NationStates Jolt Archive

Argh! A great issue, but all SIX positions are terrible. A choice of five radically activist judges, or allow the public to vote on it. OK, the last one isn't terrible (although electing judges by popular vote has some serious problems), but where is the strict constructionist position? One of the choices should be a judge who pledges to adhere to the written law, no matter what his personal feelings about an issue are.

One of the choices should be a judge who pledges to adhere to the written law, no matter what his personal feelings about an issue are.

Since a key part of the Supreme Court (in the US version of it, at least) is to interpret the law according to their best judgement (intention of the lawmakers, how it should be applied to generally new and unforeseen cases, etc...) this is IMHO not realistic. And yes, a few 'moderate' choices would make it easier to decide. Part of the issues has always been exageration of choices to be made, I think that's part of the fun. In the end, it'll average out anyway.

Ballotonia

Yeah... issues should be limited to for or 5 options MAX.
It makes things difficult, I just dismiss the issue.

myrth you of all people on the NS forum should know EXACTLY what my issue does...if you dont..you're just too lazy to look for the code of it on the europe forum :roll:

to be specific, at least if i remember right...it originally had only 5 options...but the guy who edited it(i forget who edited it also :P) added the 6th one, since i dont think id put something in there about "democracy", bleh such an evil thing

if you read each one carefully, you'll probably be able to figure out what each one does, and theres a varying number of options for a reason, i wanted to give a good number of options so that people could choose which one best fit them(there are indeed some nations in NS that would favor environmentalism over civil rights), and there are some nations, like myself, which prefer to assist the economy above all else, hence the first option, and i do believe theres a 5 star general in there too...for you crazy militants..etc. etc.

diversity is key 8)

I added the sixth upon Max's direct request.

:shock: ooh thats interesting...(nothing wrong with it, i like the editation btw)

if i didnt love my economy so much..id probably go with the 6th option anyways :lol:

One of the choices should be a judge who pledges to adhere to the written law, no matter what his personal feelings about an issue are.
I would support this sort of option being added. I wouldn't want to choose a judge who has outlined a way they're going to vote in cases. That to me is just wrong.

I disagree that the options are meant to be extreme. We know that the effects can be exaggerated, but many of the original issues had "middle-of-the-road" options. Now, with a lot of these new issues, in an attempt to be creative, writers are sacrificing sane, reasonable choices. It's very hard to RP a nation when you have to keep dismissing issues because you don't like the choices on offer.

This is yet another new issue I'm just dismissing at the moment, I suppose.

DISCLAIMER: As I thoroughly expect Nutty to turn around and say that my criticism is only because I don't like him (due to history outside of NS.net), I can assure you that my feelings on this issue are much like many of the new issues - they're lacking in moderate options.

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

---Post deleted by NationStates Moderators---

Well, whether you like it or not, the issues were meant to be extreme, and why dismiss it when you could help counter-act the compulsory voting effect with the 6th option, which increases your political freedoms.

8)

Because electing judges would see a rise in judicial activism, creating conflict between parliament (the sovereign law maker) and the courts (impartial interpreters of the law).