if my behavior consists of obvious trolling, I apologize.
But since CC felt so strongly about the racism conveyed by the obama-joker poster, I felt I was doing him a favor by providing him with the latest info. Unfortunately there isnt a more appropriate and recent thread to discuss this.
On Scalia, Im afraid that I have to agree with you guys, if what he's saying is that if you've been convicted in a fair trial but you can show your innocence, you'll still get executed, than that's insane.
I don't remember CC addressing that poster, but then the spectacle down South, *especially* artistic interpretations of it (which I believe diminishes all art, even entertainment) doesn't really grab my attention these anymore.
I'm not even watching The Daily Show these days.
if what he's saying is that if you've been convicted in a fair trial but you can show your innocence, you'll still get executed, than that's insane.
He's said other insane things before. Like torture doesn't violate the Constitution's injunction against cruel and unusual punishment because it's not a punishment for anything.
There's a fine line between legitimate legalistic language parsing and psychosis. I believe most prominent American lawyers (and increasingly, quite few Canadian ones) have crossed it. When language becomes so thoroughly un-moored from meaning, I can't see how the resulting cognitive state can be much different from a psychotic break.
"Would anyone stand for the execution of a man lawfully convicted who was later shown to be innocent? the thought boggles the mind."
You're clearly missing the point - Scalia says that there is nothing in the Constitution that forbids it. As a strict Constitutionalist he doesn't have to take actual justice or common sense into account. Hey, and Thomas agrees with him.
8 comments:
CC: I remember your outrage at the incredible racism of the Obama joker posters.
Well, the racist has been found.
Thank god, this guy wont be spreading his racism around anymore.
Monsieur Bastien: Don't you think obvious trolling is a little beneath you?
Anyway, Scalia is a psychotic. Pray that God will deliver Americans from him soon.
Hey Ti-Guy,
if my behavior consists of obvious trolling, I apologize.
But since CC felt so strongly about the racism conveyed by the obama-joker poster, I felt I was doing him a favor by providing him with the latest info. Unfortunately there isnt a more appropriate and recent thread to discuss this.
On Scalia, Im afraid that I have to agree with you guys, if what he's saying is that if you've been convicted in a fair trial but you can show your innocence, you'll still get executed, than that's insane.
I don't remember CC addressing that poster, but then the spectacle down South, *especially* artistic interpretations of it (which I believe diminishes all art, even entertainment) doesn't really grab my attention these anymore.
I'm not even watching The Daily Show these days.
if what he's saying is that if you've been convicted in a fair trial but you can show your innocence, you'll still get executed, than that's insane.
He's said other insane things before. Like torture doesn't violate the Constitution's injunction against cruel and unusual punishment because it's not a punishment for anything.
There's a fine line between legitimate legalistic language parsing and psychosis. I believe most prominent American lawyers (and increasingly, quite few Canadian ones) have crossed it. When language becomes so thoroughly un-moored from meaning, I can't see how the resulting cognitive state can be much different from a psychotic break.
Scallia's comments are hardly new but that doesn't make them any less stupid or shocking.
It's an astonishing reductio ad absurdam argument.
Would anyone stand for the execution of a man lawfully convicted who was later shown to be innocent? the thought boggles the mind.
"Would anyone stand for the execution of a man lawfully convicted who was later shown to be innocent? the thought boggles the mind."
You're clearly missing the point - Scalia says that there is nothing in the Constitution that forbids it. As a strict Constitutionalist he doesn't have to take actual justice or common sense into account. Hey, and Thomas agrees with him.
And yes, my mind boggles as well.
Would anyone stand for the execution of a man lawfully convicted who was later shown to be innocent?
That's why the death penalty is barbaric. It has the potential of making accessories to murder out of entire populations.
Post a Comment