Let’s get one thing straight. Human power organizations are corrupt whether they are political authority, social authority, religious authority, or tyrannical in nature. It does little good to point the finger at one with the implication that an alternative is clean. So, it must be with great humility that anyone endorses a particular agenda, while knowing the nature of the forces one is dealing with. Attempting to corrupt the system is an endemic problem related to political agendas and the pundits who bolster them.
Agreed. Both sides are guilty as sin. Corporations, too, will always act in their own self interest, and therefore cannot be trusted to do the right thing without oversight (Enron proved this again, for the umpteenth time).
Which inalienable rights in particular are you referring too?
What rights of homosexuals are under attack?
They are being denied equal protection, with regards to marriage laws. Married people enjoy certain benefits, including tax and estate treatment, visitation, medical benefits offered to heterosexual spouses, child custody rights, etc. Homosexual couples in committed relationships are denied these same benefits, essentially creating a condition that violates the 14th amendment.
Help me here to understand what the new definition that is being proposed would be?
Basic rights ensured by the Constitution; for example, the 4th and 5th amendments. The government is conducting unreasonable searches and seizures under the so-called 'Patriot Act', holding suspects incommunicado, without representation or hearing, under antiterrorism laws even when the prisoners are only immigration violators. Prisoners are held neither either Geneva Convention nor constitutional rights, and have reportedly been subject to torture and mistreatment.
What legislature is immune to judicial review?
Conservative lawmakers have proposed an amendment to the Defense of Marriage Act that bars the Supreme Court from ruling the DOMA unconstitutional. This is truly scary stuff; legislature that attempts to limit the judicial branch's ability to review the constitutionality of laws is not only unConstitutional, it is unAmerican.
As far as the 'activist judge' label, I think you hit it on the head. The definition of an activist judge is one that rules against you... |
