Gorsuch, the USSC and the rights of LGBTQ Employment Rights

[Brad Sallows]

>Interesting that pro-life Louisiana still has the death penalty.

I'm against the death penalty, but why is this "interesting"?  Death-row convicts are guilty of something vile, but the unborn are not.

 

[FJAG]

>Interesting that pro-life Louisiana still has the death penalty.

I'm against the death penalty, but why is this "interesting"?  Death-row convicts are guilty of something vile, but the unborn are not.

"All life is sacred". "Judge not lest you be judged". “If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

Christianity greatly mitigates against the Old Testament "eye for an eye" principles. Add to that the racial inequality that comes with the application of the death penalty in the US and you have a strong religious/moral argument against the death penalty.

Personally, I am not against the death penalty but then I'm also pro-choice and in both cases I see consistency in my view that there are circumstances where society can morally end a life not yet started or one so worthless it should not be allowed to continue.

On the other hand I consider it hypocritical to argue on the one hand about the sanctity of a life not yet started (especially when we're talking about an early stage cluster of protoplasm) and yet feel that it's quite alright to execute someone. In neither case do you have any idea if the life to follow will have value or not. Whatever line is drawn is an arbitrary one and, undoubtedly, easily rationalized in retrospect.

:stirpot:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I am personally uneasy on late term abortions and push comes to shove would vote against them. I also support some Capital punishment. Attempting to keep a prisoner that can no longer be punished and is a constant danger to the inmate makes them a candidate. Also people who have killed multiple times on separate occasions. Both require a very high level of proof before sentencing as there is no ability to reserve it. I think it's unfair on other prisoners and the people responsible to contain them to keep them. We as a society have tendency to stick people either back on the street or into prison and then forget about what happens next.

 

[FJAG]

I am personally uneasy on late term abortions and push comes to shove would vote against them. I also support some Capital punishment. Attempting to keep a prisoner that can no longer be punished and is a constant danger to the inmate makes them a candidate. Also people who have killed multiple times on separate occasions. Both require a very high level of proof before sentencing as there is no ability to reserve it. I think it's unfair on other prisoners and the people responsible to contain them to keep them. We as a society have tendency to stick people either back on the street or into prison and then forget about what happens next.

Fair enough and I don't criticize people whose opinions are different from mine in degree.

Where I find fault is with people who create black letter law that impacts other peoples' choices because of some dogma pronounced by some priest or sheep herder some three or four thousand years ago.

:stirpot:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Secularists in the 20th century certainly did their fair share of Black letter laws on "Family planning" that negatively impacted millions, all based on the rantings of some angry old farts from the 18 & 19th centuries.  8) 

Speaking of which: https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/01/china-documents-uighur-genocidal-sterilization-xinjiang/?utm_source=PostUp&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=22788&utm_term=Editors%20Picks%20OC&?tpcc=22788

 

[FJAG]

Secularists in the 20th century certainly did their fair share of Black letter laws on "Family planning" that negatively impacted millions, all based on the rantings of some angry old farts from the 18 & 19th centuries.  8) 

Speaking of which: https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/01/china-documents-uighur-genocidal-sterilization-xinjiang/?utm_source=PostUp&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=22788&utm_term=Editors%20Picks%20OC&?tpcc=22788

Didn't say they had a monopoly. There's a lot of stupid to go around.

;D

 

[Xylric]

One of the things that always surprises me, regardless of how well my background prepares me to predict the occurance of such things, is just how frequently otherwise logical laws end up being given the same immutable elements one sees in religious dogma. If the law is good and just (like for example, those related to murder), by all means let them have such a status, but if the law is one which is temporally relevant as opposed to being derived from universal truth, such as laws related to culturally sensitive issues, there is both tremendous risk and tremendous benefit.

I don't envy the difficult job the SC Judges have in making those risk/benefit evaluations for the interpretation of the laws, simply because history does not have 'sides' - only the truth.