XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa, alt.politics.usa.constitution   
   XPost: alt.tv.oreilly-factor, rec.arts.tv.news.oreilly-factor   
   From: none@none.com   
      
   On 7/1/2015 8:58 AM, Snout@smack.com wrote:   
   > On Wed, 01 Jul 2015 06:20:59 -0700, Peter Franks    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 7/1/2015 2:00 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:   
   >   
   >>> Generally speaking, we have an activist court, not judges who are able   
   >>> to put ideology aside.   
   >>   
   >> The supreme Court has empowered itself through usurpation and privilege   
   >> to be the supreme legislative body of the land, and there isn't check   
   >> and balance against that.   
   >   
   > Sure there is.  The rulings ON those cases are there Because the   
   > plaintiff BROUGHT them ---to-the-court.  Second, the LEGISLATURE can   
   > write law that conforms with accepted "principles"----which means they   
   > can't (and won't) in trying to refuse EQUALITY in law.   
      
   The supreme Court will then rewrite that law according to its whim and   
   self aggrandizement.   
      
   BTW: Time for you to take your meds.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)