Comments for The Judges Do Iowa at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 8 out of 8 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Sun, 26 May 2013 00:25:26 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-judges-do-iowa.html#comment-1496 If you are saddened by this ruling, please stay awake, turn off your TV and pray to Our Lady to save America. I have committed myself to pray the Rosary daily. Let's pray for God's mercy for all of us sinners, especially the twisted thinking judges. Hope you will join me. - Leong Chew Mon, 20 Apr 2009 11:33:14 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-judges-do-iowa.html#comment-1443 It is worth noting that the defense in this case introduced experts who weren't social scientists: an ethicist, an expert on government family policies, etc. Unfortunately, the lower court judge refused to accept their testimony because they had not done "empirical/scientific research". The only experts that the court would actually accept were the social scientists. With that being the case and with the unanimous decision, it almost seems like this case was rigged from the start. - Phil Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:36:03 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-judges-do-iowa.html#comment-1442 The court is morally relativist in part. No one is a total moral relativist besides a sociopath. - Phil Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:35:12 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-judges-do-iowa.html#comment-1434 Hadley, I don't think the problem is so much moral relativism (as you say in conclusion) as it is a type of emotive consequentialist utilitarianism... The state claims that certain things are right and wrong, but only according to either (a) a consequentialist rational, or (b) the "all-worthy-Harm-Principle." Why is porn, homosexual marriage, etc. legal? Because they are not 'harming' anyone. Granted I think ethics w/o Nat. Law is hopeless, as is evidenced by our country and its policies. - Andrew Tue, 14 Apr 2009 23:46:14 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-judges-do-iowa.html#comment-1432 To Mr. Phelan's comment: so the standard of faith is now what you find relevant, and everything else is discarded as fluff? a kind of "personal magesterium"? This is a classic cafteria approach to faith and is anything but Catholic. The problem is not a Novus Ordo Church: there has been and there remains only one Church. You and our brothers and sisters at the traditional chapel are baptized into it, but no more than any of us. No one has a monopoly on piety, truth or virtue. - Pio Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:55:04 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-judges-do-iowa.html#comment-1431 This judicial (??) reasoning is explained by the legal theory which is summed up in the words "if it quacks it's a duck\" Why would we expect anything more than quackery from the products of modern law schools?? - John Ashley Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:52:33 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-judges-do-iowa.html#comment-1428 I must be missing something. As a Catholic who never accepted the Novus Ordo Church, because I could not believe this fluff was relevant, I have no problem understanding that I am living in a post-Christian, secular world. All who attend our Trad. chapel understand we are there striving to be saints! And we understand we live in an ocean of evil. GOD KNOWS THIS. Only HE can protect us. What do do we care what happens in Iowa, Vermont or at Notre Dame? The American fraud has been exposed. - William H. Phelan Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:57:41 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2009/the-judges-do-iowa.html#comment-1427 It seems to me that this Iowa ruling is the ultimate in twisted judicial thinking. The claim that tradition, in this case prejudiced by religious concepts, violates the constitution is a repudiation of common sense. Perhaps these judges need to review anatomical architecture which cannot be blamed on tradition or religion. The architecture of human genitalia surely dictates what goes where. Sodomy and mutual masturbation seem not to fit human anatomy as well. This is not a religious fact. - William Dennis Tue, 14 Apr 2009 10:30:20 +0100