Bravery: Utah judge removes lesbian couple’s foster child, says she’ll be better off with heterosexuals

Search

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
5,391
Tokens
I love how all of these right wing wackos always preach their love for the US Constitution, but when the Supreme Court, WHICH WAS CREATED BY THE US CONSTITUTION, does its job, then it is somehow "illegal." With a majority of justices appointed by Republicans, no less.


Fascinating.

Please cite for me which section of the Constitution which grants the Supreme Court the authority to reinterpret the document that created the bench on which they sit. It would likely be somewhere in Section III. Making their own laws is not "doing their jobs."

The Supreme Court also upheld slavery, segregation, and internment. They aren't exactly batting 1.000 historically...although segregation seems to have become suddenly popular among dimocraps lately...
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
52,365
Tokens
I love how all of these right wing wackos always preach their love for the US Constitution, but when the Supreme Court, WHICH WAS CREATED BY THE US CONSTITUTION, does its job, then it is somehow "illegal." With a majority of justices appointed by Republicans, no less.

The Supreme Court isn't doing it's job, which is one of many reasons we have chaos where both sides are screaming "judicial activism!" without even knowing what that means, rather than abiding by a consistent legal standard. It is why we have become a nation of rules and men rather than the nation of laws we were founded on.

The Supreme Court was created by the Constitution, meaning the Supreme Court answers ONLY to the Constitution.

I know, I know...this just makes wayyyyyy too much sense for liberals and other activists, doesn't it? So I'll be even more specific:

Judges don't to answer to their moral consciences.
Judges don't answer to some contrived "international law"
Judges don't answer to the political winds in Washington
Judges don't answer to the gaystream media
Judges don't answer to wacky protesters and activists trying to influence their decisions one way or the other
Judges don't answer to money, power or 'fairness'
Judges don't answer to left or right

Judges answer ONLY to the LAW, meaning the Supreme Court answers only to the Supreme Law of the Land: The Constitution.

Anything beyond that is judicial overreach and activism. Think about it... why the hell would we need yet ANOTHER opinion or lawmaker on the Supreme Court? Absurd! We have the other branches of govt for that.

Judges aren't kings and queens who makes laws, they are ONE of the checks the balances the founders gave us to prevent the sort of corruption and constitutional overreach we have come to expect as 'normal' in Washington. When lawmakers (or should I say lawbreakers) overreach, the courts are supposed to slap the system back onto it's constitutional moorings.

Therefore, when a Supreme Court judge renders their decision based on facts, evidence and opinions OUTSIDE the Constitution, they have FAILED in their duty as a judge and VIOLATED their solemn oath as 'gatekeepers' of the Constitution. They should be impeached and thrown off the court!

It couldn't be simpler folks.

The only people who would disagree with this are people with an agenda...an agenda which most likely reaches far beyond American law.
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
52,365
Tokens
21b57d4fede8ae50ebaaf75c75e5956f.jpg


Ted-Cruz-on-constitution_Quote-Web.png
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
52,365
Tokens
Liberal Logic 101 (Gay "Marriage" Edition):

Liberal: Gay marriage is the law of the land!

Sane person: Says who?

Liberal: The Supreme Court says, that's who!

Sane person: Since when can the Supreme Court make laws?

Liberal: All the time! Look at Obamacare. Justice Roberts even rewrote the law - so brilliant!

Sane person: Judges can only interpret existing laws, they can't make up laws out of thin air. That job belongs to Congress: lawmakers. Lawmakers make laws, the president executes laws and judges interpret laws. Each branch of government plays a vital role in a constitutional republic. When they overreach into other branches, we get problems. Clear?

Liberal: No! You only hate gays! Gay "marriage" is the law of the land! The Supreme Court says...

face)(*^%
 

Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
3,342
Tokens
Liberal Logic 101 (Gay "Marriage" Edition):

Liberal: Gay marriage is the law of the land!

Sane person: Says who?

Liberal: The Supreme Court says, that's who!

Sane person: Since when can the Supreme Court make laws?

Liberal: All the time! Look at Obamacare. Justice Roberts even rewrote the law - so brilliant!

Sane person: Judges can only interpret existing laws, they can't make up laws out of thin air. That job belongs to Congress: lawmakers. Lawmakers make laws, the president executes laws and judges interpret laws. Each branch of government plays a vital role in a constitutional republic. When they overreach into other branches, we get problems. Clear?

Liberal: No! You only hate gays! Gay "marriage" is the law of the land! The Supreme Court says...

face)(*^%
It doesn't do any good to say this..They will never get it
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,999
Tokens
You're expanding the argument. Let's keep it simple.

My opinion: Gays are born that way and cannot alter their sexual inclinations as that is how they're wired. However, it is also natural for both gay and straight people to fall in love and seek a life partner. For a long time many hid in shame out of fear of exposure. Some tried to go straight. Others isolated themselves. Some committed suicide. Others turned to drugs and multiple partners. Others though decided to go a different route: BRAVERY. Feeling they deserved every right straight people enjoy they said no more hiding, no more shame. And here we are.

Your opinion: Instead of seeking the easy natural hetero lifestyle gays decide to be attracted to the same sex (yeccchhh!!!) for whatever reason, seeking attention, mental illness, etc. They can be repaired, so they become normal members of society. Religion says it's a sin and a perversion, and these people are damned to hell. And not only that, these people want to adopt children and turn them into gays, or God forbid change them into the opposite sex. And all gays want to shove their faggotty lifestyle down our throats.

I like mine better......

You put up a total strawman, and lie about my position. You're better than this.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,999
Tokens
Liberal Logic 101 (Gay "Marriage" Edition):

Liberal: Gay marriage is the law of the land!

Sane person: Says who?

Liberal: The Supreme Court says, that's who!

Sane person: Since when can the Supreme Court make laws?

Liberal: All the time! Look at Obamacare. Justice Roberts even rewrote the law - so brilliant!

Sane person: Judges can only interpret existing laws, they can't make up laws out of thin air. That job belongs to Congress: lawmakers. Lawmakers make laws, the president executes laws and judges interpret laws. Each branch of government plays a vital role in a constitutional republic. When they overreach into other branches, we get problems. Clear?

Liberal: No! You only hate gays! Gay "marriage" is the law of the land! The Supreme Court says...

face)(*^%

Joe knocks it out of the park. The sad thing is, the libtards in here are so ignorant, they don't even understand how our government is supposed to work - basic political science.
And, they don't care, as long as the libtaaaard agenda gets shoved down our throats.
 

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
24,884
Tokens
You put up a total strawman, and lie about my position. You're better than this.

You've really been mailing it in a lot lately Fester. You're down to one line here. Pretty much the same thing in the multipage Muslim thread. A disagreement there and you exited the discussion. So I "put up a strawman" and "lie about your position?" Well IMO you sem to have a lot of positions you are incapable or too short of time to defend.
 

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
24,884
Tokens
A lesbian couple in love and married adopt a baby they want to love. That's a 'liberal agenda'.

A scumbag judge breaks the law but the far right here whine about the Supreme Court violating the constitution, yet are silent on the judge's 'agenda' as it dovetails with their own fagbashing.

Let's take a few snippets from the article on this crackpot judge, shall we?


Johansen did receive his law degree from the Mormon Church’s Brigham Young University, and the region is heavily Mormon. Last week officials with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — the faith’s full name — confirmed it had made a change to its handbook to say children of same-sex couples cannot be blessed or baptized until they are 18. The decision is now facing wide protest from LGBT Mormons and their advocates.

This is not the first time one of Johansen’s decisions — and personal behavior — has been in headlines. In 1995, at the courthouse in Price, Utah, where he served, he slapped the 16-year-old son of a friend who thought the teenager was stealing.
“I knew immediately it was the wrong thing to do,” Johansen said at the time. “This was just a friend of mine who brought his kid over. … It was different than if I was acting with the authority of the state, but it was still not the right thing to do.” After the incident, Price was reprimanded by a judicial conduct commission for “demeaning the judicial office.”

In another unusual case, from 2012, Johansen pondered the fate of a teenager facing assault charges for cutting off most of a toddler’s hair. It was eye for an eye that day: Johansen ordered the teenager’s mother to cut off her daughter’s ponytail in exchange for a lighter sentence. Here’s how the Deseret News reported the exchange:

“I’m going to give you this option: I will cut that by 150 hours if you want to cut her hair right now,” Johansen said.

“Me, cut her hair?” [Valerie] Bruno asked.

“Right now,” the judge said. “I’ll go get a pair of scissors and we’ll whack that ponytail off.”

[Mindy] Moss, the victim’s mother, was in the courtroom and fully supported the penalty. She even spoke up when she didn’t believe Bruno had cut enough of Lopan’s ponytail off.

“Satisfied? Is it short enough?” Johansen asked Moss.

“No,” she replied. “My daughter’s hair that had never been cut, that was down to [the middle of her back], was cut up to here.”

“Take it off clear up to the rubberband,” the judge told Bruno, who protested that the scissors he’d given her weren’t up to the task.

Three years ago, the Tribune, in an editorial, took Johansen to task for his harsh sentences after he sent a boy on probation to jail for stealing a pack of gum. The reason? The boy had violated his probation by getting a poor report card.

“Seventh District Juvenile Court Judge Scott Johansen has a reliable recipe for turning an underperforming student into a juvenile delinquent, or worse,” the Tribune wrote in 2012. “And, unfortunately, Johansen follows his own recipe far too often when sentencing young offenders.” It added: “That was the beginning of a pattern of incarceration for the boy.”

Johansen’s exploits even led to the short-lived blog “Judge Scott Johansen is a tyrant” after he challenged home-schoolers in Utah to enroll their kids in class, or possibly lose them to the foster system.

“Scott Johansen is out of line,” read a post from 2007 that called him “out of control.” “He hates homeschooling so much that when a school lost a mother’s paper stating she will be homeschooling her kids the judge ordered the mother to enroll her kids in school within 24 hours or go to jail and lose her kids.”

After Johansen ordered the baby removed from Peirce and Hoagland, the Human Rights Campaign, an advocacy group for LGBT equality, condemned the decision, which will take effect in seven days.

“Removing a child from a loving home simply because the parents are LGBT is outrageous, shocking, and unjust,” Chad Griffin, the group’s president, said in a statement. “It also flies in the face of overwhelming evidence that children being raised by same-sex parents are just as healthy and well-adjusted as those with different-sex parents. At a time when so many children in foster care need loving homes, it is sickening to think that a child would be taken from caring parents who planned to adopt.”

“We’ve been told to care for this child as a mother would,” Hoagland said. “And I am her mother. That’s who she knows, and she’s just going to be taken away.”
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
52,365
Tokens
Joe knocks it out of the park. The sad thing is, the libtards in here are so ignorant, they don't even understand how our government is supposed to work - basic political science.
And, they don't care, as long as the libtaaaard agenda gets shoved down our throats.

This is exactly right. If it passes constitutional muster, great, if not, then as Pelosi said, "We're going to over the wall, under the wall, through the wall, but one way or the other, we are going to get healthcare done!"

The founders set up the system to prevent tyrants like her from trampling on our rights.

Read some of the lectures Antonin Scalia has given. On many occasions, he admits his own personal opinion stands in contrast to the law, but as a Supreme Court justice he understands his limitations and responsibilities therefore must put aside his biases and side with the law. That type of humility and honesty would go a long to getting back to a consistent legal standard all sides can agree on.

Right now it's chaos.

These activist liberal justices are outcome-oriented, not law-oriented. They are a DISGRACE and should be thrown off the bench!
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
52,365
Tokens
A lesbian couple in love and married adopt a baby they want to love. That's a 'liberal agenda'.

A scumbag judge breaks the law but the far right here whine about the Supreme Court violating the constitution, yet are silent on the judge's 'agenda' as it dovetails with their own fagbashing.

Let's take a few snippets from the article on this crackpot judge, shall we?

One judge "breaks the law" created by another set of judges who have no business making law in the first place. That responsibility lies with Congress and Congress ONLY. Presidents can't 'create' laws either...no matter how much you want two fags to tie the knot.

Both sides scream "judicial activism!" without knowing which side is up or down anymore.

Do you not understand what the hell is wrong with the system?????

:neenee:
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,999
Tokens
You've really been mailing it in a lot lately Fester. You're down to one line here. Pretty much the same thing in the multipage Muslim thread. A disagreement there and you exited the discussion. So I "put up a strawman" and "lie about your position?" Well IMO you sem to have a lot of positions you are incapable or too short of time to defend.

Well, to be honest, I'm considering taking a break from this forum for a while. Not because I think I'm wrong on any particular issue, it's just that it really has
become a waste of time. I'm sure you can relate.
 

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
23,877
Tokens
Oh well, it was quite the tempest while it lasted:

A Utah judge has reversed his decision to take a baby away from her lesbian foster parents and place her with a heterosexual couple after widespread backlash.
Court officials on Friday released an order signed by Judge Scott Johansen that will allow the 9-month-old baby to stay with April Hoagland and Beckie Peirce.
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
52,365
Tokens
Oh well, it was quite the tempest while it lasted:

A Utah judge has reversed his decision to take a baby away from her lesbian foster parents and place her with a heterosexual couple after widespread backlash.
Court officials on Friday released an order signed by Judge Scott Johansen that will allow the 9-month-old baby to stay with April Hoagland and Beckie Peirce.

Some point in the future...

Kid: Mommy?

Carpet Muncher #1: Which mommy, sweetie?

Carpet Muncher #2: I think she's talking to me.

Carpet Muncher #1: Ya think? What the hell makes you the special mommy! I'm the prettier one!

Carpet Muncher #2: Whatever...go ahead. What sweetie?

Kid: How do two mommies make a baby?

Carpet Muncher #2: Oh no! Are the kids at school bullying you again?

Another totally fucked up kid in the making...

:neenee:
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
44,999
Tokens
Some point in the future...

Kid: Mommy?

Carpet Muncher #1: Which mommy, sweetie?

Carpet Muncher #2: I think she's talking to me.

Carpet Muncher #1: Ya think? What the hell makes you the special mommy! I'm the prettier one!

Carpet Muncher #2: Whatever...go ahead. What sweetie?

Kid: How do two mommies make a baby?

Carpet Muncher #2: Oh no! Are the kids at school bullying you again?

Another totally fucked up kid in the making...

:neenee:

Somehow I think it's better to have 2 moms than 2 dads, that are in the back room sucking each other off, and ramming each
other in the ass, but both situations are pretty sick.

That, and the fact that the promiscuity rate among homosexuals is sky-high (and disease rates - and mental health...).

Can you say Rosie O'donnell?
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
52,365
Tokens
Carpet Muncher #2: What did they say hunny????

Child abuse victim: They're not bullying, but....

Carpet Muncher #2: What did they say to you????

Child abuse victim: Mommy, how did I get here? I wanna know!

Carpet Muncher #2: Well, Mommy and Mommy wanted you so much that we went to an anonymous sperm bank and had you conceived in a test tube. Isn't that amazing!

Child abuse victim: OMG! That's even worse than what the kids at school were taunting me with! So who the fuck is my Daddy? I hate you!

Carpet Muncher #2: Ummm....

*sigh*

You're right FZ, this is pure child abuse.

The psychological, spiritual, emotional and other trauma this child has been sentenced with in the name of political correctness and the fascist militant sodomite agenda is immeasurable.

I pray there's a special place in hell for anyone who damages children this way.

Coward POS judge! :madasshol
 

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
24,884
Tokens
One judge "breaks the law" created by another set of judges who have no business making law in the first place. That responsibility lies with Congress and Congress ONLY. Presidents can't 'create' laws either...no matter how much you want two fags to tie the knot.

Both sides scream "judicial activism!" without knowing which side is up or down anymore.

Do you not understand what the hell is wrong with the system?????

:neenee:

Joe let's not pretend either one of us is a lawyer. My support of what you label as "two fags to tie the not" is because I know it's what's right. The system broke a long time ago. You and I aren't going to fix it. Two separate subjects. By the way your judge is a nutjob :)
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
52,365
Tokens
Joe let's not pretend either one of us is a lawyer. My support of what you label as "two fags to tie the not" is because I know it's what's right. The system broke a long time ago. You and I aren't going to fix it. Two separate subjects. By the way your judge is a nutjob :)

Sorry Scott, I misspoke, I meant "two fudge packers tying the knot"

Best of luck in hoops tonight!

:toast:
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,827
Messages
13,573,606
Members
100,877
Latest member
kiemt5385
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com