Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes

Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Level -> Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes (4/27/2008 5:50:44 PM)
quote: (CBS) Not many Supreme Court justices become famous, but Antonin Scalia is one of the few. Known as "Nino" to his friends and colleagues, he is one of the most brilliant and combative justices ever to sit on the court and one of the most prominent legal thinkers of his generation. He first agreed to talk to 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl about a new book he's written on how lawyers should address the court. But over the course of several conversations, our story grew into a full-fledged profile - his first major television interview - including discussions about abortion and Bush v. Gore. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/24/60minutes/main4040290.shtml

cyberdude611 -> RE: Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes (4/27/2008 6:34:00 PM)
I agree when he says that too many people try to change the constitution by twisting interpretation. If laws need to be changed, they are to be changed through legislatures and not through the courts. Liberals I think are most guilty of this. And what they tried to do with the Second Amendment is a perfect example. They fight over a comma or twist the phrase around to try to make it seem as if we don't have a right to bear arms. And sure....society changes. But that doesn't mean we can just change the wording of the constititution whenever someone wants. There is a process to change the constitution. The founding fathers knew society was going to change over the generations and it has in many, many ways. Slavery abolished. Equal application of laws. Allowing women to vote. etc... The constitution has been changed 27 times since 1790. The constitution is the framework of the government and the foundation of the laws. This is not something to play around with. That's why the threshold majority needed to change it was set so radically high by the founders. No political power or political ideology on it's own can change the government. There must be unity to invoke change. (Someone should tell this to Sen Obama and his supporters.)

popeye1250 -> RE: Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes (4/27/2008 6:52:25 PM)
I watched it, it was a good interview. I like the way he thinks. It's "out of the box" but it's concise. And they said during the course of the interview that he doesn't like activist judges who try to legislate from the bench! You know, everyone else has "job descriptions" why are the people who are running our government somehow exempt from that?

Alumbrado -> RE: Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes (4/27/2008 6:52:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 ... No political power or political ideology on it's own can change the government. There must be unity to invoke change. (Someone should tell this to Sen Obama and his supporters.) Changing the status quo by not rocking the boat? Yeah, that's always worked sooooooo well.

cloudboy -> RE: Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes (4/27/2008 8:48:12 PM)
The Constitution is intentionally vague, leaving lot's of room for interpretation. Its a document that is supposed to evolve with the times and not enslave or hold back later generations with outdated legal restrictions.

cyberdude611 -> RE: Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes (4/27/2008 8:54:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy The Constitution is intentionally vague, leaving lot's of room for interpretation. Its a document that is supposed to evolve with the times and not enslave or hold back later generations with outdated legal restrictions. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Doesn't appear vague to me...

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes (4/27/2008 8:58:52 PM)
quote: The Constitution is intentionally vague, leaving lot's of room for interpretation. Its a document that is supposed to evolve with the times and not enslave or hold back later generations with outdated legal restrictions. Please provide me with a quote from one of the founding fathers saying that the Constitution is supposed to be vague with lots of room for interpretation. It's not an accident that they made the Constitution so hard to amend. It's also not an accident that they set the goverment up with 3 adversarial branches.

cloudboy -> RE: Justice Scalia on 60 Minutes (4/28/2008 7:37:23 AM)
Try quoting the whole SECOND AMENDMENT before issuing your pronouncement on it. Deliberate omissions don't fortify your credibility. Also, why just focus on your one pet issue? For example, what do you think the Eighth (8th) Amendment means? ----- Note: even the half of the Amendment you quote is vague; "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." What here would constitute "arms?" Next, how far would that right be extended or circumscribed?

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

1.513672E-02