Member since Apr 16, 2009



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

The Constitution itself is an undemocratic thing. It says that individuals have certain rights and liberties even when the majority may wish otherwise. A judge's job is to enforce the Constitution and the laws correctly, regardless of whether that application is popular or unpopular with the public. For example, even if the majority thinks your religion is heresy, the Constitution says they can't pass laws abolishing your religion. Undemocratic? Yes. But in this context, that is good. To make Supreme Court justices at the mercy of the mood of the majority undermines their ability to do their job. A justice has to be willing to do the unpopular thing if that is what the law requires. Simplistic people find "democratic" and "good" to be synonymous in every context. Some things, because of their very nature, must not be democratic. Direct election of justices would be ridiculous and would undermine the very foundation of a government based on individual liberty and the rule of law.

Posted by BP on 04/16/2009 at 9:26 AM


Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
© 1996-2018

Contemporary Media
460 Tennessee Street, 2nd Floor | Memphis, TN 38103
Visit our other sites: Memphis Magazine | Memphis Parent | Inside Memphis Business
Powered by Foundation