Disqus - Latest Comments for ebrayton

Re: From the Archives: Was America Founded on ‘Christian Principles’?

ebrayton — Thu, 26 Dec 2019 07:07:54 -0000

No, this is false. Most of the founders were Christian to one degree or another,The key founders -- Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin and Alexander Hamilton (until late in life) -- were religious skeptics. I prefer Gregg Frazer's phrase -- "theistic rationalists." But the rank and file founders were largely Christian But that isn't relevant to the question of whether they based the constitution on Christian values (whatever those might be).

Re: Biden Lies About State’s Rights Being His Objection to Busing

ebrayton — Sun, 30 Jun 2019 09:52:29 -0000

I'll answer this in a post all its own.

Re: AOC Invited to Tour Auschwitz, Nails Steve King Over It

ebrayton — Thu, 27 Jun 2019 03:33:41 -0000

The phrase "white nationalist" was invented as a euphemism for white supremacist because it sounds softer and less extreme. After that they got even more vague and started calling themselves "alt-right." That's why I refuse to use it.

Re: The Bradensburg Cross Ruling and the Ghost of Justice Scalia

ebrayton — Sat, 22 Jun 2019 12:07:44 -0000

Gah, thanks for the correction. I've updated all the posts on this subject and I caught all the instances of the misspelling. And sorry about the typos. My typing has gotten much worse because of how these recent health problems affect my hand-eye coordination. I used to be an editor and it drives me crazy. I try to double check everything, but sometimes I miss things.

Re: Partly Agreeing with Clarence Thomas on Stare Decisis

ebrayton — Tue, 18 Jun 2019 16:32:16 -0000

The now-standard version of conservative originalism is not "plain text meaning" but "original public meaning," and they discern that by looking at how the people who wrote that provision of the Constitution explained to the public what it meant. In the case of the 14th Amendment, the men who wrote it said time and time again that it would not overturn laws banning interracial marriage, for instance, and yet the Supreme Court a century later used it to overturn all such laws. They ignored the original public meaning and focused on the plain meaning of the text and they were right to do so. The ruling was unanimous. This highlights a conflict that sometimes occurs in conservative legal thinking between two theories they advocate -- originalism and textualism.

Re: Another Health Update and More Help Needed

ebrayton — Thu, 24 Jan 2019 17:35:47 -0000

I don't know yet. IT's more than blood type, I know. Meeting with the transplant specialists in a couple weeks.

Re: The Moral Horror of Parents Disowning Their Children

ebrayton — Wed, 21 Nov 2018 14:16:20 -0000

He leans more libertarian these days.

Re: Doug Wilson Insults Gays, Millenials and Pancakes?

ebrayton — Sat, 20 Oct 2018 22:14:43 -0000

He doesn't want to be taken seriously. He wants people to keep sending him money. And you do that by dividing people up and making them afraid of the non-conforming. He knows exactly what he's doing, I suspect.

Re: Trump Promises to Pay Off Debt, Increases It Massively Instead

ebrayton — Fri, 14 Sep 2018 08:02:33 -0000

There is nothing even remotely coherent in this inane comment.

Re: Facing My Own Mortality

ebrayton — Thu, 06 Sep 2018 18:56:02 -0000

Hear, hear. I would not dream of rejecting such thoughts of kindness and I appreciate the concern.

Re: Facing My Own Mortality

ebrayton — Thu, 06 Sep 2018 10:50:10 -0000

Lighten up, Francis. I'm totally cool with it. I need laughter at a time like this. I chuckled to myself using that phrase when I wrote it.

Re: Trump’s Version of the ‘Big Lie’

ebrayton — Tue, 04 Sep 2018 14:42:06 -0000

The Gish Gallop is a bit different. The Gish Gallop is to bring up one subject, have that one shown to be false, then just move on to a totally different subject without even acknowledging the first failed argument. In competitive debate, the "spread" puts out a thousand arguments right up front, relying not on your inability to answer them qualitatively but your inability to even try to answer all of them within your time constraints. The techniques are related, but operate in distinctive ways.

Re: Chicago Law Prof Makes Racist Attack on Justice Sotomayor

ebrayton — Fri, 10 Aug 2018 08:53:51 -0000

That's a fair point. He did become more angry and less rational as he got older, but that doesn't make him any less intelligent.

Re: Chicago Law Prof Makes Racist Attack on Justice Sotomayor

ebrayton — Thu, 09 Aug 2018 13:14:28 -0000

You're doing the same thing being criticized above, assuming that someone must be stupid if you disagree with them. Scalia was absolutely brilliant. He was wrong about nearly everything, but that doesn't make him stupid.

Re: Trump Attacks LeBron James After Opening School

ebrayton — Mon, 06 Aug 2018 23:12:22 -0000

And he's banned.

Re: Using Religious Arguments for Public Policy Does Not Violate the Establishment Clause

ebrayton — Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:23:06 -0000

Legally, the distinction is irrelevant. A government official can use whatever arguments they want to use as well and it has no effect on the constitutionality of the policy. If a government official said that murder should be against the law because the Bible says so, would that render murder laws a violation of the Establishment Clause? Of course not.

Re: Using Religious Arguments for Public Policy Does Not Violate the Establishment Clause

ebrayton — Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:19:53 -0000

This could hardly be less relevant to this discussion, though. I'm not arguing that religious arguments are good arguments or that they justify anything. I'm arguing that they are not, by themselves, unconstitutional.

Re: Using Religious Arguments for Public Policy Does Not Violate the Establishment Clause

ebrayton — Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:18:29 -0000

Please cite the Supreme Court precedent that says any government action or policy that "gives the appearance of favoritism toward religion" is a violation of the Establishment Clause. I'll wait.

Re: Sessions’ Incredibly Dishonest Bible Quoting

ebrayton — Mon, 18 Jun 2018 03:46:40 -0000

SAy goodbye, you totalitarian asshole.

Re: Sessions’ Incredibly Dishonest Bible Quoting

ebrayton — Mon, 18 Jun 2018 03:40:39 -0000

I'm afraid HpO is right here. It does not violate separation of church and state merely to point to a religious rationale for a public policy. Martin Luther King and other civil rights leaders pointed continually to religious reasons for equality; that does not make the call for equality a violation of the Establishment Clause, and that is also true of a government official. That's why I did not criticize him on that basis. The problem here is that he is using his religious rationale in a highly dishonest manner. The law does not require what he claims it requires (the automatic charging of anyone who crosses the border illegally with a crime). In fact, the law rather explicitly allows those who cross the border to ask for political asylum and there is long-established process for dealing with such applications. Those are the ones whose children are being taken away, causing so much justifiable outrage. Pending a hearing on their asylum application, they should not be charged, as they have not been in the past. If they are denied asylum, they then can be deported back to the countries they came from. But until then, arresting them and taking their children away is barbaric and unconscionable.

Re: The Return of Culture Wars Radio

ebrayton — Thu, 31 May 2018 14:12:23 -0000

No. I could go back and have it on the station I used to be on, but decided not to do that. I'll have more flexibility this way in terms of language and timing.

Re: White supremacist on probation for assaulting a woman at a Trump rally headed to jail for attacking his wife

ebrayton — Tue, 15 May 2018 21:04:18 -0000

Please get your facts straight. Parrot's wife is not the mother of Heimbach's wife. The mother of Heimbach's wife died almost three years ago and she was Parrott's ex-wife several years before that. I know that because she was my best friend and I was at her bedside when she died. And she hated everything Parrott had become and that her daughter had gotten caught up with these horrible people. Parrott's current wife is no relation at all to Heimbach's wife.

Re: Eight Rules for Understanding Our Teenage President

ebrayton — Fri, 13 Apr 2018 14:41:52 -0000

As usual, Sastra adds an important perspective. This is absolutely spot on. It reflects so well the trends in American culture for decades.

Re: Eight Rules for Understanding Our Teenage President

ebrayton — Fri, 13 Apr 2018 14:40:37 -0000

Very good points that should definitely be included on this list. I would add that he also picks who to listen to based on whether he gets along with them well, which really means whether they suck up to him sufficiently.

Re: McMaster Out, Bolton In, World Screwed

ebrayton — Tue, 27 Mar 2018 19:26:29 -0000

I rarely read the comments here. I just happened to see this one.