Comments on: Puritan Theocracy vs Judicial Tyranny

By: Dale

Dale — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 03:18:45 +0000

Oh, by the way . Please tell the author that American government is a republic modeled after
Rome. Which Scot Presbytery had a bicameral legislature composed of a Senate and a House?
Which Bay Colony had this Theocratic structure?

By: Dale

Dale — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 03:12:30 +0000

Thanks, Gene. I am so relieved to know that countries with WMD are not the greatest threat to the US.
Nor are Islamists, terrorists, liberals or grandmothers who voted for Clinton.
If people think our judges are tyrannous , they have no clue what tyranny is.
Viva justice in America! The best in the world. Nobody does it better than us. Stop tearing down America.

By: gene

gene — Sun, 06 Aug 2006 20:37:34 +0000

The ACLU and those like minded is the greatest enemy that the US could possibly have. I’ve read where the so called “Equity in Education” is being tried in many state courts. That is that the courts are determining how much the state governments should spend on education. I believe that only the Texas Supreme court told them to take a hike. I’d like to read more about this subject from theIC.

By: Dale

Dale — Sun, 06 Aug 2006 16:15:07 +0000

Wow, I had two thoughts and combined them into one. I am sorry.
The last paragraph should read: ” Perhaps the author is upset that the Massachussets Supreme Court upheld the Massachusetts Constitution? If so, then what will happen when the Massachusetts Constitution is changed to prohibit marriage between same sex couples and the Supreme Court refuses to uphold the Constitution then?
Will the author be understanding?

By: Dale

Dale — Sun, 06 Aug 2006 16:10:34 +0000

Let me see if I understand this:
The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that the laws regarding marriage in Massachusetts did not conformto the Massachusetts Constitution. Isn’t that what they are supposed to do? What did I miss?
Perhaps the author is upset that the Massachussets Supreme Court did not uphold the Massachusetts Constitution? If so, then what will happen when the Massachusetts Constitution is changed to prohibit marriage between same sex couples and the Supreme Court rules against that?
Will the author be understanding?

By: M. Ray Johnson

M. Ray Johnson — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:56:18 +0000

I agree with you, but would add that this is EXACTLY the reason that we need to fight back against judicial tyranny. Some conservatives oppose a constitutional amendment because they rightly revere the constitution. But our founding fathers gave us that excellant option. We need to be brave enough to use it.