Sociology > Education > Re: Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court? Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law? Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals?
| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
28 Jul 2005 08:16:05 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court? Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law? Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals? |
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
:|
:|
:|Captain Ranger McCoy wrote:
:|> Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court?
:|>
:|> From: http://jollyrogerwest.com/showthread.php?p=1470#post1470
:|>
:|> Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law?
:|>
:|> Why can't schoolteachers have it? Why can't poets and prophets? Why
:|> can't entrepreneurs, artists, and craftsman have it?
:|>
:|> Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals?
:|>
:|> From: http://jollyrogerwest.com/showthread.php?p=1470#post1470
:|
:|"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore,
:|be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is
:|not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything
:|mean everything or nothing at pleasure." --Thomas Jefferson to William
:|Johnson, 1823. ME 15:450
:|
:|"Common sense [is] the foundation of all authorities, of the laws
:|themselves, and of their construction." --Thomas Jefferson: Batture at
:|New Orleans, 1812. ME 18:92
You really love the above two quotes don't you?
Why don't you fill in the context?
Why don't you tell the readers that while Jefferson was a practicing
lawyer once he never really liked the profession or the practice of law.
Why don't you tell them how much Jefferson hated the courts when he was
president since while he controlled the Executive branch of government and
the legislative branch he didn't control the judicial branch and he tried
very hard to get control of it, even going so far as using impeachments to
try
Why don't you tell them how much he personally, politically and
professionally hated his cousin, John Marshall, Chief Justice of the U S
Supreme Court
Why don't you tell them how much he hated Joseph Story, associate Justice
of the US Supreme Court.
You see, context does mean something, it fills in important details with
regards to quotes that are removed from context or presented without
context.
**************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and the discussion group for the above site listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members]
For people in Hampton Roads you are also invited to join
NORFOLK/VA. B. SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE MEETUP GROUP
http://churchandstate.meetup.com/47/
Virginia Chapter Americans United for Separation of Church and State
http://au-va.org/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
"Dedicated to combatting 'history by sound bite'."
Now including a re-publication of Tom Peters
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE HOME PAGE
and
Audio links to Supreme Court oral arguments and
Speech by civil rights/constitutional lawyer and others.
This site is a member of the following web rings:
Freethought Ring--&--Freethought, Religion & Beliefs Ring
The First Amendment Ring--&--The Church-State Ring
American History WebRing--&--The History Ring
Let Freedom Ring--&--Religious Freedom Ring
Law Issues Ring--&--Legal Research Ring
****************************************************************
..
.
|
|
| User: "J Strickland" |
|
| Title: Re: Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court? Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law? Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals? |
28 Jul 2005 01:53:34 PM |
|
|
<buckeyeelo@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:9imhe1lhbbo1nbduqt099mut6khaqg93rt@4ax.com...
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
:|
:|
:|Captain Ranger McCoy wrote:
:|> Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court?
:|>
:|> From: http://jollyrogerwest.com/showthread.php?p=1470#post1470
:|>
:|> Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law?
:|>
:|> Why can't schoolteachers have it? Why can't poets and prophets? Why
:|> can't entrepreneurs, artists, and craftsman have it?
:|>
:|> Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals?
:|>
:|> From: http://jollyrogerwest.com/showthread.php?p=1470#post1470
:|
:|"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore,
:|be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is
:|not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything
:|mean everything or nothing at pleasure." --Thomas Jefferson to William
:|Johnson, 1823. ME 15:450
:|
:|"Common sense [is] the foundation of all authorities, of the laws
:|themselves, and of their construction." --Thomas Jefferson: Batture at
:|New Orleans, 1812. ME 18:92
You really love the above two quotes don't you?
Why don't you fill in the context?
Why don't you tell the readers that while Jefferson was a practicing
lawyer once he never really liked the profession or the practice of law.
Why don't you tell them how much Jefferson hated the courts when he was
president since while he controlled the Executive branch of government and
the legislative branch he didn't control the judicial branch and he tried
very hard to get control of it, even going so far as using impeachments to
try
Why don't you tell them how much he personally, politically and
professionally hated his cousin, John Marshall, Chief Justice of the U S
Supreme Court
Why don't you tell them how much he hated Joseph Story, associate Justice
of the US Supreme Court.
You see, context does mean something, it fills in important details with
regards to quotes that are removed from context or presented without
context.
That's rich. The grand pubah of using quotes out of context is giving a
lecture on context.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court? Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law? Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals? |
29 Jul 2005 11:45:45 AM |
|
|
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote:
:|
:|<buckeyeelo@nospam.net> wrote in message
:|news:9imhe1lhbbo1nbduqt099mut6khaqg93rt@4ax.com...
:|> "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
:|>
:|>>:|
:|>>:|
:|>>:|Captain Ranger McCoy wrote:
:|>>:|> Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court?
:|>>:|>
:|>>:|> From: http://jollyrogerwest.com/showthread.php?p=1470#post1470
:|>>:|>
:|>>:|> Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law?
:|>>:|>
:|>>:|> Why can't schoolteachers have it? Why can't poets and prophets? Why
:|>>:|> can't entrepreneurs, artists, and craftsman have it?
:|>>:|>
:|>>:|> Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals?
:|>>:|>
:|>>:|> From: http://jollyrogerwest.com/showthread.php?p=1470#post1470
:|>>:|
:|>>:|"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore,
:|>>:|be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is
:|>>:|not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything
:|>>:|mean everything or nothing at pleasure." --Thomas Jefferson to William
:|>>:|Johnson, 1823. ME 15:450
:|>>:|
:|>>:|"Common sense [is] the foundation of all authorities, of the laws
:|>>:|themselves, and of their construction." --Thomas Jefferson: Batture at
:|>>:|New Orleans, 1812. ME 18:92
:|>
:|>
:|> You really love the above two quotes don't you?
:|>
:|> Why don't you fill in the context?
:|>
:|> Why don't you tell the readers that while Jefferson was a practicing
:|> lawyer once he never really liked the profession or the practice of law.
:|>
:|> Why don't you tell them how much Jefferson hated the courts when he was
:|> president since while he controlled the Executive branch of government and
:|> the legislative branch he didn't control the judicial branch and he tried
:|> very hard to get control of it, even going so far as using impeachments to
:|> try
:|>
:|> Why don't you tell them how much he personally, politically and
:|> professionally hated his cousin, John Marshall, Chief Justice of the U S
:|> Supreme Court
:|>
:|> Why don't you tell them how much he hated Joseph Story, associate Justice
:|> of the US Supreme Court.
:|>
:|> You see, context does mean something, it fills in important details with
:|> regards to quotes that are removed from context or presented without
:|> context.
:|
:|
:|That's rich. The grand pubah of using quotes out of context
Your unsubstantiated claim is noted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ordinary or extraordinary claims require ordinary or extraordinary proof.
If you're going to claim something and especially something outlandish
you're going to need some pretty extraordinary and/or irrefutable proof to
back up such a claim. "Where's the beef?" Where's the ordinary or
extraordinary proof for their ordinary or extraordinary claims? If one is
not responding with ordinary or extraordinary, *factual* proof, then the
claim is not worth considering
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[ as Homer@nospam said]
Why is asking for "proof" considered truculence? Do you consider it
truculence for a judge to ask for evidence in a trial. Would you rather
that
people just testified that they believed in the guilt of the suspect?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[as Gray Shockley said:]
Your "opinion" is not an adequate citation.
You forgot your citations.
Or, are your opinions more valid than facts?
You do realize, do you not?, that opinion without substantiation is just
propaganda for those without critical thinking abilities and originate with
those who are attempting to manipulate rather than those who are attempting
to clarify.
*****************************************************************
Poor Jeffy is uspset with me again soon he will put me on ignore again
"Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote:
:|But the Adams son was a child, or relative child, when the Adams father was
:|Prez.
John Adams 1735-1826.
President 1797-1801
John Q. Adams 1767-1848
President 1825-1829
J.Q. Adams was approx 30 years old when his father was elected president.
That hardly makes him a child or relative child
One more time jeffy dazzles us with his ignorance
********************************************************************
Jeffy - I am "against" vouchers but I have offered every pro voucher
argument ever offered on the internet in voucher discussions for at least a
year to two years now - strickland
******************************************
[Jeffy had asked another]
Why do you feel the constant need to be nasty?
To you? Because you are an ignoramus who not only does not check his
facts, but posts endlessly repeating stuff that has been disproven
several times. You also seem to think that your unsupported opinion
is of interest to other people.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier,
**********************************
[To that I add]
Jeff - I don't have a clue what I am talking about, but I am good at
pretending and making it up as I go along so don't confuse me with the
facts, my mind is made up. I stereotype and prejudge. It has always worked
well in the past, why change now - Strickland
**********
Jeffy -- maybe, I heard, but didn't bother to do any independent research,
[ He says it gives him a headache] I like to believe things I want to hear.
I don't like knowing the facts if they aren't going to agree with what I
want to believe and I especially love passing along on the internet, as
facts, things I haven't a clue about their accuracy -- Strickland )
*******************************
[To Jeff Strickland]
I find it "interesting" that you are so incredibly stupid that you totally
missed the citation to the _New York Times_.
You seem to have remembered to take your one-a-day stupid pills.
Gray Shockley
**********
"Jeff Strickland" <beerman@yahoo.com> wrote:
I think I see more intolerance.
"Gray Shockley" <gray-87a@cybercoffee.org> wrote in message
Oh, no, no, no.
You neither "think" nor "see".
Is that better?
*******************************
Jeff Strickland wrote:
I find it interesting that when Carol is unable to find the link, you ignore
the request for assistance. But, when I am unable to find the link (and
volunteer twice that I have looked), you jump in with a snide remark that
"the search was not too difficult," as though I am the idiot.
[Joni said]
I'm sorry. I didn't mean to imply you are an idiot. I meant to just
come right out and say you are an idiot.
**************************************
[another time Joni asked Jeffy]
Were you born this stupid or did you take a class?
**************************************
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 14:12:45 -0500, Jeff Strickland wrote
The ACLU is not mentioned in this story, but I believe they have been
mentioned in other stories on the same topic with the same county. Perhaps I
am being a bit reactionary to point my boney fingers at the ACLU,
You don't mind that some of us consider you a pschopathetic liar, do you?
After all, you seem to create "facts" just like your spiritual
great-great-great-great-great grandfather, Richard "I'll ***** You" Cheney.
Are you so [drunk, stoned, Bushed, freaked out] that you even realize how
much - and how many - of your posts are lies?
Are you truly stupid or totally insane?
Gray Shockley
**************************************
[jeffy was asked]
Can you back this up with truthful citations or is this just more of your
"lies manufactured especially for any and all occasions by Jeffie
Strickland"?
Gray Shockley
Vicksburg, MS
**************************************
As you, Jeffie the Wack Strickland, are quite obviously the product of no
education whatsoever.
Gray Shockley
**************************************
[jeffy had said]
It is the mother that has custodial and full guardianship
rights of the child. Newdow has no rights relative to this child and her
rearing.
YOU STUPID FUCKING ILLITERATE MORON, READ WHAT YOU AGREED
WITH EARLIER! THE COURTS HAVE RULED THAT NONCUSTODIAL
PARENTS **DO** HAVE RIGHTS TO THE RELIGIOUS UPBRINGING
OF THEIR CHILDREN, YOU BRAIN-DAMAGED TURD!
Merlyn LeRoy
*********************************************************
Said to Jeff Strickland
Because you are clueless, seeing an objection when there is none, and
failing to understand the objection that I do have.
Aren't you again showing your cluelessness? Yes.
lojbab
********************************************************
[Larry Hewitt said to Jeff Strickland]
Seeing that you deleted my links to the US census and a current news
report
that both proved you to be factually incorrect, I conclude that you
acknowledge your failure and chose to try to lie your way out of your
defeat.
larry
[jeff replied ]
Those links show NOTHING relative to this discussion.
[Larry naidled jeff with]
So you deleted them because you were afraid I was making a fool of myself
in
public, and you wanted to shield me from that humiliation??
Nah, you're just a rightard liar.
Larry
*********************************************************
**************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and the discussion group for the above site listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members]
For people in Hampton Roads you are also invited to join
NORFOLK/VA. B. SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE MEETUP GROUP
http://churchandstate.meetup.com/47/
Virginia Chapter Americans United for Separation of Church and State
http://au-va.org/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
"Dedicated to combatting 'history by sound bite'."
Now including a re-publication of Tom Peters
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE HOME PAGE
and
Audio links to Supreme Court oral arguments and
Speech by civil rights/constitutional lawyer and others.
This site is a member of the following web rings:
Freethought Ring--&--Freethought, Religion & Beliefs Ring
The First Amendment Ring--&--The Church-State Ring
American History WebRing--&--The History Ring
Let Freedom Ring--&--Religious Freedom Ring
Law Issues Ring--&--Legal Research Ring
****************************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court? Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law? Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals? |
15 Aug 2005 05:39:41 AM |
|
|
Any movie with the Stones in it.
Please allow me to introduce myself.
I'm a man of wealth and taste.
Ranger Mccoy, USMC
SAIL THE THE RENAISSANCE:
http://autumnrangers.com
http://jollyrogerwest.com
http://jollyroger.com/penpals
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court? Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law? Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals? |
16 Aug 2005 03:06:00 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 05:39:41 -0500,
wrote
(in article
<1124102381.171906.238500@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
Any movie with the Stones in it.
Please allow me to introduce myself.
I'm a man of wealth and taste.
Ranger Mccoy, USMC
SAIL THE THE RENAISSANCE:
"Rangers" are USArmy.
"Recon" is USMarines.
Gray Shockley
---------------------------
Who was neither.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court? Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law? Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals? |
21 Aug 2005 10:42:30 AM |
|
|
Was Hamlet insane?
Or just feigning it?
Join the Great Books renaissance!!
http://jollyrogerwest.com
http://jollyroger.com/penpals (Great Books USMC Penpals)
The wind's a rising matie!!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Should only lawyers be allowed on the Supreme Court? Why is it that only lawyers can have "proper" knowledge of the law? Should the legal profession be opened to all qualified individuals? |
09 Aug 2005 05:27:55 PM |
|
|
http://autumnrangers.com/
We've got Kid Rock to Rock The House!!!
Autumn Rangers is where NASCAR meets Moby *****, where the Founding
Fathers hang with Kid Rock, where poetry collides with physics, and
where Classic-American-Country-Hiphop-Lit burns through the pomo fog to
exalt America's heart and soul. Autumn Rangers is the American
Renaissance that's been a long time coming, where the Man with No Name
rides again with John Wayne.
The Great American Novel roars 'cross the Rugged American Terrain in a
Jeep and thunders down Dante's Lost Highway in Autumn's Corvette, with
Ranger riding shotgun, packing the Constitution and Declaration of
Independence, chasing down that classic American Dream that makes
Outlaws out of Romantics these days.
Autumn Rangers is a book, movie, video game, magazine, and philosophy
for packing up and heading west, for hiding out and laying low on the
run, for taking a chance with that one life you've been given--taking a
chance on living it from the inside out for those higher ideals,
standing up for what's right, defending eternity against all odds,
facing down irony's evil Sheriff and his Deputies at high noon with a
couple Colt .45 Peacemakers loaded with poetry, and becoming an Autumn
Ranger. But first and foremost, from the Alpha to the Omega, Autumn
Rangers is a story. . .
The rise of the Conservative Arts!!
http://autumnrangers.com/
http://jollyrogerwest.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
