Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Texas City Pulls nativity, despite objections of atheists.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="grasping the after wind" data-source="post: 69021683" data-attributes="member: 256417"><p>I find the idea laughable that my statement is objectively false simply because 31 years ago the majority of 9 old people in robes ( some perhaps senile at the time) disagreed with what I am now saying. You are conflating subjective legal opinion with objective fact. If all legal opinions of the Supreme Court were objectively verifiable facts then how is it that it is arrived at by majority vote and not unanimous acclimation and how is it that Courts ever disagree with previous rulings. We would still have Dred Scott as a benchmark and the 13th Amendment would never have been adopted if it were the case that the Supreme Court was inerrant.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="grasping the after wind, post: 69021683, member: 256417"] I find the idea laughable that my statement is objectively false simply because 31 years ago the majority of 9 old people in robes ( some perhaps senile at the time) disagreed with what I am now saying. You are conflating subjective legal opinion with objective fact. If all legal opinions of the Supreme Court were objectively verifiable facts then how is it that it is arrived at by majority vote and not unanimous acclimation and how is it that Courts ever disagree with previous rulings. We would still have Dred Scott as a benchmark and the 13th Amendment would never have been adopted if it were the case that the Supreme Court was inerrant. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
Texas City Pulls nativity, despite objections of atheists.
Top
Bottom