Nice Read on Anthony Kennedy

[homersapien 11,381]

Sorry, I don't get your point.

I paraphrased what Thomas said. (Didn't feel like looking it up.)

I have no idea what the PC bit is about.

He didn't say that. This was the relevant portion (which Vox and other left wingers mischaracterized):

The corollary of that principle is that human dignity cannot be taken away by the government. Slaves did not lose their dignity (any more than they lost their humanity) because the government allowed them to be enslaved. Those held in internment camps did not lose their dignity because the government confined them. And those denied governmental benefits certainly do not lose their dignity because the government denies them those benefits. The government cannot bestow dignity, and it cannot take it away.” (emphasis mine)

The last line is the key. Now one can still disagree with it, but he did not say slavery was no threat to human dignity. His point was that the government does not bestow dignity, therefore it cannot take it away.

Human dignity has long been understood in this country to be innate. When the Framers proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal” and “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,” they referred to a vision of mankind in which all humans are created in the image of God and therefore of inherent worth. That vision is the foundation upon which this Nation was built.

The corollary of that principle is that human dignity cannot be taken away by the government. Slaves did not lose their dignity (any more than they lost their humanity) because the government allowed them to be enslaved. Those held in internment camps did not lose their dignity because the government confined them. And those denied governmental benefits certainly do not lose their dignity because the government denies them those benefits. The government cannot bestow dignity, and it cannot take it away.

http://www.supremeco...14-556_3204.pdf

One's dignity is not dependent on his government acknowledging it. Rise up, and demand what is rightfully yours. Get up, stand up. What's so awful about that?

Well, in the South in the first half of the 19th century, you might be run down by tracking hounds and then tied to a whipping post for a lashing.

Very dignified, huh?

[Mims44 1,871]

If a man can take another mans dignity, why is it such a crazy thought that a government could take a mans dignity?

[TitanTiger 20,485]

If a man can take another mans dignity, why is it such a crazy thought that a government could take a mans dignity?

I think the idea is that dignity comes from above and beyond human beings or governments. Neither can take away that which they cannot bestow in the first place.

It's a high level philosophical argument, but not a hugely controversial one.

[JoeBags7277 734]

If a man can take another mans dignity, why is it such a crazy thought that a government could take a mans dignity?

I think the idea is that dignity comes from above and beyond human beings or governments. Neither can take away that which they cannot bestow in the first place.

It's a high level philosophical argument, but not a hugely controversial one.

Exactly. Not sure how I didn't squeeze this little word on earlier, but government cannot *legitimately* take away or bestow a man's dignity.

[TitanTiger 20,485]

If a man can take another mans dignity, why is it such a crazy thought that a government could take a mans dignity?

I think the idea is that dignity comes from above and beyond human beings or governments. Neither can take away that which they cannot bestow in the first place.

It's a high level philosophical argument, but not a hugely controversial one.

Exactly. Not sure how I didn't squeeze this little word on earlier, but government cannot *legitimately* take away or bestow a man's dignity.

It goes along with unalienable rights. These are rights that one has simply be virtue of being human. They are bestowed by our Creator. They are rightfully yours no matter what anyone or any government says or does. And any government or person that deprives you of them is already in the wrong no matter how many people agree with them.

[homersapien 11,381]

If a man can take another mans dignity, why is it such a crazy thought that a government could take a mans dignity?

I think the idea is that dignity comes from above and beyond human beings or governments. Neither can take away that which they cannot bestow in the first place.

It's a high level philosophical argument, but not a hugely controversial one.

BS. It's pure sophistry.

[TitanTiger 20,485]

If a man can take another mans dignity, why is it such a crazy thought that a government could take a mans dignity?

I think the idea is that dignity comes from above and beyond human beings or governments. Neither can take away that which they cannot bestow in the first place.

It's a high level philosophical argument, but not a hugely controversial one.

BS. It's pure sophistry.

Says you.

[homersapien 11,381]

If a man can take another mans dignity, why is it such a crazy thought that a government could take a mans dignity?

I think the idea is that dignity comes from above and beyond human beings or governments. Neither can take away that which they cannot bestow in the first place.

It's a high level philosophical argument, but not a hugely controversial one.

Exactly. Not sure how I didn't squeeze this little word on earlier, but government cannot *legitimately* take away or bestow a man's dignity.

The point is they can do it practically. And the Confederacy and Nazi Germany did so, legally within their system.

Clarence Thomas apparently doesn't believe it's possible.

[homersapien 11,381]

If a man can take another mans dignity, why is it such a crazy thought that a government could take a mans dignity?

I think the idea is that dignity comes from above and beyond human beings or governments. Neither can take away that which they cannot bestow in the first place.

It's a high level philosophical argument, but not a hugely controversial one.

BS. It's pure sophistry.

Says you.

Yessir indeed. But I am certainly not alone.

[TitanTiger 20,485]

If a man can take another mans dignity, why is it such a crazy thought that a government could take a mans dignity?

I think the idea is that dignity comes from above and beyond human beings or governments. Neither can take away that which they cannot bestow in the first place.

It's a high level philosophical argument, but not a hugely controversial one.

BS. It's pure sophistry.

Says you.

Yessir indeed. But I am certainly not alone.

Neither am I. And I'm betting the ones on my side are smarter.

[homersapien 11,381]

Yessir indeed. But I am not alone.

Neither am I. And I'm betting the ones on my side are smarter.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Most people recognize that a legal system that allows kidnapped humans to be stuffed like sardines into a ship's hold for a long voyage only to have the survivors be sold as slaves would recognize the power of a government to deny a man's (or woman's or child's) dignity.

And we all know what the Nazi's did.

Maybe you should first start with the term dignity and figure out what it is you are talking about. You seem to have it confused with some abstract religious term like "soul".

[TitanTiger 20,485]

Yessir indeed. But I am not alone.

Neither am I. And I'm betting the ones on my side are smarter.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Most people recognize that a legal system that allows slaves to be stuffed like sardines into a ship's hold for a long voyage only to have the survivors be sold as slaves would recognize the power of a government to deny a man's (or woman's or child's) dignity.

And I think we all know what the Nazi's did.

Maybe you should first start with the term dignity and figure out what it is you are talking about. You seem to have it confused with some abstract religious term like "soul".

I'm certain of it.

No one can take your dignity from you no matter what horrible things they do to you. Even the fact that you can recognize that a legal system that treats people as less than they are in objective reality is in the wrong should tell you that dignity is not bestowed, nor taken away, by any man or government thereof.

[homersapien 11,381]

Yessir indeed. But I am not alone.

Neither am I. And I'm betting the ones on my side are smarter.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Most people recognize that a legal system that allows slaves to be stuffed like sardines into a ship's hold for a long voyage only to have the survivors be sold as slaves would recognize the power of a government to deny a man's (or woman's or child's) dignity.

And I think we all know what the Nazi's did.

Maybe you should first start with the term dignity and figure out what it is you are talking about. You seem to have it confused with some abstract religious term like "soul".

I'm certain of it.

No one can take your dignity from you no matter what horrible things they do to you. Even the fact that you can recognize that a legal system that treats people as less than they are in objective reality is in the wrong should tell you that dignity is not bestowed, nor taken away, by any man or government thereof.

How about the slaves and Jews who committed suicide to escape their condition?

This is religious-based mumbo jumbo. It's the same sort of thinking that would dismiss our earthly existence as being relevant at all. It is of no practical use whatsoever.

To use such thinking as an excuse to attenuate the effects of government tyranny - much less just flat out evil - is a disgrace.

[TexasTiger 12,915]

Yessir indeed. But I am not alone.

Neither am I. And I'm betting the ones on my side are smarter.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Most people recognize that a legal system that allows slaves to be stuffed like sardines into a ship's hold for a long voyage only to have the survivors be sold as slaves would recognize the power of a government to deny a man's (or woman's or child's) dignity.

And I think we all know what the Nazi's did.

Maybe you should first start with the term dignity and figure out what it is you are talking about. You seem to have it confused with some abstract religious term like "soul".

I'm certain of it.

No one can take your dignity from you no matter what horrible things they do to you. Even the fact that you can recognize that a legal system that treats people as less than they are in objective reality is in the wrong should tell you that dignity is not bestowed, nor taken away, by any man or government thereof.

If not sophistry, it's something darn close. The context of the argument has to do with what government action is acceptable under the Constitution. The way you're using it, apparently the government can bestow any number of indignities on a person, even robbing them of their very freedom because true dignity comes from within. That's a bit circular. There are a variety of definitions for the word dignity :

dig·ni·ty (dĭg′nĭ-tē)

n. pl. dig·ni·ties

1. The quality or state of being worthy of esteem or respect.

2. Inherent nobility and worth: the dignity of honest labor.

3.

a. Poise and self-respect.

b. Stateliness and formality in manner and appearance.

4. The respect and honor associated with an important position.

5. A high office or rank.

6. dignities The ceremonial symbols and observances attached to high office.

7. Archaic A dignitary.

I suppose one can always make the most of an inherently undignified status and carry oneself with as much "dignity" as a situation allows, but the question is really one of what can government justifiably be allowed to do? Reasonable people may differ on where that line is, but there is a line.

[TitanTiger 20,485]

How about the slaves and Jews who committed suicide to escape their condition?

Unjust suffering does not strip a person of their dignity.

This is religious-based mumbo jumbo. It's the same sort of thinking that would dismiss our earthly existence as being relevant at all. It is of no practical use whatsoever.

Actually that is antithetical to my thinking. I don't subscribe to gnosticism.

To use such thinking as an excuse to attenuate the effects of government tyranny - much less just flat out evil - is a disgrace.

It would be, if that's what I was doing.

[Mims44 1,871]

Gotta side with the others TT.

Just because there might be that 1 in a million people that keeps their dignity through being tortured, raped, watching everything they love die horrible slow deaths... does not mean that a government is incapable of taking ones dignity. It just means a government isn't 100% able to do so.

And if we want to get really crazy with it.... what would you say a government has done if it lobotomized people... left them as shells of their former selves? If they take their ability to reason and think would that not take their dignity?

[TitanTiger 20,485]

A person has dignity by virtue of being human, just like a person has inherent worth by virtue of being human. Evil men can try to legislate that away, attempt to demean, shame, persecute, torture, subjugate it out of them. They may treat them as if they have no dignity or worth, as if they are no better than a common animal. But that does not mean they are successful. They cannot take it from them. They are incapable of doing so, no matter how much power they believe they have.

[Strychnine 1,802]

A person has dignity by virtue of being human, just like a person has inherent worth by virtue of being human. Evil men can try to legislate that away, attempt to demean, shame, persecute, torture, subjugate it out of them. They may treat them as if they have no dignity or worth, as if they are no better than a common animal. But that does not mean they are successful. They cannot take it from them. They are incapable of doing so, no matter how much power they believe they have.

While I certainly respect your opinion, what of the people that were subjugated under full force of the states' rule? While evil indeed, slavery did indeed exist, and people were indeed born into it. You may argue, correctly, that a person has dignity by virtue of being human, but where was that argument for the centuries that slavery existed as a human enterprise? What recourse did the enslaved have to reclaim or achieve their deserved dignity?

[TitanTiger 20,485]

A person has dignity by virtue of being human, just like a person has inherent worth by virtue of being human. Evil men can try to legislate that away, attempt to demean, shame, persecute, torture, subjugate it out of them. They may treat them as if they have no dignity or worth, as if they are no better than a common animal. But that does not mean they are successful. They cannot take it from them. They are incapable of doing so, no matter how much power they believe they have.

While I certainly respect your opinion, what of the people that were subjugated under full force of the states' rule? While evil indeed, slavery did indeed exist, and people were indeed born into it. You may argue, correctly, that a person has dignity by virtue of being human, but where was that argument for the centuries that slavery existed as a human enterprise? What recourse did the enslaved have to reclaim or achieve their deserved dignity?

I think you are still making the error of believing that dignity and worth is something that is given to us by others, and thus it can be taken away. But if it is inherent to a person as a human being by virtue of being what they are, then no one can take it away. The fact that people for centuries kept slavery going doesn't change this. In fact, it reinforces it. The argument was always that the slave was not a person, but rather a piece of property...at best a subhuman. Thus they could pretend they had no inherent dignity and worth. After all, they aren't really people. But it was this understanding that I'm talking about that eventually caused people to rise up and seek to free them.

In fact, it diminishes dignity and worth to even say that it could be bestowed or taken away by another person. When the slaves were freed, it wasn't that kindly white folk finally decided to confer dignity on black people. They didn't give it nor had they taken it away before. When they did begin to do was recognize it in them and treat them a bit more as that dignity and worth deserved.

The other error here is the argument that because others didn't or refused to understand the reality of this that somehow it wasn't true during that time. But this is like saying that during the time that most of humanity believed the world was flat, that it somehow wasn't actually round for that span of time. That because they had the facts wrong, that it affected the reality of what the Earth indeed was. Of course it wasn't. And the fact that slavery existed does not mean that human beings didn't have inherent dignity and worth by virtue of being human. It just means that people failed to realize it. They were wrong just like the flat earthers.

[homersapien 11,381]

How about the slaves and Jews who committed suicide to escape their condition?

Unjust suffering does not strip a person of their dignity.

This is religious-based mumbo jumbo. It's the same sort of thinking that would dismiss our earthly existence as being relevant at all. It is of no practical use whatsoever.

Actually that is antithetical to my thinking. I don't subscribe to gnosticism.

To use such thinking as an excuse to attenuate the effects of government tyranny - much less just flat out evil - is a disgrace.

It would be, if that's what I was doing.

I want to apologize for my term "mumbo jumbo". One could say I disrespected your dignity with those terms.

As you know, I respect your perspective even though we see things differently. Furthermore, I (think) I do understand your perspective. I think we are possibly talking past each other regarding the philosophical vs. the justification of that "value" in the application of this jurisprudential decision.

Texas Tiger did a good job of expressing my position.

[Strychnine 1,802]

While I certainly respect your opinion, what of the people that were subjugated under full force of the states' rule? While evil indeed, slavery did indeed exist, and people were indeed born into it. You may argue, correctly, that a person has dignity by virtue of being human, but where was that argument for the centuries that slavery existed as a human enterprise? What recourse did the enslaved have to reclaim or achieve their deserved dignity?

I think you are still making the error of believing that dignity and worth is something that is given to us by others, and thus it can be taken away. But if it is inherent to a person as a human being by virtue of being what they are, then no one can take it away. The fact that people for centuries kept slavery going doesn't change this. In fact, it reinforces it. The argument was always that the slave was not a person, but rather a piece of property...at best a subhuman. Thus they could pretend they had no inherent dignity and worth. After all, they aren't really people. But it was this understanding that I'm talking about that eventually caused people to rise up and seek to free them.

The problem with that is that many people (even generations of them) were born between humans making that distinction. In the meantime, slavery existed with the support of the state. Slaves that escaped were returned to slavery (or much worse). The United States itself struggled extremely with this issue. People that were born into slavery (many generations) had no concept of dignity to grasp on to. Whether the government and its support structures were acting "correctly" or even "legally" is irrelevant. The point is they (slave owners) were acting within their government accorded rights in subjugating human beings, and therefore destroying their concept of dignity. It's difficult to request or fight for dignity when your entire existence has been based on someone else literally owning you, and you were born into such an arrangement.

This would not be an issue of discussion (before, now, or later) if our predecessors had not seen fit to subjugate other human beings to their will, and not done so under force of law. In that sentence, the important part is "force of law". If no one could take "dignity" away, slavery would have never existed. Slavery revolves around the concept of being able to enslave people. How does one (or a government) enslave others?

[TitanTiger 20,485]

How about the slaves and Jews who committed suicide to escape their condition?

Unjust suffering does not strip a person of their dignity.

This is religious-based mumbo jumbo. It's the same sort of thinking that would dismiss our earthly existence as being relevant at all. It is of no practical use whatsoever.

Actually that is antithetical to my thinking. I don't subscribe to gnosticism.

To use such thinking as an excuse to attenuate the effects of government tyranny - much less just flat out evil - is a disgrace.

It would be, if that's what I was doing.

I want to apologize for my term "mumbo jumbo". One could say I disrespected your dignity with those terms.

As you know, I respect your perspective even though we see things differently. Furthermore, I (think) I do understand your perspective. I think we are possibly talking past each other regarding the philosophical vs. the justification of that "value" in the application of this jurisprudential decision.

Texas Tiger did a good job of expressing my position.

It is possible that we are talking past each other and actually share similar perspectives on most of this. Regardless of Justice Thomas' particular use of this argument, I just think it is important for us to reinforce the truth that human beings do not have worth because some government or group of people confers it on them. These things are not subject to the mere opinions of others.

[JoeBags7277 734]

People have basically repeated themselves for two pages now. Perhaps its time to remind ourselves that no one here thinks its ok for governments to enslave, torture, starve, or commit genocide and just move on.

[TexasTiger 12,915]

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/george-takei-clarence-thomas-denying-our-rights-denies-our-dignity

[TitanTiger 20,485]

Denying your rights means treating you as less than your dignity - your inherent worth - deserves. It does not mean you lose your dignity.