[quote who="Krazikarl" reply="141" id="3406921"] Correct. However, they ARE the ultimate arbitrator on what is Constitutional and what is not Constitutional. This is an argument about what is and is not Constitutional, not what is right and wrong. There may very well be a huge range of valid opinions on what is right and wrong in many of these cases. However, there can be very little doubt in many cases on what is or is not Constitutional. Don't conf
[quote who="Krazikarl" reply="137" id="3406869"] Quoting Kantok, reply 134The fact remains that constitutional interpretation is a discipline founded and based upon ideology and opinion. It's not science. It never will be, despite how much "experts" like to try to construe it otherwise. Yep, I agree. Brad is the one who has tried to present it in terms of absolutes. He listed the absolutes in his OP that could not be violate
[quote who="Krazikarl" reply="133" id="3406831"] Broad assertions with numerous counter examples don't exactly convince me.[/quote] Says the guy responsible for: [quote who="Krazikarl" reply="118" id="3406519"] With that being said, a lot of his positions are fairly extreme even by the standards of strict constitutionalists. Yes, I'm aware of Scalia and the like. But the simple fact is that the history of Supreme Court rulings weight extreme
[quote who="Krazikarl" reply="120" id="3406547"] Why must we arbitrarily constrain it to the OP? For example, maintaining that the Louisiana Purchase was illegal is a fairly extreme position. I've put my reasoning and support for that statement above.[/quote] You said: [quote who="Krazikarl" reply="118" id="3406519"] With that being said, a lot of his positions are fairly extreme even by the standards of strict constitutionalists. Yes, I&#
[quote who="Krazikarl" reply="118" id="3406519"] extreme [/quote] I don't think that word means what you think it means. Please, point out the extreme statements in his OP list.
[quote who="flagyl" reply="112" id="3406472"] Please stop. I don't know anything about law, so I will not argue any side on this subject, but your above argument is the equivalent of saying "Your so called experts are corrupt because they are the establishment" or some such nonsense. I am going to modify KraziKarl's quote: "When it comes to the heart disease, you disagree with the vast majority of c
[quote who="sjaminei" reply="110" id="3406262"] (Boring sideway discussion, only the "Congress/Senate" is responsible for any changes to our constitution, so it's quite harder to change in the US obviously)[/quote] Actually, this would make for an interesting side discussion. Most democratic governments, even those modeled explicitly on the US Constitution, are significantly more fluid than ours. I think that is to our benefit, but I could see the argument f
[quote who="sjaminei" reply="110" id="3406262"] Why are the founding fathers that important? I am not a US citizen, so all this focus on them in such an important document is somewhat foreign to me. Our constitution was based on the US one, and as such was one of the most liberal ones during it's time in Europe, but we certainly have changed it a lot since then, and I am sure most countrymen of mine could not name one of the "founding fathers" of it. However you Americans seems to m
[quote who="Krazikarl" reply="109" id="3406256"] When it comes to the Constitution, you disagree with the vast majority of Constitutional scholars, the Supreme Court in general, several of our founding fathers, and "The Father of the Constitution". Once somebody's opinion reaches that level, it is not a personal or quasi personal attack to call your point of view strange or bizarre. It's simply pointing out that you have a highly idiosyncratic interpretation of t
[quote who="Alstein" reply="33" id="3406210"] A successful GalCiv III launch will shut up the folks who still spout off over War of Magic- I can't see a scenario where Brad would allow a sub-par GalCiv III to be released, and now he can look at the game with a lot more critical eye than he could War of Magic. [/quote] No it won't. If publicly detailing what went wrong, acknowledging their mistakes, repeatedly openly admitting and apol
[quote who="Alstein" reply="99" id="3405908"] That's why we have case law. Living constitution does not supposedly allow you to contravene previous SC decisions on the same amendment unless you can come up with another argument. (though this gets ignored on occasion by the SC) There are limits on the living constitution. [/quote] That's not what a living constitution means though. Living constitution has nothing to do with case law
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="30" id="3403625"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 30 Quoting Noumenon72, reply 26 Did you ever consider stepping down and hiring a quick-money CEO to wring the gains out of Impulse, letting you focus on technical work? I don't see why I would have wanted to do that when I could sell Impulse for tens of millions of dollars and get rid of the toxicity at the same time. I assumed that GameStop would be the ide
[quote who="Ekko_Tek" reply="805" id="3405879"] Flagyl I appreciate your efforts but you're honestly wasting your time at this point. Dunning-Kruger rules the day here...[/quote] Someone thinks they're clever in their insults. In reality it's all just more snide bullshit intended to make you feel good in your supposed superiority while avoiding actually discussing anything. I'm taking a break from this thread for a while. If it's still ar
[quote who="flagyl" reply="804" id="3405858"] Sooo...there is no model for the interior of a star because that is too complex. Oh wait...here is one http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&ved=0CFUQFjAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.physics.utah.edu%2F~springer%2Fphys3060%2FLectures_files%2Flec17-2013.ppt&ei=m0hfUta_BpPc8ATF94H4DA&usg=AFQjCNETZLU3J4CVRKJu4wi7dayAOXvg5A&sig2=NLPXNJv66QKFIElht--MHQ&bvm=bv.54176721,d.eWU T
[quote who="Chibiabos" reply="97" id="3405838"] The founding fathers gave implicit acceptance of slavery, and regarded women and ethnic minorities as property. If it is subversive to find aspects of the original constitution, before adoption of amendmends, as having been in any way evil -- such as slavery -- then I am proud to be subversive.[/quote] The founding fathers knew that the document would need to change. That's the reason for the amendment process in the
[quote who="sareth01" reply="95" id="3405733"] The idea of a living constitution comes from the lawyers and historians that try to interpret the writings of the constitution so that new regimes can exploit cultural ignorance(media) so that they can gain more power. In this way the constitution is subverted, as a legal document it should be explicitly read, because one of the defining qualities of a constitution is that it is an explicit document and cannot therefore be read honorab
[quote who="psychoak" reply="797" id="3405774"] We modeled gravity because we saw an apple drop and what do you know, we dropped a pear and the damned thing stayed in place! That's a really great picture. Try this one. Your answer to how much is a slide of graphs, all of which mysteriously stop before the utterly devastating lack of warming started. It's real nice of the IPCC to use ten year old data to
[quote who="psychoak" reply="79" id="3404933"] He can't. You'd have to engage in black market arms trading just to get such weaponry, and then the first country to catch you with it would either sink it before they boarded and arrested you, or after.[/quote] I've seen his prepper posts. I'm sure he knows a guy. As for getting sunk, well that's my problem.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="11" id="3404976"] Probably right. I've never really understood where all that hate comes from. I realize that my direct interaction on forums can be seen as abrasive at times but some of the hatred that I've had directed at me is kind of spooky. I'm just a guy who makes games and desktop gadgets. There's very little drama where I work and my home life is pretty drama free (or as drama free as having two teenage sons can be). &
This is why you likely won't see a non-Steam version. Anything Steamworks that SD uses which is core to the game would have to be reengineered by SD to support a non-Steam version. I have no idea what the numbers are or if there will even be Steamworks dependencies, but asking for a non-Steam version isn't a trivial request. It would certainly cost SD some (and I'd guess a fair amount of) money.
[quote who="Cykur" reply="755" id="3404888"] Just for the record, there are a LOT of reasonable AGW supporters who are heavily in favor of nuclear power. There are people in this thread who are pretty negative on any idea, but they don't speak for all of us.[/quote] Fair enough. But there are also a lot of "leading voices" in the AGW industry that are against nuclear too. For the record, I'm all for nuclear even though I'm in the "denier" cam
Seriously though, in regards to the 2nd in particular and all other amendments in general, to properly understand what was meant by the phrasing we have to understand how the words were used at a given time. You can't possible expect that the founders were able to predict how our language would evolve and then they wrote the amendments in that regard. The idea of a well regulated militia for example, means exactly what Psychoak has said repeatedly. Regulated mean
[quote who="ZombiesRus5" reply="76" id="3404870"] Me! Sounds like fun. I'll grab my guns [/quote] Well... I may have over-promised. Hey Brad: You're rich. Buy us a warship. You should, because you're rich and we want one so you should feel obligated. Or something. Barring that, I'll grab my 2 person kayak and we can both bring our guns. Then we just need to find someone to declare war on and i
Elemental Forums
GalCiv3 Forums