watching a very interesting documentary on the U.S. Presidents (the History Channel). They made mention that FDR was a "C" student at Harvard. I would assume that FDR, the average student, helped gain admission the Ivy League school from the fact that he was the only child of aristocrats. But we all know about FDR the President. Didn't seem to do too bad of a job in the White House!

    I am not quite sure what you mean, FCB, by "legacies"? Most 18-year-olds are not legacies. Do you mean come from wealthy or prestigous families? Seems as though the tag fits both Pres. G.W. Bush & FDR.
    A great president, or any leader for that matter, doesn't necessarily have to be the smartest person in the room, anymore than a great baseball manager has to have been a great player. To be successful, the chief executive needs to surround himself with talent and have the ability to manage that talent.
    George Washington was not as "smart" as Thomas Jefferson or Alexander Hamilton, but he put both Jefferson and Hamilton in his cabinet and was a more effective leader than either.
    Many, perhaps most, of our presidents who are now regarded as having been effective leaders were never regarded as great intellects, but they had the ability to lead: Andrew Jackson, U.S. Grant (more as a general than a president), FDR, Eisenhower, Reagan. Lincoln and Truman are special cases in that their education was limited, but both men seem to me to have been well read and to have had first class minds.
    We have had a few presidents who were arguably both intellectuals and effective leaders-for all his bombast, Theodore Roosevelt was well read and a prolific author, and Thomas Jefferson was obviously a genius though his presidency was at best medicore IMO. But many of our presidents who did seem to be the smartest guy in the room had administrations that that were less than roaring successes: John Adams, James Madison, John Qunicy Adams, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, perhaps Woodrow Wilson.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."

  6. #50
    A Little to the Left Redsfaithful's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bexley, OH
    Posts
    7,463

    Re: Clarence Thomas: Judges should be evaluated by God, not Constitution

    Andrew Jackson, U.S. Grant (more as a general than a president)
    I think you should put the same qualification there for Jackson. Because he was a terrible president.
    We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
    --Oscar Wilde

  7. #51
    THAT'S A FACT JACK!! GAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Bellefontaine, Ohio
    Posts
    26,665

    Re: Clarence Thomas: Judges should be evaluated by God, not Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by Redsfaithful
    Spin it however you want GAC, but a Supreme Court Justices job is to interpret the constitution, not to do what Christianity considers to be God's will.
    Not spinning anything. You posted an article where a third person was quoting someone else who says they heard Judge Thomas make this statement. As RB already pointed out... "The reporter did not witness the supposed statement from Justice Thomas. There is accordingly the question of whether or not the quote is accurate, or in proper context."

    And yet, I've heard some wild assumptions made by some on here, and simply based on the fact they have ideological differences with the guy (i.e. he is a conservative Christian).

    What I'd simply like to know is.... has Judge Thomas, in the function/execution of his job as a Supreme Court judge ever tried to subvert or violate the Constitution of the United States by any of the rulings/judgements that he has rendered in accordance to his Christian faith?

    Aren't you kinda jumpin' off the deep end on one singular statement that he may/maynot have made?

    All sessions of the Supreme Court are called into session by the Court Clerk with this phrase: "God save the United States and this honorable Court."

    Is that unconstitutional?

    Have previous Supreme Court Justices made somewhat similar statements?...

    First Chief Justice John Jay wrote: "Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."

    In 1844 the Supreme Court ruled that the rights of American citizens were God given.

    Thomas Clark (appointed to the Supreme Court in the late 1940's) wrote: "The Founding Fathers believed devoutly that there was a God and that the unalienable rights of man were rooted not in the state, nor the legislature, nor in any other human power but in God alone."

    My point? I don't think that Thomas, if he made this statement, is violating the Constituion any more then some of his predecessors.
    "panic" only comes from having real expectations

  8. #52
    OlafTheBlack Dan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    2,580

    Re: Clarence Thomas: Judges should be evaluated by God, not Constitution

    I hear that by the State of the Union address this year that George W. Bush AND Clarence Thomas will both be replaced by Jim Coombs, and that among the lesser goals of his Presidency will be to bring peace to Israel and personally lead a manned mission to Mars.
    Sabermetrics is this: A batter's goal is to extend the inning. Extend enough innings and you're going to score runs. Extend more innings than your opponent and you're going to score more runs than him.

    Forget the rain. It's never an official game until the Reds piss away a run between third base and home plate. - Bluegrass Redleg


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25