Tuesday, January 31, 2006
Thank the President for Appointing Judicial Conservatives to the Supreme Court
Today is an exciting day! Judge Samuel Alito won confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court by a vote of 58-42. You helped make this happen. Thank you.
I have a special opportunity for you to communicate with President Bush. But you must act now.
Take time today to send a letter of support to President Bush for keeping his promise to appoint judicial conservatives to the Supreme Court.
Your letter will be hand-delivered to the President on Wednesday afternoon at the White House by TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty. Time is short. Act now!
I have a special opportunity for you to communicate with President Bush. But you must act now.
Take time today to send a letter of support to President Bush for keeping his promise to appoint judicial conservatives to the Supreme Court.
Your letter will be hand-delivered to the President on Wednesday afternoon at the White House by TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty. Time is short. Act now!
Thoughtful Readers Speak:
<< Home
RIGHTFAITH: Where everything favors the stewardship of patrimony. All content is believed to be correct but may be amended based upon new information. The content of this page may be republished with proper citation without the expressed consent of the author. This site is not, in any manner whatsoever, associated with the religious philosophism from the Indian penninsula. All comments or emails to the author become the property of the author and may be published or deleted without notice or reason provided. Copyrighted 2005.
its hard to believe given statements like this and frankly his whole disposition: It is not true, in my judgment, that the Supreme Court is free to do anything that it wants. It has to follow the Constitution and it has to follow the laws.
Stare decisis, which I was talking about earlier, is an important limitation on what the Supreme Court does. And although the Supreme Court has the power to overrule a prior precedent, it uses that power sparingly, and rightfully so. It should be limited in what it does.
Stare decisis, which I was talking about earlier, is an important limitation on what the Supreme Court does. And although the Supreme Court has the power to overrule a prior precedent, it uses that power sparingly, and rightfully so. It should be limited in what it does.
# posted by 
: 9:33 AM
: 9:33 AM
Wow. I never would have believed that there would be someone who didn't think Alito was conservative enough.
What was the problem, Randy? Alito didn't come out and hate gays enough?
What was the problem, Randy? Alito didn't come out and hate gays enough?
"Give them up"? Maybe you're familiar with a concept called "freedom"?
Adults recognize that "freedom" means that people are going to sometimes choose to do things that we wouldn't do, ourselves. Part of growing up is learning how to deal with that. And part of loving someone is recognizing that you have no right to assume you know what's best for them.
Adults recognize that "freedom" means that people are going to sometimes choose to do things that we wouldn't do, ourselves. Part of growing up is learning how to deal with that. And part of loving someone is recognizing that you have no right to assume you know what's best for them.
Randy still doesn't seem to realize that heterosexuals can also contract sexually transmitted diseases or that heterosexuals engage in the exact same practices as homosexuals.
"part of loving someone is recognizing that you have no right to assume you know what's best for them."
this philosophy leads to licentious societies. it would work if everyone acted with the same moral code. AND, it violates the 'common good' intent of the writers of the constitution.
unrestrained freedoms are not the founders vision for america; liberty, or freedom with responsbility, is. But, you were probably educated in public school, so you wouldn't realize this.
part of loving a person and america is defending it from that which destroys it.
this philosophy leads to licentious societies. it would work if everyone acted with the same moral code. AND, it violates the 'common good' intent of the writers of the constitution.
unrestrained freedoms are not the founders vision for america; liberty, or freedom with responsbility, is. But, you were probably educated in public school, so you wouldn't realize this.
part of loving a person and america is defending it from that which destroys it.
# posted by : 11:06 AM
: 11:06 AM
unrestrained freedoms are not the founders vision for america; liberty, or freedom with responsbility, is.
Can you point to the specific language in the constitution that proves that the Founders intended to marginalize homosexuals?
part of loving a person and america is defending it from that which destroys it.
And you believe that anal sex is going to destroy America? Then can I presume you're an opponent of "abstinence-only education", which has been scientifically proven to influence teenagers to have more anal sex?
Can you point to the specific language in the constitution that proves that the Founders intended to marginalize homosexuals?
part of loving a person and america is defending it from that which destroys it.
And you believe that anal sex is going to destroy America? Then can I presume you're an opponent of "abstinence-only education", which has been scientifically proven to influence teenagers to have more anal sex?
the 10th amendment leaves these decisions to the people in the states. the vast majority of people believe that homosexual marriage is wrong. if courts force states to recognize homosexual marriage then we have lost the value of the constitution, thus it has been destroyed.
your lack of knowledge again has served you poorly
your lack of knowledge again has served you poorly
# posted by : 3:43 PM
: 3:43 PM
the vast majority of people believe that homosexual marriage is wrong.
Acually, quite the opposite is true. An increasing majority of Americans support the extension of the civil protections of marriage to gay couples.
I suspect you'll try to claim otherwise, but you'll be lying.
Post a Comment
Acually, quite the opposite is true. An increasing majority of Americans support the extension of the civil protections of marriage to gay couples.
I suspect you'll try to claim otherwise, but you'll be lying.
<< Home
