"Making matters worse, if Trump is elected this year he could veto any congressional attempt to reverse such a disastrous ruling of the Court by passing a law guaranteeing same sex marriage rights."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz 40 points 8 months ago (9 children)

Any judge who makes a ruling based on their personal beliefs rather than on factual evidence is not truly acting as a judge, but rather as a petulant child determined to force everyone else to do things their way. Allowing even a single ruling of law to be based on personal beliefs, whether religious or otherwise, reduces the entire court system to nothing more than a mockery of legal justice.

[–] bedrooms@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (5 children)

IANAL, but I dare guess judges do need beliefs. In the beginning, people thought Black people were not humans, and so equality of people in constitution did not apply. I might be factually wrong on this, but let's assume it. To overcome this, some judges had to abandon their racism and understand black people are people.

And while some areas of human issues can be discussed scientifically, like racism being completely wrong, some are difficult.

And if science can't overcome an unjust law today, judges have to listen to their heart and do the right thing. Probably the left thing these days, though...

[–] MudMan@kbin.social 7 points 8 months ago

It's not a matter of science vs belief, it's a matter of law versus dogma.

Law is a consensus that, at least in a democracy, aims to set some rule and the consequences of it in advance so that whenever a case applies it is at least relatively predictable and applied equally in each case.

If you pass judgement based on the things you like, or in the religious beliefs you profess you're not following the law, your imparting dogma. Imposing it, in fact, over others.

You can absolutely make unjust laws, but at least those are the result of a process. In a democracy you can at least understands what steps lead to rectifying an unjust law.

If a person with power decides they don't like you and they apply that belief inconsistently, irrationally and without following consistent rules there is no recourse or path for society to correct itself (beyond violent revolt, presumably).

Judges don't need to listen to their heart. Judges need to apply laws generated in a functional system that captures the will of an informed people in a predictable, equitable manner. Judges ruling based on personal beliefs, whether you agree with them or not, are a tyranical manifestation and a very scary thing.

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (7 replies)