Another conservative supreme court justice?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by halfprep455, Sep 12, 2007.

  1. halfprep455 macrumors regular

    halfprep455

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland USA
    #1
    Im sure all of you know all of the issues that are brought up about the 2008 election; ie Iraq War, Oil Prices, Abortion, Economics, ext. However one issue that you don't really hear in the news is who the next president would nominate to the supreme court. The courts 2 liberal justices, Ginsburg and Stevens are in their late 70's and 80's respectively. That probably means that the next president will be able to nominate at least one justice. However, if a conservative justice, such as Alito or Roberts, is nominated, the court will undoubtedly swing to the far right. This would have a huge impact on the entire nation. If another conservative justice were nominated, you could expect the following.

    -The overturning or severe watering down of Roe v Wade. This would mean the end to reproductive freedom and the outlawing of abortions in all cases in many states.

    -The ability for public schools to mandate prayer and Bible teaching.

    -The favoring of fundamental Christianity over all other religions.

    -Severe restrictions on Habeas Corpus.

    -The extension of the death penalty to minors and mentally incapable people.

    -The interpretation that states do not have to follow the Bill of Rights. This would mean that state governments would be fully able to use cruel and unusual punishment and severly limit freedom of religion, speech, and press.

    -Severe limits on freedom of speech and press.

    -Federal funding of religious institutions.

    -The end of public schools over the favoring of religious private schools.

    -Mandating the teaching of creationism over evolution.

    There are a lot of things I din not cover but I'm sure you all get the point.

    I just think people should consider this when they are choosing who to vote for. It is an issue that is too many people do not consider.
     
  2. nbs2 macrumors 68030

    nbs2

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Location:
    A geographical oddity
    #2
    You seem a bit paranoid. Stare Decisis would prevent most of that from happening. Ignoring precedent is not something taken lightly. The only one on your list that has even a remote chance of occurrence is the shift in Roe v. Wade. Even that would be unlikely to be overturned. Rather, I could see the court rule that reproductive health has not been handled by the feds, and therefore is handled by the states. You would see Congress splitting as they would try to legislate a federal policy. I don't know if Congressional involvement would pass muster or not.
     
  3. ham_man macrumors 68020

    ham_man

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    #3
    Your paranoia is frightening.

    Will a conservative Supreme Court reverse decisions such as Roe v. Wade? It is definately possible, seeing as how things such as that are very much open to interpretation.

    But will they blatantly subvert the Constitution? Hell. No.
     
  4. halfprep455 thread starter macrumors regular

    halfprep455

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland USA
    #4
    I will admit that my post does sound a little paranoid. When I wrote it I was in a bad/ ranting mood.
     
  5. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #5
    They already have. Do you ever have something intelligent to say?
     
  6. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #6
    Huh? Have you been paying attention the last few years? It's already happened.
     
  7. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #7
    We're already funding an "Office of Faith-based Initiatives". The only groups receiving funding are Christian. You don't have a problem with that? Nevermind the fact that government isn't supposed to be in the business of funding religion. This "Office" should have never been allowed to exist, but it does. Look at the list, you'll find a lot more things that are going on right now.
     
  8. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #8
    LOL. Faith Based Initiative. That's a good one :D
     
  9. calculus Guest

    calculus

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    #9
    I thought that all government initiatives were 'faith based' (as opposed to 'fact based');)
     
  10. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
  11. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #11
  12. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #12
    I know that's what our two recent SCOTUS nominees SAID during their confirmation hearings, but their actions say they do not find stare decisis to be much of a roadblock to applying their ideological stamp to their decisions.
     
  13. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #13
    Please, the man couldn't even name his favorite Bible verse when asked. He only start being a "man of faith" when he lost a race to man who actually was devout. Rove was a secular agnostic as well.

    One of those hired to run the faith based initiatives quit in disgust when he saw what they really were, should have told the "true believers" something.
     

Share This Page