|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Dec 15, 2003 13:59:35 GMT -5
Americans are running the courts. There is a judicial structure in place in Iraq as many of their former jurists are in fact still breathing, but how the system will run seems to be in limbo; right now my suspicion is that it will be something of a military style court until things in Iraq calm down a bit. Not that I will be holding my breath waiting for Iraq to try Saddam; I truely doubt that the citizens of Iraq will get that pleasure. Most likely he'll go to the world court for trial.
Which is a shame... the Iraqui citizenry has been quoted as saying they would love to do to him what he did to them...
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Dec 14, 2003 16:11:19 GMT -5
Welcome to the world of Global Politics. We trained Saddam to take on Iran and the Shah, and he turned on us, and us on him, when it was no longer convenient to have him as an ally. We trained Osama and the Al Qaida as well to be freedom fighters, and they turned on us when they got too full of themselves. Maybe we ought to just learn the lesson... STOP TRAINING THESE PEOPLE!
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Dec 10, 2003 17:31:34 GMT -5
It would be interesting to see what the French murder laws are. Under US law, it would depend what state you were in to determine whether or not she has a cause of action criminally, although my instinct tells me he wouldn't be prosecuted. Our authorities would leave this to the civil courts for a malpractice suit. Wonder if France has that?
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 25, 2003 21:12:32 GMT -5
But there's the trick Hussar... they leave it up to the judges, and then piss and moan when a decision they wouldn't openly support is handed down, thereby making them look like they "agree with the people", when in reality they just didn't have a backbone one way or another. Probably the biggest problem with nominating the higher judiciary, IMHO (and before anyone reminds me that we have to actually vote for our state judiciary in some states, the party politics ensure that whoever is nominated gets elected and no one ever loses retention votes!). They get to be the bad guys, and usually for doing what's right... welcome to politics, folks!
And Wyrm, I don't remember the exact citation, but it was one of those darned creche cases from Ohio or Pittsburg...
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 24, 2003 7:01:27 GMT -5
ok, where to begin...
Hussar:
I have no clue! In a normal world, you'd get the darn divorce wherever you happen to live. With most states prohibiting gay marriages, no one really knows where they're supposed to go!
Khyron:
I debated your point over and over and over with my family law professor, believe me. The problem we're running into is twofold, however. First, even the US Congress has stepped in and passed a federal law regulating marriage, laws usually left to the state. Secondly, tthere arer states trying to amend their constitutions to prohibit it, which makes things sticky. Under normal circumstances, the marriages should be recognized, but the reality is that they are not...
Wyrm:
I have gotten my interpretation directly from the mouth of the US Supreme Court, who has stated that the 1st Amendment also means freedom from religion. Their words not mine!
As for your second statement, I totally disagree. I don;t care if they are motivated by religion or establishing religion, it has the same effect; they are not doing their jobs. Their jobs are to uphold the US Constitution and the rights of ALL Americans, not vote according to their own personal religious beliefs. By voting according to their religious beliefs, and spouting off this crap about the US being a Christian nation, they are trying to turn the US into a de facto Christian nation; we may not be Christian in name, but Christian in fact. Which, by the way, is just as unconstitutional as doing it by law!
more later, I need to get ready for work...
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 23, 2003 7:43:10 GMT -5
The legal grey area to which you refer would actually be divorce. The US Constitution, Article 5, IIRC, (whcih is codified in statute in Chapter 18 of the United States Code) deals with what is called "Full Faith and Credit". Basically, a state must recognize the judgment of another. Unfortunately, IIRC, it's mostly used in business or contract law, and not family law The concern is that if Mass. allows gay marriage, TX (for example) won't recognize the marriage. The problem then becomes, does TX have to do the divorce? I see the concern; one of the VT couples actually had this problem in TX... TX didn't recognize the marriage as valid, and not too many legal commentators are sure who gets to handle the divorce! As for the religious aspect, the 1st Amendment guarantees that no Church will have to marry gay couples unless it's Pastor feels it's apprpriate, which means a lot of gays will be going to UCC, UU, and possibly the American Episcopal Church and Reconstructionist Jewish Temples. Hussar, your argument has fallen on deaf ears for years. England, most Northern European countries, and some central European countries, as well ans Canada and Australia, IIRC, allow gay soldiers. Their militaries haven't fallen apart yet, but the US doesn't care. The US wants to be the bastion of freedom, as long as it's conservative freedom that doesn't step on the religious right's toes. Funny, the First Amendment guarantees Wyrm freedom OF religion, just as much as it guarantees me freedom FROM religion. And yet, our leaders loves spouting the bible and running this country based on religious principles....
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 22, 2003 9:36:18 GMT -5
Well, it's been all over the news and the ruling was finally handed down. In twin cases, the Massachusetts High Court gave the thumbs up to gay marriage, while the New Jersey Appellate Courts denied the same (although there is a higher court to appeal to). Based on the recent US Supreme Court holding in Texas v. Geddes and it's own state laws allowing gay couples a number of rights which married couples have, the court held that the state's prohibition on same-sex unions was unconstitutional under that state's constitution.
Two other states faced similar challenges several years ago, and in both cases the Alaska and Hawai'i Supreme Courts made the same decicion... although the legislatures of each state amended their constitutions to ban such unions, instead opting for "domestic partnerships", while Vermont's highest court, recognizing that bans prohibiting same sex unions were unconstitutional, allowed the Legislature to formulate a "civil union" statute creating a "separate but equal" system for same-sex unions.
Massachusetts has 6 months to get thier laws in order, and my understanding is that it takes 3 years to amend the constitution in that state, so they may not be able to go the Alaska/Hawai'i route....
So, are we seeing the decline of Western Civilization, or are we finally catching up with the new world order and international law?
****Please, no flaming... serious posts only!****
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Dec 18, 2003 10:13:43 GMT -5
This guy is the classic example of a "dolt". Don't like spam? Get a program to take care of it! Sending terroristic threats through the internet isn't the answer. He wants stress, boy, wait until he goes to trial, lol
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 23, 2003 7:31:00 GMT -5
Well, since most of the Japanese Anime we are talking about prolly came from Manga anyway, I guess we should use comic book logic? <shrugs> dammit, too early in the AM to be worrying about logic when I'm trying to decide if Wolvie can kick Goku's butt!
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 22, 2003 20:02:20 GMT -5
I can beat that reply with one word: "Phoenix" Can Goku destroy an entire galaxy? If not, Phoenix wins
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 22, 2003 7:16:35 GMT -5
Hey, the X-Men took on an entire interstellar empire and won (the Shi'ar), so I would definitely say it's a case of "been there, done that" when taking on the Gundam Armada...
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 21, 2003 22:00:55 GMT -5
Power Rangers would get their butts handed to them by Power Pack! Gundam Wing? Please, last 5 seconds against Ye Olde Timers. Thor, Hulk, the Avengers, Fantastic Four, X-Men, Titans, JLA, etc. Of course if we did a Superhero Smackdown, my cash is on the X-Men:
The New X-Men:
Professor X (Charles Xavier): the world's most powerful telepath
Jean Grey: the Phoenix. Need I say more?
Cyclops (Scott Summers): The original and always fearless leader who can punch holes in mountains with a blink of an eye.. literally
Beast (Hank McCoy): Body by King Kong and brains by Einstein!
White Queen (Emma Frost): Third most powerful telepath in the world after Prof X and Jean, and totally invulnerable in her diamond form (heck, she survived a nuclear blast!)
Wolverine (Logan, real name: James Howlett): Everyone's favorite adamantium-laced psycho, and he's over 100 and still going!
Uncanny X-Men:
Archangel (Warren Worthington, III): Flight, healing, and a nasty 'tude. Oh, yeah... and a magickal holy sword he swiped from Magik of the Exiles!
Iceman (Bobby Drake): Hello, can freeze city blocks at a time. Heck, he can kill someone by freezing the air in their lungs! Not the wimp he used to be... ok, may be dead, but no one stays dead in the Marvel Universe for long
Husk (Paige Guthrie): Almost as invulnerable as Wolvie!
Jubilee (Jubilation Lee): Her fireworks can trash large robots in a single bound
Havok (Alex Summers): solar-powered plasma blasts. Temperature: about a million degrees Farenheit...
Nightcrawler (Kurt Wagner): Fuzzy, blue teleporter who'll whoop your butt with style!
Juggernaut (Cain Marko): the original immovable object AND irresistable force rolled into one
Northstar (Jean-Peal Beaubier): he may not hit hard, but a couple of hundred punches at the speed of sound over three seconds will trash almost anything...including those who are invulnerable
Polaris (Lorna Dane): Mistress of Magnetism, and man she learned nasty tricks from Magneto... imagine all the iron in your blood being manipulated by her at once... hurts just thinking about it
X-Treme X-Men:
Storm (Ororo Munroe): Mistress of the elements. 'nuff said.
Sage (Tessa): is there anything she DOESN'T know?!?
Bishop (Lucas Bishop): Gundam's lasers are useless against a man who can absorb them...
Gambit and Rogue: no powers, but still kick butt!
Cannonball (Sam Guthrie): Fast, invulnerable, and can pack a mean plasma blast shield punch!
Magma (Allison Crestmere, aka Amara Olivana Juliana Aquila): Uhh... lava and earth control. She'll rock your world then melt it to pieces
The New Mutants (2003):
teachers:
Moonstar (Danielle Moonstar): She's your worst nightmare.. literally
Karma (Xi'an Coy Manh): She'll take your mind and do things with your body you'll never remember
Wolfsbane (Rahne Sinclair): Hi! a scottish 10' werewolf is pretty darn impressive....
students:
David: Talent Mimicry: anything you can do, well, so can he!
Sofia: total wind control... flight, sonic booms, hurricanes, superhuman hearing, immunity to pheromones similar attacks...
Laurie: Pheromones: she'll make you love her or kill your best friend with a scent
Josh: he'll make sure that when an X-Man is down, they'll get right back up again with his healing touch
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 20, 2003 17:57:52 GMT -5
uhhh, I'm gonna disagree with what Minion said. A perfect soldier is not a mindless grunt who takes orders without question. They may be more calculating and less zealous than a warrior, but mindless drones... nope. A soldier fights because he (a) believes in something and (b) it's his job (talking modern military here).
The perfect warrior: check out the Homeric Hymn to Ares. I think that says it all.
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 21, 2003 11:53:02 GMT -5
Pacifism is a greal ideal, but utterly and completely unrealistic. War and conflict can be traced by to Gods only know when. Unless we're willing to adopt some global socialism which would elimate war, strife, conflict, property, and probably free will as well, it's simply not a possibility.
|
|
|
Post by ShonenSenshiDave on Nov 20, 2003 19:38:12 GMT -5
My take on all of this is that war, like it or not, is a necessary part of life. Conflict is a necessary part of life. Like it or not, conflict and wars bring about change.
It's kinda like evolution versus punctuated equilibrium. Evolution brings about slow changes, gradually, over generations. Conflict, like punctuated equilibrium, is the faster version. Same result, just faster and dirtier.
You also have to keep in mind, like it or not, that sometimes violence is necessary. People feel oppressed, and that leads to revolution. People see suffering and vile acts, which leads them to fight for what they believe in.
Does that mean violence is always the answer? Certainly not. I believe that sometimes the best solution is to walk away. I also recognize that is not always possible. Sometimes diplomacy works, sometimes reason works, and sometimes it takes conflict. It cannot be avoided, IMO.
|
|