Religions > Atheism > Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"T" |
| Date: |
08 Oct 2003 07:35:05 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:gsm3ov8g80g0h6ulrs27ktpqqtk56jtfgk@4ax.com...
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 02:59:41 -0500, "Terry/Anti" <GrandpaTDhot@mail.com>,
Message ID: <vo28675ogrnoe3@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:fhq0ovcfv0hreno9gavqncoot1p2laug0g@4ax.com...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 01:40:18 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net>,
Message ID: <6gqeb.382892$Ji7.4211939@news.easynews.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
there goes the american constitution...
It's been gone since 2000 since Herr Shickle...errr Bush was apointed.
It's been pruned since before I was born.
In some cases, in others strengthened imo.
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving the
president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of people were
worried that he would use it to remain in office.
Gramps
Move the @ ahead of hot to email me.
Gramps
Move the @ ahead of hot to email me.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
09 Oct 2003 12:59:30 PM |
|
|
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:gsm3ov8g80g0h6ulrs27ktpqqtk56jtfgk@4ax.com...
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 02:59:41 -0500, "Terry/Anti"
<GrandpaTDhot@mail.com>, Message ID:
<vo28675ogrnoe3@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:fhq0ovcfv0hreno9gavqncoot1p2laug0g@4ax.com...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 01:40:18 GMT, "jabriol"
<jabriol@Neogenesis.net>, Message ID:
<6gqeb.382892$Ji7.4211939@news.easynews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
there goes the american constitution...
It's been gone since 2000 since Herr Shickle...errr Bush was
apointed.
It's been pruned since before I was born.
In some cases, in others strengthened imo.
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving
the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of people
were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly
realized I was talking to myself!"
--Peter O'Toole.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
09 Oct 2003 05:11:24 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving
the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of people
were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or executive
order is superior to the Constitution.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
09 Oct 2003 08:15:15 PM |
|
|
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving
the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of people
were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or executive
order is superior to the Constitution.
Yes, any such order would be a violation of Article VI, Section 2.
Such a radical change would require a constitutional amendment for it to be
valid, under the procedure outlined in Article V.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Ill-Legal Dept. "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here"
"My country, right or wrong; to be defended when right and righted when wrong."
- Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
10 Oct 2003 08:56:24 AM |
|
|
On 09 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for
toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving
the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of
people
were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or executive
order is superior to the Constitution.
This is not technically true. The president can place the nation under
martial law, which suspends certain constitutional rights. Whether or
not it's strictly legal for the president to do so is another question;
but it can be and has been done.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly
realized I was talking to myself!"
--Peter O'Toole.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
10 Oct 2003 03:17:07 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns94105C8F41E1BMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 09 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving
the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of people
were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or executive
order is superior to the Constitution.
This is not technically true. The president can place the nation under
martial law, which suspends certain constitutional rights.
Where in the Constitution does it say the president has that power?
The only right the president can suspend per the Constitution is the
right of habeas corpus.
Whether or not it's strictly legal for the president to do
so is another question;
Which is precisely what I said. It's not constitutional.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
10 Oct 2003 03:37:13 PM |
|
|
On 10 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:BTR1702-42583B.15174810102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns94105C8F41E1BMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 09 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill
giving the president authority to suspend the constitution.
Lots of people were worried that he would use it to remain in
office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or
executive order is superior to the Constitution.
This is not technically true. The president can place the nation
under martial law, which suspends certain constitutional rights.
Where in the Constitution does it say the president has that power?
The only right the president can suspend per the Constitution is the
right of habeas corpus.
Whether or not it's strictly legal for the president to do
so is another question;
Which is precisely what I said. It's not constitutional.
Isn't that beside the point, if the president can do it anyway? Someone
could take it to the US Supreme Court, but if the president has already
suspended the Constitution and established a base of power to support
that decision, you won't be able to take it to the USSC to begin with.
I'd like to know if this has been done. It wouldn't be the first time a
president has flagrantly violated the Consitution.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly
realized I was talking to myself!"
--Peter O'Toole.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
10 Oct 2003 05:00:34 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns9410A084E5F80Mekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 10 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:BTR1702-42583B.15174810102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns94105C8F41E1BMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 09 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill
giving the president authority to suspend the constitution.
Lots of people were worried that he would use it to remain in
office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or
executive order is superior to the Constitution.
This is not technically true. The president can place the nation
under martial law, which suspends certain constitutional rights.
Where in the Constitution does it say the president has that power?
The only right the president can suspend per the Constitution is the
right of habeas corpus.
Whether or not it's strictly legal for the president to do
so is another question;
Which is precisely what I said. It's not constitutional.
Isn't that beside the point, if the president can do it anyway?
He can't legally do it.
Someone could take it to the US Supreme Court, but if the president has already
suspended the Constitution and established a base of power to support
that decision, you won't be able to take it to the USSC to begin with.
Well, sure, if you're talking a dictatorial coup by the executive
branch, backed up by the military. However, such an action would still
not be legal, which was the original point.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
15 Oct 2003 10:09:24 AM |
|
|
On 10 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:BTR1702-39C397.17011510102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns9410A084E5F80Mekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 10 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:BTR1702-42583B.15174810102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns94105C8F41E1BMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 09 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his
face, groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message
in news:BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his
face, groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following
message in news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill
giving the president authority to suspend the constitution.
Lots of people were worried that he would use it to remain in
office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I
being paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or
executive order is superior to the Constitution.
This is not technically true. The president can place the nation
under martial law, which suspends certain constitutional rights.
Where in the Constitution does it say the president has that power?
The only right the president can suspend per the Constitution is
the right of habeas corpus.
Whether or not it's strictly legal for the president to do
so is another question;
Which is precisely what I said. It's not constitutional.
Isn't that beside the point, if the president can do it anyway?
He can't legally do it.
Someone could take it to the US Supreme Court, but if the president
has already suspended the Constitution and established a base of
power to support that decision, you won't be able to take it to the
USSC to begin with.
Well, sure, if you're talking a dictatorial coup by the executive
branch, backed up by the military. However, such an action would still
not be legal, which was the original point.
Abraham Lincoln did it with impunity. He placed the nation under
martial law, and suspended many constitutional rights, and hardly
anybody said a word. *My* point is that if the president can do it
anyway, isn't it beside the point whether or not it's legal?
You can't dismiss the issue by saying it's not legal, if it can and has
been done. It's still worthy of concern.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly
realized I was talking to myself!"
--Peter O'Toole.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
15 Oct 2003 10:35:45 AM |
|
|
Abraham Lincoln did it with impunity. He placed the nation under
martial law, and suspended many constitutional rights, and hardly
anybody said a word.
You call the Lincoln administration's rather impressive defeat in the Ex Parte
Milligan Supreme Court case "hardly saying a word?" Frecryinoutloud...most of
the Justices were appointed by him and they still overwhelmingly voted against
him in the case. Imagine that happening today.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
15 Oct 2003 02:12:16 PM |
|
|
On 15 Oct 2003, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert) screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:20031015113545.28427.00000986@mb-m12.aol.com:
Abraham Lincoln did it with impunity. He placed the nation under
martial law, and suspended many constitutional rights, and hardly
anybody said a word.
You call the Lincoln administration's rather impressive defeat in the
Ex Parte Milligan Supreme Court case "hardly saying a word?"
Frecryinoutloud...most of the Justices were appointed by him and they
still overwhelmingly voted against him in the case. Imagine that
happening today.
The Ex Parte Milligan case was judged in 1866. Lincoln placed the
nation under martial law in 1863. In the intervening time, so far as I
have ever heard or read, this act of his was hardly challenged at all,
and many people suffered from the suspension of habeas corpus he
imposed. I did not say it was *never* challenged, but at the time it
was *not* challenged.
My point is that it's a bit foolish to hear that the President suspended
constitutional rights and say, "Aw, don't worry about it, that's not
legal!" Well, it may not be legal, but that doesn't mean it can't
happen and that bad things won't happen to you and your if it does.
However, be that as it may... I believe this is the order that stoney
was speaking of:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/resources/govdocs/980706.govdoc.eo13083.asp
Not really all that dangerous as far as I can tell. At worst it can be
construed as encroaching on states' rights, but does not give the
President power to violate the personal freedoms of citizens.
If you were speaking of a different order, stoney, please post it.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly
realized I was talking to myself!"
--Peter O'Toole.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
15 Oct 2003 05:14:42 PM |
|
|
The Ex Parte Milligan case was judged in 1866. Lincoln placed the
nation under martial law in 1863.
First of all the courts cannot judge a case until it is brought before them.
Second is the fact that the due process of law takes time. Lambdin Milligan was
arrested on 5 October 1864, seven months before the war's end, by General Alvin
Hovey, the Army's commander for Indiana. He was sentenced to be executed on 19
May 1865. After Lincoln's death President Johnson sustained the order. It was
then that Milligan's lawyers filed for a writ of habeas corpus and for the case
to be heard by a federal circuit court. The circuit court didn't know what to
do and they kicked the case upstairs to the Supreme Court.
So, from the time of Milligan's arrest in October 1864 to the time the case was
heard by the Supreme Court in March 1866 we have a period of roughly 18 months.
That is exceptionally fast for a case to get to the Supremes from the time of
the violation to the time the case is heard. Ex Parte Milligan was a 9-0
decision.
To say that Lincoln's establishment of martial law was hardly challenged is
ludicrously laughable. It was one of McClellan's campaign platforms in the 1864
election. It's why there were riots in northern cities in 1863 and 1864.
The Hour and the Man, Campaign Song for McClellan's candidacy (shamelessly
stolen from the 28th Massachusetts Infantry website
http://www.28thmass.com/NINA/hour_and_the_man.htm )
When the Blackness of War overshadowed the land,
The youthful McClellan was called to command.
As he belted his sabre, and sprang on his steed,
“Twas Scott the brave veteran, who bade him God-speed.
CH: Come fill up the Cup, and come fill up the can,
And cheer! For the hour has come, and the man;
Our gallant young hero we’ve placed on the track,
And we’ll seat in the White House our brave little Mac.
Says Mac to his soldiers – “Strike down the armed foe,
“But to wounded and prisoners all gentleness show;
When the battle is over let violence cease, -
Remember we fight but for Union and Peace.”
There were foemen before him and foes in his rear, -
In front of him Richmond; but Washington near, -
For Lee and Old Abe were in rivalry then, -
Lee killing, old Abraham stealing his men.
How the army was saved – by what miracles wrought,
Ask the soldiers who under McClellan have fought;
How they felt when he lost his command and again
When he galloped once more at the head of his men.
South Mountain, Antietam, encircled his name
With a halo as bright as the dawn’s ruddy flame:
‘Twas then – when his praises rang over the land,
Old Abra’m removed the young chief from command.
The people have patiently bided their time.
To brand with their verdict the infamous crime;
In the joker’s own coinage the debt we’ll pay back –
Walk out Mr. Lincoln – walk in little Mac.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
15 Oct 2003 05:31:27 PM |
|
|
In article <Xns9415922633251Mekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 15 Oct 2003, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert) screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:20031015113545.28427.00000986@mb-m12.aol.com:
Abraham Lincoln did it with impunity. He placed the nation under
martial law, and suspended many constitutional rights, and hardly
anybody said a word.
You call the Lincoln administration's rather impressive defeat in the
Ex Parte Milligan Supreme Court case "hardly saying a word?"
Frecryinoutloud...most of the Justices were appointed by him and they
still overwhelmingly voted against him in the case. Imagine that
happening today.
The Ex Parte Milligan case was judged in 1866. Lincoln placed the
nation under martial law in 1863. In the intervening time, so far as I
have ever heard or read, this act of his was hardly challenged at all,
and many people suffered from the suspension of habeas corpus he
imposed.
Suspending habeas corpus is the one right the Constitution allows the
president to suspend. It wasn't illegal for Lincoln to do that.
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended,
unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may
require it."
I'd say the Civil War was a pretty clear-cut case of rebellion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
15 Oct 2003 06:05:11 PM |
|
|
Suspending habeas corpus is the one right the Constitution allows the
president to suspend. It wasn't illegal for Lincoln to do that.
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended,
unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may
require it."
I'd say the Civil War was a pretty clear-cut case of rebellion.
Suspending habeas corpus in areas which were in rebellion and the civilian
courts have broken down, like they did in the eleven rebellious states, is
certainly Constitutional. Indiana, which is where the incidents in question
took place was not in rebellion and the civilian courts were still open, which
is why the Court ruled as they did in a 9-0 decision. Lincoln did not have the
authority to suspend habeas corpus in Indiana because the civilian judicial
system, following the laws of the United States, was still fully operational.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
16 Oct 2003 09:15:35 AM |
|
|
On 15 Oct 2003, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:BTR1702-22BD40.17321315102003@news.west.earthlink.net:
In article <Xns9415922633251Mekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 15 Oct 2003, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert) screwed up his
face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:20031015113545.28427.00000986@mb-m12.aol.com:
Abraham Lincoln did it with impunity. He placed the nation under
martial law, and suspended many constitutional rights, and hardly
anybody said a word.
You call the Lincoln administration's rather impressive defeat in
the
Ex Parte Milligan Supreme Court case "hardly saying a word?"
Frecryinoutloud...most of the Justices were appointed by him and
they
still overwhelmingly voted against him in the case. Imagine that
happening today.
The Ex Parte Milligan case was judged in 1866. Lincoln placed the
nation under martial law in 1863. In the intervening time, so far as
I
have ever heard or read, this act of his was hardly challenged at
all,
and many people suffered from the suspension of habeas corpus he
imposed.
Suspending habeas corpus is the one right the Constitution allows the
president to suspend. It wasn't illegal for Lincoln to do that.
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended,
unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may
require it."
I'd say the Civil War was a pretty clear-cut case of rebellion.
That's interesting, considering that it was precisely that suspension of
habeas corpus that the US Supreme Court struck down in Ex Parte
Milligan.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly
realized I was talking to myself!"
--Peter O'Toole.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
16 Oct 2003 09:45:10 AM |
|
|
Suspending habeas corpus is the one right the Constitution allows the
president to suspend. It wasn't illegal for Lincoln to do that.
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended,
unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may
require it."
I'd say the Civil War was a pretty clear-cut case of rebellion.
That's interesting, considering that it was precisely that suspension of
habeas corpus that the US Supreme Court struck down in Ex Parte
Milligan.
The Supreme Court struck it down for three reasons:
1) With the formal surrender of all Confederate forces on 2 May 1865 the
rebellion was officially over (although I seem to recall Kirby Smith still
hiding out in Texas).
2) The area in question (Indiana) was not in rebellion and had never been
occupied by Confederate troops.
3) The civilian court system in Indiana was still in full operation and was
entirely capable of trying cases.
For all of these reasons the Court decreed that both Lincoln and Johnson had no
power to suspend habeas corpus in Indiana, therefore Milligan's military trial
was invalid under the law. Had the case taken place in, say, North Carolina,
the result would have been markedly different.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
10 Oct 2003 02:46:01 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:11:24 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com>,
Message ID: <BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net>
wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving
the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of people
were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or executive
order is superior to the Constitution.
The Constitution was rendered irrelevant by presidential fiat.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
10 Oct 2003 05:01:21 PM |
|
|
In article <o23eovc58rb6ud8b20fsahv414e11m8fub@4ax.com>, stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:11:24 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com>,
Message ID: <BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net>
wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving
the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of people
were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or executive
order is superior to the Constitution.
The Constitution was rendered irrelevant by presidential fiat.
The president can't legally render the Constitution irrelevant by fiat
or by any other method.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
11 Oct 2003 10:11:56 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 22:01:21 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com>,
Message ID: <BTR1702-048EC5.17020210102003@news.west.earthlink.net>
wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <o23eovc58rb6ud8b20fsahv414e11m8fub@4ax.com>, stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:11:24 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com>,
Message ID: <BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net>
wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving
the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of people
were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or executive
order is superior to the Constitution.
The Constitution was rendered irrelevant by presidential fiat.
The president can't legally render the Constitution irrelevant by fiat
or by any other method.
What does legal have to do with anything? It's might makes right.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
| User: "BTR1701" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
11 Oct 2003 12:13:13 PM |
|
|
In article <pc7govk2ejngmnans04p7fsjlf5pq04m43@4ax.com>, stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 22:01:21 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com>,
Message ID: <BTR1702-048EC5.17020210102003@news.west.earthlink.net>
wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <o23eovc58rb6ud8b20fsahv414e11m8fub@4ax.com>, stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:11:24 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com>,
Message ID: <BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net>
wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for
toilet paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill
giving the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of
people were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or executive
order is superior to the Constitution.
The Constitution was rendered irrelevant by presidential fiat.
The president can't legally render the Constitution irrelevant by fiat
or by any other method.
What does legal have to do with anything?
Quite a bit.
It's might makes right.
Your opinion, nothing more.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
12 Oct 2003 12:41:58 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 17:13:13 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com>,
Message ID: <BTR1702-0B03ED.12135511102003@news.west.earthlink.net>
wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <pc7govk2ejngmnans04p7fsjlf5pq04m43@4ax.com>, stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 22:01:21 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com>,
Message ID: <BTR1702-048EC5.17020210102003@news.west.earthlink.net>
wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <o23eovc58rb6ud8b20fsahv414e11m8fub@4ax.com>, stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:11:24 GMT, BTR1701 <BTR1702@ix.netcom.com>,
Message ID: <BTR1702-0EE979.17120509102003@news.west.earthlink.net>
wrote in alt.atheism;
In article <Xns940F85C69A4FCMekkala@199.45.49.11>, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
On 08 Oct 2003, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for
toilet paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill
giving the president authority to suspend the constitution. Lots of
people were worried that he would use it to remain in office.
If this is true -- I am suddenly very, very worried. Am I being
paranoid not to trust Bush with that kind of power?
No such bill would be constitutional. No act of Congress or executive
order is superior to the Constitution.
The Constitution was rendered irrelevant by presidential fiat.
The president can't legally render the Constitution irrelevant by fiat
or by any other method.
What does legal have to do with anything?
Quite a bit.
Since when?
It's might makes right.
Your opinion, nothing more.
Really? The Prez revoked an American's citizenship by fiat. There was
no due process.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
09 Oct 2003 12:52:12 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 19:35:05 -0500, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net>, Message
ID: <vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:gsm3ov8g80g0h6ulrs27ktpqqtk56jtfgk@4ax.com...
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 02:59:41 -0500, "Terry/Anti" <GrandpaTDhot@mail.com>,
Message ID: <vo28675ogrnoe3@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:fhq0ovcfv0hreno9gavqncoot1p2laug0g@4ax.com...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 01:40:18 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net>,
Message ID: <6gqeb.382892$Ji7.4211939@news.easynews.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
there goes the american constitution...
It's been gone since 2000 since Herr Shickle...errr Bush was apointed.
It's been pruned since before I was born.
In some cases, in others strengthened imo.
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving the
president authority to suspend the constitution.
WHAT!!!!! Any source on this?
Lots of people were
worried that he would use it to remain in office.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
| User: "Terry/Anti" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
09 Oct 2003 02:43:11 PM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:4p7bovklheh17e58e2o1r0lgl9kp9befvt@4ax.com...
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 19:35:05 -0500, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net>, Message
ID: <vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:gsm3ov8g80g0h6ulrs27ktpqqtk56jtfgk@4ax.com...
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 02:59:41 -0500, "Terry/Anti"
<GrandpaTDhot@mail.com>,
Message ID: <vo28675ogrnoe3@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:fhq0ovcfv0hreno9gavqncoot1p2laug0g@4ax.com...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 01:40:18 GMT, "jabriol"
<jabriol@Neogenesis.net>,
Message ID: <6gqeb.382892$Ji7.4211939@news.easynews.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
there goes the american constitution...
It's been gone since 2000 since Herr Shickle...errr Bush was
apointed.
It's been pruned since before I was born.
In some cases, in others strengthened imo.
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving the
president authority to suspend the constitution.
WHAT!!!!! Any source on this?
No, I didn't expect to ever have to document it.
Gramps
Move the @ ahead of hot to email me.
Lots of people were
worried that he would use it to remain in office.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Oh Queer Canada: The Bible as Hate Speech? Gays Win Big in Canada |
10 Oct 2003 02:45:10 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 14:43:11 -0500, "Terry/Anti" <GrandpaTDhot@mail.com>,
Message ID: <vobehbl3kd9sbf@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:4p7bovklheh17e58e2o1r0lgl9kp9befvt@4ax.com...
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 19:35:05 -0500, "T" <TerryD@highstream.net>, Message
ID: <vo9b8jpc365hb0@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:gsm3ov8g80g0h6ulrs27ktpqqtk56jtfgk@4ax.com...
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 02:59:41 -0500, "Terry/Anti"
<GrandpaTDhot@mail.com>,
Message ID: <vo28675ogrnoe3@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:fhq0ovcfv0hreno9gavqncoot1p2laug0g@4ax.com...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 01:40:18 GMT, "jabriol"
<jabriol@Neogenesis.net>,
Message ID: <6gqeb.382892$Ji7.4211939@news.easynews.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
there goes the american constitution...
It's been gone since 2000 since Herr Shickle...errr Bush was
apointed.
It's been pruned since before I was born.
In some cases, in others strengthened imo.
The Clinton administration made
it impotent by making it possible to ignore it.
Really? How so? The Shrub administration's been using it for toilet
paper.
I believe it was near the end of his term. He sighed a bill giving the
president authority to suspend the constitution.
WHAT!!!!! Any source on this?
No, I didn't expect to ever have to document it.
No problem.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
