Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Listen to the bible
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Listen to the bible
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/19/17 3:57 PM, wrote: On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 12:41:03 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: Pfffft. You Christians treat the bible like a cafeteria...believe this, pick that, ignore those...it's a handy document. Sort of like how liberals read the constitution. The Constitution can be interpreted, but how that is done is a matter of law. That's nothing like interpreting the bible. And depending on the politics of the courts, the same phase is multiple interpretations. |
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Listen to the bible
On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 16:50:42 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote: Pfffft. You Christians treat the bible like a cafeteria...believe this, pick that, ignore those...it's a handy document. Sort of like how liberals read the constitution. The Constitution can be interpreted, but how that is done is a matter of law. That's nothing like interpreting the bible. How so? Nine people in black robes decide what the words mean in a huge leap of faith. You only have to look at the total reversals, like Dred Scott or Schenck to see that. That is not "a matter of law" as much as a sign of the times. It is no more so than how people take passages of the bible and bend them to their current beliefs. |
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Listen to the bible
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Listen to the bible
On 12/19/17 10:45 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 21:05:03 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/19/17 8:28 PM, wrote: On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 16:50:42 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: Pfffft. You Christians treat the bible like a cafeteria...believe this, pick that, ignore those...it's a handy document. Sort of like how liberals read the constitution. The Constitution can be interpreted, but how that is done is a matter of law. That's nothing like interpreting the bible. How so? Nine people in black robes decide what the words mean in a huge leap of faith. You only have to look at the total reversals, like Dred Scott or Schenck to see that. That is not "a matter of law" as much as a sign of the times. It is no more so than how people take passages of the bible and bend them to their current beliefs. Wow! Never noticed that before? It is yet to be seen which decisions might be overturned when Trump gets to replace Ginsberg. (Bryer is getting pretty old too). If the 5-4s are a lock for "textualist" conservatives we may see lots of things being revisited. There have been plenty of things read into the constitution that are simply not there and things that have been ignored that are there. With a lot of luck, the Repubs will lose the House and maybe the Senate next year. If the latter happens, Trump's ability to further **** on the judiciary will be cut back, and he will not be able to name another right-wing extremist to the Supremes. |
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Listen to the bible
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:49:35 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote: On 12/19/17 10:45 PM, wrote: On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 21:05:03 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/19/17 8:28 PM, wrote: On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 16:50:42 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: Pfffft. You Christians treat the bible like a cafeteria...believe this, pick that, ignore those...it's a handy document. Sort of like how liberals read the constitution. The Constitution can be interpreted, but how that is done is a matter of law. That's nothing like interpreting the bible. How so? Nine people in black robes decide what the words mean in a huge leap of faith. You only have to look at the total reversals, like Dred Scott or Schenck to see that. That is not "a matter of law" as much as a sign of the times. It is no more so than how people take passages of the bible and bend them to their current beliefs. Wow! Never noticed that before? It is yet to be seen which decisions might be overturned when Trump gets to replace Ginsberg. (Bryer is getting pretty old too). If the 5-4s are a lock for "textualist" conservatives we may see lots of things being revisited. There have been plenty of things read into the constitution that are simply not there and things that have been ignored that are there. With a lot of luck, the Repubs will lose the House and maybe the Senate next year. If the latter happens, Trump's ability to further **** on the judiciary will be cut back, and he will not be able to name another right-wing extremist to the Supremes. It is funny that a conservative judge who actually wants to read the constitution is a right wing extremist but a liberal judge who makes up words that are not there is a normal jurist. Maybe that is normal in your world. There is a process if you don't like what is written there. Amend it. You are not supposed to just bend the meaning to suit your politics. In that regard isn't that exactly the way you say they are twisting bible verse? |
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Listen to the bible
On 12/20/17 10:51 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:49:35 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/19/17 10:45 PM, wrote: On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 21:05:03 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/19/17 8:28 PM, wrote: On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 16:50:42 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: Pfffft. You Christians treat the bible like a cafeteria...believe this, pick that, ignore those...it's a handy document. Sort of like how liberals read the constitution. The Constitution can be interpreted, but how that is done is a matter of law. That's nothing like interpreting the bible. How so? Nine people in black robes decide what the words mean in a huge leap of faith. You only have to look at the total reversals, like Dred Scott or Schenck to see that. That is not "a matter of law" as much as a sign of the times. It is no more so than how people take passages of the bible and bend them to their current beliefs. Wow! Never noticed that before? It is yet to be seen which decisions might be overturned when Trump gets to replace Ginsberg. (Bryer is getting pretty old too). If the 5-4s are a lock for "textualist" conservatives we may see lots of things being revisited. There have been plenty of things read into the constitution that are simply not there and things that have been ignored that are there. With a lot of luck, the Repubs will lose the House and maybe the Senate next year. If the latter happens, Trump's ability to further **** on the judiciary will be cut back, and he will not be able to name another right-wing extremist to the Supremes. It is funny that a conservative judge who actually wants to read the constitution is a right wing extremist but a liberal judge who makes up words that are not there is a normal jurist. Maybe that is normal in your world. There is a process if you don't like what is written there. Amend it. You are not supposed to just bend the meaning to suit your politics. In that regard isn't that exactly the way you say they are twisting bible verse? The Constitution has been re-interpreted since its first printing. If your conservative jurists actually read the Constitution, the 2nd Amendment "right" to bear arms would only pertain to those in well-regulated militias. The bible isn't endowed with the rule of law, anyway, despite conservative attempts to make it so. It's nothing more than a book compiled from disparate scrolls in the third and fourth centuries and retranslated many times. |
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Listen to the bible
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 12/19/17 10:45 PM, wrote: On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 21:05:03 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: On 12/19/17 8:28 PM, wrote: On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 16:50:42 -0500, Keyser Soze wrote: Pfffft. You Christians treat the bible like a cafeteria...believe this, pick that, ignore those...it's a handy document. Sort of like how liberals read the constitution. The Constitution can be interpreted, but how that is done is a matter of law. That's nothing like interpreting the bible. How so? Nine people in black robes decide what the words mean in a huge leap of faith. You only have to look at the total reversals, like Dred Scott or Schenck to see that. That is not "a matter of law" as much as a sign of the times. It is no more so than how people take passages of the bible and bend them to their current beliefs. Wow! Never noticed that before? It is yet to be seen which decisions might be overturned when Trump gets to replace Ginsberg. (Bryer is getting pretty old too). If the 5-4s are a lock for "textualist" conservatives we may see lots of things being revisited. There have been plenty of things read into the constitution that are simply not there and things that have been ignored that are there. With a lot of luck, the Repubs will lose the House and maybe the Senate next year. If the latter happens, Trump's ability to further **** on the judiciary will be cut back, and he will not be able to name another right-wing extremist to the Supremes. But left wing extremists are OK? How about a constitutionalist. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
here's a listen... | General | |||
Who are you going to listen to?? | ASA | |||
Joe...Listen Up.... | ASA | |||
Joe...Listen Up.... | ASA | |||
On the Way to Bible Study | ASA |