Comment Responses

I like smart comments, they deserve play. So, in order of importance: 1) Politics 2)Iowa Law Girl 3)Pontiff

1) Politics, re: Roper v. Simmons. Anonymous 10:23 makes a very good point:

"I agree that the court should not be relying on the whimsy of the people in making their decisions, but Kennedy's admission that constitutional law evolves is key to their ability to expand liberty. Those expansions only do come, however, when society has changed somewhat. The problem arises when the court uses the shift in societies beliefs to restrict liberty instead of expanding it."

This is very true; many of the recent liberties have come along in just this way. Overall, I think it is a great thing, and were there not another hook for the Court to hang this on, I would prefer this reason to not getting the right result, which we got with Roper. I worry about situations I perceive as restricting personal liberties (further limits to abortion) that the Court might view as expanding liberty (rights to life). I can't think of another example; I guess I'm just super-freaked about the abortion thing. Practically speaking, BushCo machine is full force right now, and I would feel more comfortable with the Court staying away from words that could get used against us in a couple of terms. On a theoretical level, I think it makes perfect sense for the Court to expand liberty based on shifts in public opinion. Strict textualists can get bent.

2.) A big hello and thanks to Hufflin n Puffin over at Angry Little Iowa Law Girl, for adding me to her blogroll. First time for me, and as soon as I figure out how... I will link her too! She's got some pretty funny stuff over there, so all 3 of my readers should check her out. Thanks much, I always enjoy hearing from anyone interested in Rubik's Cubes.

3.) Pontiff:
First, Mr. Bonnell said

"Thanks for your honest postings"

Wasn't sure what to make of that, whether it was sarcasm or sincerity. I took a look over at his blog, and I must say - this is the sort of Christian I like. That's right folks, I don't just automatically look down on those who are religious. Despite how lightly I take religion and the jokes I throw around about God, I admit there are values in the Christian religion I find appealing. It's my understanding that the basic teachings revolve around loving others, community ties, forgiveness and humility. Not so bad. I think liberals could tap into the "religious" community way more. It's the application of the religion which has really seemed to create problems. I collect magnets; one of my favorites say "I've got nothing against God; it's his fan club I can't stand." So true. If more Christians were like Mr. Burnell, I wouldn't be so freaked out about religion.

As a general comment (not at all directed at Mr. Burnell), even if there is a God, that doesn't mean that the morals and values of atheists, agnostics and members of other religions are wrong or bad. Belief in God is not a free pass to ignore the inhumanity on this earth; nor is it an adequate justification for forcing others to follow your beliefs. When the non-believers are in the majority - religious folk might find themselves wishing they had demonstrated more tolerance. I'm just saying, treat your neighbor as you would have him treat you... or whatever it is I hear they say at church.

Anonymous 10:20 said:

"Just look at how God is playing with the pope...I agree that guy should be dead by now - but God is playing with him too, just like you."

That's a bad sign for the Catholics. One more sign they didn't get it right. I swear man, more I think about this, the more certain I am I would place my bet on the Mormons ;) Anyhow, it sure is strange that every time I turned on the t.v. after the Pope's surgery - it was all about how everyone was praying that he would pull out strong, and stay with us for more years to come. WHY? why why why? Shouldn't the Pope be the first one ready to go? Doesn't he get like, a gold mini-throne, right next to God? Lines of Popes rolling around behind the Trinity? If the Catholics are right (which the Pope had better believe), then the Pope is going to be part of God's posse. That has got to have fat benefits. Mad bling. You'd think people would be ok with him bowing out.

More from Anonymous 10:20

"Lex, what if God was just playing with you and decided not to strike you down."

Well, then, that's not too bright on God's part. If God knows me, he should have given me my one chance for salvation. I mean, he could have made it look like a heart attack or whatever, God wouldn't have to be found out (although, as per my earlier Pope post, I think he should sometimes). It's his own fault. He made me so reasonable that I can't bring myself to follow the words of a buncha men from forever ago. Plus, weren't there all kinds of other gospels that didn't quite make the Bible cut...? Isn't religion the reason for example after example of humans brutally killing eachother? Hasn't God let his people become terribly misguided? And for what, a test of faith? That's bullshit. The majority of people have to burn in eternal fire pits because you made yourself make no sense? Sorry big man upstairs, holy father has got some evolving to do.

By the way, I hate that poem Footprints. That shit is so played out.