Quote :

"The state of North Carolina, they took something so dearly from me, something that was God given."

oh she was into religion??? pfft.

they should have stripped her of any educational or schooling records as well and taken away the right for her to vote. in my liberal swayed opinion they didn't do ENOUGH

1/13/2012 4:59:52 PM

you're trying too hard when you post "set em up" just so you can have the top of the next page two minutes later

1/13/2012 5:19:55 PM

Quote :

"We just can't go back in time and make what they did illegal. That would violate the fundamental basis of Due Process."

Speaking of, I would think that having a bureaucrat decide to tie your tubes would not qualify as "due process under the law," which makes the application of the program a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

1/13/2012 9:03:34 PM

I did qualify under due process because the state created a system to identify those individual who were to be sterilized. Due Process doesn't necessarily imply court involvement.

1/14/2012 1:58:26 AM

No but I do imagine it implies being informed and the ability to appeal. Otherwise any law the government sees fit to pass is "due process".

1/14/2012 9:13:58 AM

It did provide notice about the impending sterilization and an appeals process.

The point is due process rights were not violated by the law. Yes, it is a stain on the history of North Carolina, but under no circumstances should anyone be charged with any crime.

1/14/2012 1:12:11 PM

^ are you kidding?

It's pretty clear when you look into this that the law wasn't applied consistently by any stretch. 1920s America just created a law that let douchebag, racist bureaucrats satisfy their cruel instincts.

This wasn't an enlightened, thought-out, or principled law like you seem to be implying.

1/14/2012 1:34:14 PM

There is no law that bureaucrats must be either consistent or not douchebags. There is no requirement that laws be enlightened, thought-out, or principled. This was a miscarriage of democracy and we today must accept this is what democracy produces now and then and act accordingly to marginalize and suppress the democratic beast.

If we want to put an end to such human catastrophes then we need to close down the legislature and learn to live with the laws we have.

[Edited on January 14, 2012 at 2:49 PM. Reason : .,.]

1/14/2012 2:47:15 PM

^^I'm not implying anything. The fact of the matter is there is nothing that can or should be done to the people who carried out the law. The fact of the matter is, it was the law and at the time it was deemed Constitutional. To go back through and ex post facto prosecute people for engaging in legal behavior would be a massive miscarriage of justice.

^Oh great, so we end up with a tyranny of the executive and judiciary. Bravo.


[Edited on January 14, 2012 at 3:08 PM. Reason : .]

1/14/2012 3:07:01 PM

^ so are you saying that yes, we should compensate the victims of the law, but no, we shouldn't prosecute the people who wrote and extended the law?

1/14/2012 3:24:23 PM

They should be compensated

But you cannot prosecute the people who wrote and implemented the laws for various reasons.

1) The law was written back in the 1930s, those legislators are dead

2) Even if they are alive, there is still the age old legislative immunity, which should never be destroyed.

3) The implementers of the law were no way in violation of the law. Going after them would be ex post facto, which is expressly prohibited by the Constitution.

4) Etc.

1/14/2012 3:30:42 PM

Quote :

"Even if they are alive, there is still the age old legislative immunity, which should never be destroyed."

There should be no such thing as legislative immunity. That concept is highly offensive - the idea that, if something gets passed by the legislative body, those responsible for passing it should never be held responsible. No, that's wrong. The legislators responsible for these laws should be held accountable.

1/14/2012 7:09:29 PM

1/14/2012 8:55:39 PM

Quote :

"[user]aaronburro[[/user]: Maybe the taxpayers should be on the hook for gross violations of people's rights so that they won't elect fuckers who will do it. but there certainly shouldn't be reparations if the idiots who did this don't go to jail"

?

I don't follow your reasoning.

1/14/2012 11:31:49 PM

Quote :

"There should be no such thing as legislative immunity. That concept is highly offensive - the idea that, if something gets passed by the legislative body, those responsible for passing it should never be held responsible. No, that's wrong. The legislators responsible for these laws should be held accountable."

Legislators should be free to vote and debate their conscience without fear of civil or criminal reprisal. It is a fundamental basis of our representative democracy.

The proper way to hold a legislator responsible is to vote them out of office if you disagree with them.

Anything else would lead to tyranny.

1/15/2012 4:57:50 AM

Quote :

"I did qualify under due process because the state created a system to identify those individual who were to be sterilized."

and the state also created a great system to identify who couldn't drink from a water fountain or go to a certain school.

Quote :

"Legislators should be free to vote and debate their conscience without fear of civil or criminal reprisal."

bullshit. they are bound to uphold either state or national constitutions. fuck them if they don't understand those basic, simple documents

[Edited on January 15, 2012 at 2:05 PM. Reason : ]

1/15/2012 2:03:21 PM

Quote :

"bullshit. they are bound to uphold either state or national constitutions. fuck them if they don't understand those basic, simple documents"

Ding. Failure to hold our politicians responsible for their actions, up to and including civil and criminal prosecution for dereliction of duty gives us scenarios like all the congress critters who claimed that they didn't know the PATRIOT ACT was so bad when they voted for it because they didn't read it.

1/15/2012 6:49:11 PM

And in the future, democracy may decide to punish our current legislators for failing to exterminate today's undesirables.

The principle that a future legislature should not be able to imprison people, even past legislators, for stuff that was not a crime at the time, should not be sacrificed just to "get" people you don't like.

1/15/2012 11:41:30 PM

Quote :

"and the state also created a great system to identify who couldn't drink from a water fountain or go to a certain school."

not even in the same league.

Quote :

"bullshit. they are bound to uphold either state or national constitutions. fuck them if they don't understand those basic, simple documents"

Yes they are bound by the constitution, but that has nothing to do with legislative immunity.

Quote :

"Ding. Failure to hold our politicians responsible for their actions, up to and including civil and criminal prosecution for dereliction of duty gives us scenarios like all the congress critters who claimed that they didn't know the PATRIOT ACT was so bad when they voted for it because they didn't read it."

There is a method for holding them responsible, it's called voting them out of office. However, civil and criminal penalties for exercising their 1st Amendment rights is not the proper avenue to address that.

1/16/2012 6:27:34 AM

Quote :

"they are bound to uphold either state or national constitutions. fuck them if they don't understand those basic, simple documents"

The courts said they had satisfied those documents, just as the courts say the crap we put up with today satisfies those documents.

1/16/2012 7:01:39 AM