«

[gregor]

How can a democratic country have judges that are on their position untill their die?

Althought i have nothing against older people it is a proven fact that cerain processes are not done as fast and mind is not so clear anymore when you are old. That's why people retire.


So why have 70 year old or 80 year old judges???

[blastradius14]

They are appointed for life.

Benjamin Franklin lived for a very long time... maybe he had influence on it?

[A. J. Raffles]

Originally posted by Doubler@Sep 6 2005, 05:10 PM

Atheist? Make that agnostic.

I'd say make that independent. :bleh:

[allyfaucet]

I've never heard of the guy. I was out of the know when Rehnquist died, too :blink:

I don't think it matters too much if a judge is religious or affiliated with a party or on the political spectrum, as long as they can make sound decisions. Of course all of that stuff influences their judgement, but that's why we have 9 of them to go off of each other, so you get people from Scalia all the way to Ginsberg.

[Sebatianos]

Originally posted by R Havell@Sep 7 2005, 05:38 PM
Actually, not "letting go" is not effective not only because of the timnig issue but becuase sperm may already be present on the penis and some sperm are ejaculated during sex. But anyway, back onto US politics...

Well there were times in the US political history when these questions were completely in place...

But back on topic - judges should be completely independent, unfortunately if they are, no body is recomending them. Infulental people recomend judges that would be useful to them. And because these peoepl are influential their candidates usually end up where they want them to end up. Laws have nothing to do here - politcs can change laws - especially if the legal minds are their candidates... This just proves what the Greeks already found out in the ancient times - you can't have democracy once all the people can't be physically present at an importaint meeting. Representatives of the people don't represent democracy anymore.

[Toxik]

I always say that.there is no democracy unless you know whats is really going on and you can change it
For my country iom getting tired ofthings like.politics increades their wages by 7500 czk(
its like around 35czk to 1 usd)discussion about increasing wages of firemen,policemen
and doctors are moved to next year

[Borodin]

Originally posted by allyfaucet@Sep 7 2005, 12:36 AM
I don't think it matters too much if a judge is religious or affiliated with a party or on the political spectrum, as long as they can make sound decisions. Of course all of that stuff influences their judgement, but that's why we have 9 of them to go off of each other, so you get people from Scalia all the way to Ginsberg.

You realize, of course, that at one time the justices were chosen for their lack of political and religious affiliations? And that Ginsberg is a moderate--that the last liberal on the Court died roughly 30 years ago?

[eolsunder]

Hey, its just the way humans are.

To have perfect Judges you need to have robots, who have no emotions or political ties, something that can just judge the laws.

But Judges are humans, so EVERY Judge ever made has political ties, ideals, views on life. And all those things influence their decisions. A good Judge will try and limit those views, but every one will put their views into their decisions (wether they notice it or not).

Hey, just the way the world works. If Judges were nominated by the people, then the people's political/religious views would influence who gets in. If Judges were nominated by the government/politicans, then its the politicians views that influence their nomination. Nothing will change that.

We can only hope that they use their job and skills to make decisions based on the laws, not their own views.

Me, I didn't know who he was before this, and really don't care since my vote doesn't count anyway. If I didn't like him, really nothing I could do about it anyway since its not a elected position.

[allyfaucet]

I think you're right, there is no perfect judge.

Some have said that judges should be athiest and/or independent, but if they all were, even those things would shape their opinions. I guess this is why we have 9 of them. Also, the president would have a hard time appointing a hardcore liberal or hardcore conservative judge. They can't be too far in either direction or Congress would whip them out of there so fast it would make their head spin.

However, there are times on some cases and issues that are brought to the Supreme Court where sometimes a justice is advised to sit out of the case because their feelings on the issue have already been made public.

[punch999]

But the thing is bush nominated him for his religious views so he could help stop abortion and stem cell researched deemed un right because the bible treasures all life and crap