@talentedmrmac.bsky.social
Not the hill I’d die on
December 30, 2023 at 12:57 AM
Not the hill I’d die on
If you think slavery is an immoral action, unjustifiable, any position to delay its end is based on a human view of expediency and political possibility.
Otherwise you actually don’t have a view of it being an immutable evil.
Quibbling over what is a bargaining chip, when negotiating with slavers…
Otherwise you actually don’t have a view of it being an immutable evil.
Quibbling over what is a bargaining chip, when negotiating with slavers…
December 30, 2023 at 12:56 AM
If you think slavery is an immoral action, unjustifiable, any position to delay its end is based on a human view of expediency and political possibility.
Otherwise you actually don’t have a view of it being an immutable evil.
Quibbling over what is a bargaining chip, when negotiating with slavers…
Otherwise you actually don’t have a view of it being an immutable evil.
Quibbling over what is a bargaining chip, when negotiating with slavers…
Reposted
the basic premise of these arguments is that January 6 did not constitute an attack on constitutional government. they do not make sense outside of that assumption.
December 30, 2023 at 12:08 AM
the basic premise of these arguments is that January 6 did not constitute an attack on constitutional government. they do not make sense outside of that assumption.
Even if your opinion is set, you don’t engage enough for other folks (this is a public discussion) can decide who has the best position.
It’s cowards posting and intellectually empty.
You do have smart people engaging with you and you’re just acting like a grumpy teenager when confronted.
It’s cowards posting and intellectually empty.
You do have smart people engaging with you and you’re just acting like a grumpy teenager when confronted.
December 29, 2023 at 5:43 AM
Even if your opinion is set, you don’t engage enough for other folks (this is a public discussion) can decide who has the best position.
It’s cowards posting and intellectually empty.
You do have smart people engaging with you and you’re just acting like a grumpy teenager when confronted.
It’s cowards posting and intellectually empty.
You do have smart people engaging with you and you’re just acting like a grumpy teenager when confronted.
No you aren’t. You made a reference to what year it is.
At you making legal agreements, are you a cynic that believes law doesn’t exist other than what the court votes?
You are throwing a rhetorical bomb without even explaining your why.
Is not far from just posting. “Wrong” “disagree” “ dumb”
At you making legal agreements, are you a cynic that believes law doesn’t exist other than what the court votes?
You are throwing a rhetorical bomb without even explaining your why.
Is not far from just posting. “Wrong” “disagree” “ dumb”
December 29, 2023 at 5:41 AM
No you aren’t. You made a reference to what year it is.
At you making legal agreements, are you a cynic that believes law doesn’t exist other than what the court votes?
You are throwing a rhetorical bomb without even explaining your why.
Is not far from just posting. “Wrong” “disagree” “ dumb”
At you making legal agreements, are you a cynic that believes law doesn’t exist other than what the court votes?
You are throwing a rhetorical bomb without even explaining your why.
Is not far from just posting. “Wrong” “disagree” “ dumb”
Are you arguing from normative or positive grounds here?
Cynics without skin in the game are rather boring to argue with, especially if your point is bad faith actors exist and will make decisions and bad faith voters may resent attempts to enforce norms, therefore… checkmate. Ok. Good talk.
Cynics without skin in the game are rather boring to argue with, especially if your point is bad faith actors exist and will make decisions and bad faith voters may resent attempts to enforce norms, therefore… checkmate. Ok. Good talk.
December 29, 2023 at 5:39 AM
Are you arguing from normative or positive grounds here?
Cynics without skin in the game are rather boring to argue with, especially if your point is bad faith actors exist and will make decisions and bad faith voters may resent attempts to enforce norms, therefore… checkmate. Ok. Good talk.
Cynics without skin in the game are rather boring to argue with, especially if your point is bad faith actors exist and will make decisions and bad faith voters may resent attempts to enforce norms, therefore… checkmate. Ok. Good talk.
Menthols baby
December 29, 2023 at 3:50 AM
Menthols baby
And they are the good people and should be judged as such.
Folks that knew it was wrong but thought it reasonable to have more children sold from their mothers for the greater good and reasonable timelines just less horrific.
Folks that knew it was wrong but thought it reasonable to have more children sold from their mothers for the greater good and reasonable timelines just less horrific.
December 29, 2023 at 3:30 AM
And they are the good people and should be judged as such.
Folks that knew it was wrong but thought it reasonable to have more children sold from their mothers for the greater good and reasonable timelines just less horrific.
Folks that knew it was wrong but thought it reasonable to have more children sold from their mothers for the greater good and reasonable timelines just less horrific.
Are often… I mean how compromised were King, Gandhi, etc etc…
Or are we saying the great white men in history who write history are often fatally flawed so that’s how we should judge history and morals?
Insane and backwards.
By that logic women have rarely been part of change in the world
Or are we saying the great white men in history who write history are often fatally flawed so that’s how we should judge history and morals?
Insane and backwards.
By that logic women have rarely been part of change in the world
December 29, 2023 at 3:28 AM
Are often… I mean how compromised were King, Gandhi, etc etc…
Or are we saying the great white men in history who write history are often fatally flawed so that’s how we should judge history and morals?
Insane and backwards.
By that logic women have rarely been part of change in the world
Or are we saying the great white men in history who write history are often fatally flawed so that’s how we should judge history and morals?
Insane and backwards.
By that logic women have rarely been part of change in the world
Sometimes grandma is 37 years old (and a House Rep).
Sometimes
Sometimes
December 29, 2023 at 2:44 AM
Sometimes grandma is 37 years old (and a House Rep).
Sometimes
Sometimes
I’m not as ignorant as you care to imply (as if I read more I’d surely come around to your view).
There is some urgency to the NOW when it comes to great evils.
Wise men have been telling people to wait through a little more (your life perhaps) bc that will make it easier for all of history
There is some urgency to the NOW when it comes to great evils.
Wise men have been telling people to wait through a little more (your life perhaps) bc that will make it easier for all of history
December 29, 2023 at 1:24 AM
I’m not as ignorant as you care to imply (as if I read more I’d surely come around to your view).
There is some urgency to the NOW when it comes to great evils.
Wise men have been telling people to wait through a little more (your life perhaps) bc that will make it easier for all of history
There is some urgency to the NOW when it comes to great evils.
Wise men have been telling people to wait through a little more (your life perhaps) bc that will make it easier for all of history
I think any argument that treats the lives of the currently living as a bargaining chip for future morality is compromised beyond repair.
Why is the idea of easing into the end of human bondage acceptable, but gentle transitioning away from child abused not?
Why is the idea of easing into the end of human bondage acceptable, but gentle transitioning away from child abused not?
December 29, 2023 at 1:21 AM
I think any argument that treats the lives of the currently living as a bargaining chip for future morality is compromised beyond repair.
Why is the idea of easing into the end of human bondage acceptable, but gentle transitioning away from child abused not?
Why is the idea of easing into the end of human bondage acceptable, but gentle transitioning away from child abused not?
Imagine someone writing “I want to put child abuse and molestation on the path to extinction” and later generations thinking anything but “we must build a Time Machine to stone that person to death in the past”
December 29, 2023 at 1:11 AM
Imagine someone writing “I want to put child abuse and molestation on the path to extinction” and later generations thinking anything but “we must build a Time Machine to stone that person to death in the past”
He’s not wrong, but I think “ that slaver caused the war, was an evil that needed to be purged from the nation and the bad guys, who were slavers, lost- and that you’re happy they did”.
There is a huge population that disagrees… but that’s America. Bad guys
There is a huge population that disagrees… but that’s America. Bad guys
December 28, 2023 at 4:36 AM
He’s not wrong, but I think “ that slaver caused the war, was an evil that needed to be purged from the nation and the bad guys, who were slavers, lost- and that you’re happy they did”.
There is a huge population that disagrees… but that’s America. Bad guys
There is a huge population that disagrees… but that’s America. Bad guys
Tell good stories with a sense of wonder and awe.
Seems people like paying for that. Instead of starting with “what have folks paid for in the past and how fast can we make something sort of like that and could sell some merch”
Seems people like paying for that. Instead of starting with “what have folks paid for in the past and how fast can we make something sort of like that and could sell some merch”
December 27, 2023 at 10:17 PM
Tell good stories with a sense of wonder and awe.
Seems people like paying for that. Instead of starting with “what have folks paid for in the past and how fast can we make something sort of like that and could sell some merch”
Seems people like paying for that. Instead of starting with “what have folks paid for in the past and how fast can we make something sort of like that and could sell some merch”
What I think will happen isn’t what I like or would choose. But no one calls losing arguments “the law”, and I don’t sit on the court
December 27, 2023 at 8:09 PM
What I think will happen isn’t what I like or would choose. But no one calls losing arguments “the law”, and I don’t sit on the court
I’m giving you the Holmesian view of law is a prediction of what courts will do.
This isn’t science - this is post hoc rationalization of political outcomes.
If you think you have evidence that the members of the court have punished that contradicts my assessment, I’m happy to consider.
This isn’t science - this is post hoc rationalization of political outcomes.
If you think you have evidence that the members of the court have punished that contradicts my assessment, I’m happy to consider.
December 27, 2023 at 8:08 PM
I’m giving you the Holmesian view of law is a prediction of what courts will do.
This isn’t science - this is post hoc rationalization of political outcomes.
If you think you have evidence that the members of the court have punished that contradicts my assessment, I’m happy to consider.
This isn’t science - this is post hoc rationalization of political outcomes.
If you think you have evidence that the members of the court have punished that contradicts my assessment, I’m happy to consider.
It’s basically the entirety of con law, which is often two semesters. Not footnoting it for you
That’s what textualism is. That’s how Thomas thinks. It’s in every one of his opinions.
Go open your book on cannons of construction and dig in.
That’s what textualism is. That’s how Thomas thinks. It’s in every one of his opinions.
Go open your book on cannons of construction and dig in.
December 27, 2023 at 8:07 PM
It’s basically the entirety of con law, which is often two semesters. Not footnoting it for you
That’s what textualism is. That’s how Thomas thinks. It’s in every one of his opinions.
Go open your book on cannons of construction and dig in.
That’s what textualism is. That’s how Thomas thinks. It’s in every one of his opinions.
Go open your book on cannons of construction and dig in.
If you can keep it.
The idea that laws and norms will consistently supported against election processes is a tough sell. The dead hand of history will not govern the present for long if the present wants a dictatorship and choses it.
The idea that laws and norms will consistently supported against election processes is a tough sell. The dead hand of history will not govern the present for long if the present wants a dictatorship and choses it.
December 27, 2023 at 8:03 PM
If you can keep it.
The idea that laws and norms will consistently supported against election processes is a tough sell. The dead hand of history will not govern the present for long if the present wants a dictatorship and choses it.
The idea that laws and norms will consistently supported against election processes is a tough sell. The dead hand of history will not govern the present for long if the present wants a dictatorship and choses it.
There is a real problem with the head of state being held accountable. The are elected to have great powers. The main check is impeachment for behavior. If the Senate reviewed the facts and said, yeah nah…
I mean O.J. Wasn’t convicted. He did it, but that doesn’t give you what you want.
I mean O.J. Wasn’t convicted. He did it, but that doesn’t give you what you want.
December 27, 2023 at 7:59 PM
There is a real problem with the head of state being held accountable. The are elected to have great powers. The main check is impeachment for behavior. If the Senate reviewed the facts and said, yeah nah…
I mean O.J. Wasn’t convicted. He did it, but that doesn’t give you what you want.
I mean O.J. Wasn’t convicted. He did it, but that doesn’t give you what you want.
I think the Senate had a chance to do the right thing and tried him and failed to convict him (of basically insurrection).
I think it’s fairly absurd to think the court will act more politically than the senate on the same set of facts.
I think it’s fairly absurd to think the court will act more politically than the senate on the same set of facts.
December 27, 2023 at 7:52 PM
I think the Senate had a chance to do the right thing and tried him and failed to convict him (of basically insurrection).
I think it’s fairly absurd to think the court will act more politically than the senate on the same set of facts.
I think it’s fairly absurd to think the court will act more politically than the senate on the same set of facts.
I think textualists have addressed that argument many times in other cases and ignore legislative history as biased sausage making and hints at language that was rejected or traded trying to be read back into text.
I think it is completely unpersuasive or binding on this Court.
I think it is completely unpersuasive or binding on this Court.
December 27, 2023 at 7:50 PM
I think textualists have addressed that argument many times in other cases and ignore legislative history as biased sausage making and hints at language that was rejected or traded trying to be read back into text.
I think it is completely unpersuasive or binding on this Court.
I think it is completely unpersuasive or binding on this Court.
Making the sentence remarkably accurate. You didn’t find hidden meaning there.
Life will include death, but it also requires some level of community and interaction.
Some have argued against holiday gatherings and forced quarantines
Life will include death, but it also requires some level of community and interaction.
Some have argued against holiday gatherings and forced quarantines
December 27, 2023 at 7:47 PM
Making the sentence remarkably accurate. You didn’t find hidden meaning there.
Life will include death, but it also requires some level of community and interaction.
Some have argued against holiday gatherings and forced quarantines
Life will include death, but it also requires some level of community and interaction.
Some have argued against holiday gatherings and forced quarantines
What do you know about me? I’ve only shared the views of my grandmother.
I do not think you’re the only person alive with dead friends but I’m sorry to of their passing and your loss.
I do not think you’re the only person alive with dead friends but I’m sorry to of their passing and your loss.
December 27, 2023 at 7:45 PM
What do you know about me? I’ve only shared the views of my grandmother.
I do not think you’re the only person alive with dead friends but I’m sorry to of their passing and your loss.
I do not think you’re the only person alive with dead friends but I’m sorry to of their passing and your loss.
There are no right answers in Con Law other than 5 votes and knowing there’s enough political cover to justify it. Issuing a simple short opinion that appears technical saves a lot of grief for them.
December 27, 2023 at 7:42 PM
There are no right answers in Con Law other than 5 votes and knowing there’s enough political cover to justify it. Issuing a simple short opinion that appears technical saves a lot of grief for them.