Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Fees  i just don't see unilateral conservatism as the answer, which is what it seem like you guys like to promote. If you think things are going to be able to stay the same, with the same interpretations, then how do you feel about brown vs board of education? 1789 is different that 1889 or 2009. What we are fighting within most muslim countries is radical conservatism, and thats an example that scares me. |
Feez religious fanatacism turned into a political movement isn't conservatism. Your wrong about both.
Conservatism espouses the principles of classical liberalism... it lauds individual liberty, responsibility and freedom of conscience. Whereas jihadists... don't.
As for the court... a judge who explicitly promotes using one's empathy and experience rather than relying exclusively on the law in order to render her decisions is a partial judge who is trying to play legislator.
Activist decisions... the duty of the court is to clarify the law not to craft it into their version of what Congress must have wanted. That means that sometimes a legitimate law will yield a horribly unjust result. The judge must permit that result because that's their job. Its the job of Congress to fix it. Sotomayor doesn't accept that check on her branch's sphere of authority.