The Supreme Court faces an existential crisis of legitimacy

[Doc Dutch]

The already control your body--age of alcohol consent, hours of alcohol purchase, what drugs you can put into your body, age of consent for sexual activity, vaccinations required for school and military duty...

A lot of those things are religious based morality laws. Limits for public safety are fine such as "No shooting guns in town". Why should anyone give a damn if I buy beer on a Sunday morning unless it's a religious issue?

[Flash]

The good protectors of the Constitution will rightly rule that the unborn children have rights too.

What do the rights of the unborn include? Do they have the right to make contracts, inherit....?

[Flash]

A lot of those things are religious based morality laws. Limits for public safety are fine such as "No shooting guns in town". Why should anyone give a damn if I buy beer on a Sunday morning unless it's a religious issue?

They are still laws even if they were (originally) religious based. Many laws are religious based morality laws--murder, rape, assault, theft....

At one time adultery and sodomy were illegal.

[Doc Dutch]

They are still laws even if they were (originally) religious based. Many laws are religious based morality laws--murder, rape, assault, theft....

At one time adultery and sodomy were illegal.

Exactly, because they were religious-based. Let's keep moving in that direction.

Murder and rape or any other victim crimes secular.

[Flash]

Exactly, because they were religious-based. Let's keep moving in that direction.

Murder and rape or any other victim crimes secular.

Laws on alcohol consumption (including blue laws) were never found unconstitutional because of 1st amendment freedom of religion. They were eventually repealed by the legislature or struck down for violating the right to privacy (sodomy).

Do you think drug laws are religiously based? A law can be based on the religious beliefs of some (abortion) but it is still a secular law if it contains no religious language.

[Doc Dutch]

Laws on alcohol consumption (including blue laws) were never found unconstitutional because of 1st amendment freedom of religion. They were eventually repealed by the legislature or struck down for violating the right to privacy (sodomy).

Do you think drug laws are religiously based? A law can be based on the religious beliefs of some (abortion) but it is still a secular law if it contains no religious language.

Yes. What right does a government have to tell a person they can't be a heroin addict?

If we all have unalienable rights, then where does it become the government's right to dictate to someone they can't smoke pot?

[Flash]

Yes. What right does a government have to tell a person they can't be a heroin addict?

If we all have unalienable rights, then where does it become the government's right to dictate to someone they can't smoke pot?

The 10th Amendment gives the states "police powers" to protect "health, safety, welfare, and morals." Federal laws against drugs come from the interstate commerce clause.

That "inalienable rights" thing was always a little vague to me--like "natural law."

[Nordberg]

What do the rights of the unborn include? Do they have the right to make contracts, inherit....?

If a fetus is a person, try and get it a social security card . register it for the draft. Try and good food stamps. They will show you that is not a person.

[Doc Dutch]

The 10th Amendment gives the states "police powers" to protect "health, safety, welfare, and morals." Federal laws against drugs come from the interstate commerce clause.

That "inalienable rights" thing was always a little vague to me--like "natural law."

I understand they are laws. What I don't understand is what gives a democratic government oppressive authoritarian powers...except that We, the People gave it to them and won't take them back.

[Flash]

I understand they are laws. What I don't understand is what gives a democratic government oppressive authoritarian powers...except that We, the People gave it to them and won't take them back.

The government has the powers given it in the Constitution. Technically, in a democracy the government has any powers a majority of the people choose to give it. That is why many make the point that we are not a democracy because a majority cannot override the rights of the minority in our system.

[Doc Dutch]

The government has the powers given it in the Constitution. Technically, in a democracy the government has any powers a majority of the people choose to give it. That is why many make the point that we are not a democracy because a majority cannot override the rights of the minority in our system.

That's incorrect. The government has powers limited by the Constitution.

We can't, by popular vote, seek to outlaw a religion or enslave a group of people. Or can we? After all, we can dictate to people what drugs they can or can't take.

[Flash]

That's incorrect. The government has powers limited by the Constitution.

We can't, by popular vote, seek to outlaw a religion or enslave a group of people. Or can we? After all, we can dictate to people what drugs they can or can't take.

That was my point. We are not a democracy because even a majority cannot override the rights limited in the Constitution. In some representative democracies there is no such thing as an unconstitutional law.

[anatta]

That's incorrect. The government has powers limited by the Constitution.

We can't, by popular vote, seek to outlaw a religion or enslave a group of people. Or can we? After all, we can dictate to people what drugs they can or can't take.

"the government?" which government?
Federal powers are enumerated ( or found implied by SCOTUS) - Constitution lists them it doesn't
"limit" them.
If you mean the 10th those powers not specificly enumerated go to the state and people-
but that's the function of federalism or the balance of powers.

Government has limited and finite powers if that is what are crudely trying to say-
but even the 10th has limited reach

[gemini104104]

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor said it better than any of the court’s external critics. "Will this institution survive the stench this creates in the public perception, that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts?” she asked during oral arguments on Mississippi’s abortion law on Wednesday. “If people believe this is all politics, how will we survive? How will this court survive?”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...is-legitimacy/

This is a crisis created by Moscow Mitch in order to kiss tRump's lawlessly hacked in hide at seditiously and un Constitutionally installing demagogues with the intent to do tRump's will only, and to hell with the purpose the U.S. Supreme Court was created as to serve the interests of society, Democracy as an impartial form of administering justice and in compliance with U.S. Constitutional law. This is another reason in order to further reduce the affect that tRump's destructive stench had in an effort to destroy Democracy from within, is to expand SCOTUS. This effort in order to dilute the seditious influence that exist there which does not work to preserve Democracy or the rule of impartial law but to be a tool at waging war against Democracy, society and humanity. Considering tRump and his repuke demagogues lawlessly corrupted SCOTUS, there is nothing illegal about reversing that atrocity when it comes to expanding SCOTUS in defense of Democracy and the interests of society and humanity and the rule of law, etc.

[Earl]

What do the rights of the unborn include? Do they have the right to make contracts, inherit....?

The unborn have the right to live. They will have the right to make contracts and inherit when they are old enough to understand those issues.