A Tribute Thread to SC Justice Scalia

[*bfine32*]

(02-15-2016, 12:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Excuse me Your Highness, but you never answered my question about how long I have to fawn over him after his death before I can go back to telling the truth.

I'm sorry I didn't see where you asked that question (where exactly did you ask it or are you paraphrasing?), but the answer it: once Flags return to full-staff. Hell I remember someone getting upset that I mentioned Carter was a bad President about 4 months after it was made public that he was undergoing treatment for Brain cancer. If memory serves it is the same folk that feel the need to "tell the truth" now.

I get that liberals would not agree with Scalia's decisions, but to start a thread called A "tribute" to him and then use it as a forum to bash him one day after the announcement of his death is in extremely poor taste IMO.

As I said I expected more from the OP;  but a couple of the guys that have written their affirmation: not so much.  

[Rotobeast]

This thread is disgusting.
It was in poor taste to start and obvious bait.
I am even embarrassed for those that offered more than condemnation.
Quite frankly, I even feel a little dirty for leaving my name in the thread.

Sad

[fredtoast]

(02-15-2016, 02:09 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: This thread is disgusting.
It was in poor taste to start and obvious bait.
I am even embarrassed for those that offered more than condemnation.
Quite frankly,  I even feel a little dirty for leaving my name in the thread.

Sad

I am embarrassed for people who think that a total stranger suddenly becomes above criticism when he dies.

I would never say anything critical of him at this time to one of his friends or family members, but that does not apply to anyone here. None of you knew him personally.  There is no need for any of you to act like you are in a period of morning.  Your claims of moral outrage is nothing but a phony affectation.

He was a public figure whose actions are subject to criticism even after he is dead.

[Vas Deferens]

we shouldn't have anyone so gullible to believe the earth is only 5,000 years old anywhere near a bench. good riddance.

[Rotobeast]

(02-15-2016, 02:58 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am embarrassed for people who think that a total stranger suddenly becomes above criticism when he dies.

I would never say anything critical of him at this time to one of his friends or family members, but that does not apply to anyone here. None of you knew him personally.  There is no need for any of you to act like you are in a period of morning.  Your claims of moral outrage is nothing but a phony affectation.

He was a public figure whose actions are subject to criticism even after he is dead.

It has nothing to do with affection, even remotely.
It has to respect and decorum.
I would afford any of you the same and I don't really "know" any of you.

If it were someone that were irrefutably detested by every person in the world, I could see it.
However, you cannot tell me that this man never done something to make the world better.
Sure, he could have done more, but so can we all.

If Obama were assassinated, I'm sure many would be clamoring for people to hold their vitriol until the body was at least cold and in the ground.

[GMDino]

(02-15-2016, 04:09 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: It has nothing to do with affection, even remotely.
It has to respect and decorum.
I would afford any of you the same and I don't really "know" any of you.

If it were someone that were irrefutably detested by every person in the world, I could see it.
However, you cannot tell me that this man never done something to make the world better.
Sure, he could have done more, but so can we all.

If Obama were assassinated, I'm sure many would be clamoring for people to hold their vitriol until the body was at least cold and in the ground.

And you can also be sure there would be a swath that would not do that all.

As I often say when I post something online and someone complains: I am SHOCKED that people on the internet have opinions!  

We have a thread to pay respects, one to discuss possible replacements and one to discuss his words and if they are ridiculous or not.

[Rotobeast]

(02-15-2016, 04:15 PM)GMDino Wrote: And you can also be sure there would be a swath that would not do that all.

As I often say when I post something online and someone complains: I am SHOCKED that people on the internet have opinions!  

We have a thread to pay respects, one to discuss possible replacements and one to discuss his words and if they are ridiculous or not.

And I guarantee you that I would condemn them, just the same.

I guess I may have held some people in a little higher esteem than I should have.

Lesson learned.

[fredtoast]

(02-15-2016, 04:09 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: It has nothing to do with affection, even remotely.
It has to respect and decorum.

I have no reason to respect him.  He was a pompous hypocrite and a shill for religious groups and big corporations.

None of that changed just because he died.  I am never going to say I am happy when someone dies, but at the same time I am not going to act like dying somehow makes him worthy of my respect.

[Rotobeast]

(02-15-2016, 04:20 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have no reason to respect him.  He was a pompous hypocrite and a shill for religious groups and big corporations.

None of that changed just because he died.  I am never going to say I am happy when someone dies, but at the same time I am not going to act like dying somehow makes him worthy of my respect.

I can understand the animosity given your morals, but considering your field I would think there would be a small amount afforded.

[*bfine32*]

(02-15-2016, 04:24 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: I can understand the animosity given your morals, but considering your field I would think there would be a small amount afforded.

As I said before, I have respect for all the SCJs and although I disagree with many of their more recent rulings I accept the fact that the rule of law was followed.

I likewise understand there is a reason there is more than one of them and why there is an odd number. I further understand the need for dissension on many issues. Am I holding a vigil for the SCJ tonight; no. To me it is common decency, unfortunately decency is becoming far less common.

I must say I am embarrassed to be associated with conservatism given the way they are handling the passing of the man. It is every bit as disrespectful as a few in this thread.    

[fredtoast]

(02-15-2016, 04:24 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: I can understand the animosity given your morals, but considering your field I would think there would be a small amount afforded.

I would be completely respectful to his friends and family who were in mourning for his loss.  He may very well have been a good father, husband, and friend.  If I thiought anything I said here would get back to them then I would restrain my comments at this time.  But I really don't believe that death makes a person immune from criticism among total strangers.

[Rotobeast]

(02-15-2016, 05:52 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But I really don't believe that death makes a person immune from criticism among total strangers.

I do not, either.

However.... I feel we should concentrate on the policy, more than the man and I guess I am in the extreme minority of people who thinks there needs to be a waiting period (albeit undefined) before speaking ill of the dead.
I have no opinion of what that timeframe is, but if I were forced I'd say 3 days to a week (let them be buried).

I don't know if you were in the old Smack Forum when Chris Henry died, but this was a big discussion then and a few of the people in this thread were of the opinion that a waiting period was warranted.

Regardless, I am not going to single anyone out.
I said my piece and do not want to sit here and badger anyone.

[*Nately120*]

I would imagine anyone who is dancing on his grave would have done that dance whether he were alive, or not. Basically, if someone criticizes a man when he is alive, then he may as well stay the course when the guy is dead. Scalia was a very public figure and his decisions had, and continue to have impact upon living people. His influence, for good or ill, is still being felt beyond his existence.

He chose a position of power, he chose how to use that power, and he wasn't shy about making his opinions known (nor should he have been). Nobody dances on the graves of nobodies, so thems the breaks. I can't say that I believe in the afterlife, or souls or anything, so when I'm dead you can all laugh until your rectums prolapse for all I care.

[Bengalzona]

(02-15-2016, 02:09 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: This thread is disgusting.
It was in poor taste to start and obvious bait.
I am even embarrassed for those that offered more than condemnation.
Quite frankly,  I even feel a little dirty for leaving my name in the thread.

Sad

I don't think it is disgusting in the least. It is as stated in the title: a tribute thread. The man's legacy was his words and ideas. I have included some of his words and ideas. We honor him by discussing those words and ideas. There is no reason others can't contribute more of his words if they so choose.

He was a divisive figure while alive. People loved his words and ideas, and people hated his words and ideas. I don't see any reason why that would change when he is dead... regardless of how cold the body is.

You want me to say something good about him? Try this: He was an intelligent man who galvanized many conservatives around his concept of "Originalism".

Does that give you warm fuzzies?

[Bengalzona]

(02-15-2016, 12:06 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This may come as a shock to you, but many times SCJs interpret the law when giving their affirmation/distentions based on how they interpret the law and not always their personal opinion. If you think a professed Christian would want to see an innocent person die then there is where we disagree. IMO his words merely spoke to the rule of law.
Despite recent developments SCOTUS's job is the interpret the law, not make them.   

Consider how some professed Christians discuss homosexuals.

[Rotobeast]

(02-15-2016, 08:10 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Does that give you warm fuzzies?

Yes....yes it does.
But no tip, because it took so long.

[*bfine32*]

(02-15-2016, 08:16 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Consider how some professed Christians discuss homosexuals.

I would say any Christian that wishes ill on someone simply because of their sexual orientation is misguided. 

But continue to slur the man if you must; you have some support. 

[*bfine32*]

(02-15-2016, 08:10 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: I don't think it is disgusting in the least. It is as stated in the title: a tribute thread. The man's legacy was his words and ideas. I have included some of his words and ideas. We honor him by discussing those words and ideas. 

Your first meme does not contain his words; it is an interpretation designed to do nothing more than paint him in a bad light. You may try to assert you "honor" him by posting such things so soon after his passing; however, I find it discussing. Just as I would similar "honors" bestowed on any Justice. 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

The biggest problem with a thread such as this is that it was started by a "Mod".

[*Nately120*]

(02-15-2016, 09:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But continue to slur the man if you must; you have some support. 

Meh, I'd argue the part of this that makes Scalia look worst of all are his own words.  If compiling a list of a man's quotes makes for ridicule, he should have been less ridiculous when he spoke.