(September 3, 2015 at 12:05 pm)abaris Wrote:

(September 3, 2015 at 12:02 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: For those judicial positions that are filled by elections, the winner could be a fast food cook and serve. It's about the number of votes received. The candidate actually knowing anything about the law is often a bonus.

That's what I suspected according to my limited informations on the system. And that's what I was afraid to hear. So, basically, a burger flipper could make life or death decisions.

In principle, yes. However, the check built into the system is the appeals process, in which you don't have to go far up the ladder before you run into a judge, or panel of judges, who actually do know something about the law.

Still, it's always seemed perverse and deeply stupid to leave any judicial position up to a vote, as if we were electing just another county commissioner or city alderman. Think of how ignorant the average voter is about issues that get discussed 24/7 on the cable news outlets. Now think about the likelihood that these same voters will have anything other than a cartoonish idea of the law based on what little they remember from high school civics classes and what they glean from television cop/court procedurals. It's scary.

Do we even know if this is a Christian couple trying to get a divorce?

When my husband and I got a divorce, my lawyer fucked me over. I gave him a piece of my mind. I'd do the same fucking thing if a judge tried to deny a divorce at all. My ex-husband was an asshole, and sure it COULD have worked out. If my fucking husband had stopped fucking other women, and not coming home for days at a time. (I actually didn't give a fuck about the cheating, but him being away from home for days at a time was not shit I was willing to put up with) Of course I'd probably also get held in contempt of court. Not sure you can call a judge the names I would have used.

Surely there's a requirement to run for judge? I mean that'd be pretty fucking stupid. My daughter-in-law is a defense attorney, and she spent a fuck ton of years in college, which put her and my son in crazy amounts of debt. And all she needed to do was run for judge? How do people not know how fucking stupid that sounds?

Yes, there are requirements for trial judges.

Quote:Qualifications
To serve on any of the trial courts, a judge must be:

• authorized to practice law in state;
  
• a district resident for at least 1 year;
  
• a state resident 5 years; and
  
• at least 30 years old.[1]
  

Fr. wiki

They are elected in partisan elections which means this fucker is starting his "campaign" for his next term among the hillbilly assholes in Tennessee.

Judges in what... two states aren't elected, but appointed?

What the fuck! I mean that's fucking stupid. The requirements help a little, but still. Justice is supposed to be fucking blind, not political bullshit.

We're supposed to have seperation of church and state too, but it's gotten so far that people legitimately believe this country was founded on christian principles.

(September 3, 2015 at 11:39 am)Chad32 Wrote: Yeah, that's bullshit. Marriage hasn't changed. It's still consenting adults signing a binding contract. Divorce hasn't changed either.

ARE YOU CRAZY?! IT'S ALL CHANGED!

BUTT STUFF IS SCARY!!!</sarcasm>

(September 3, 2015 at 12:05 pm)abaris Wrote:

(September 3, 2015 at 12:02 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: For those judicial positions that are filled by elections, the winner could be a fast food cook and serve. It's about the number of votes received. The candidate actually knowing anything about the law is often a bonus.

That's what I suspected according to my limited informations on the system. And that's what I was afraid to hear. So, basically, a burger flipper could make life or death decisions.

In reality, it doesn't happen that way. I mean, you could as easily argue that a burger-flipper could be elected president; the only two qualifications are that he or she be 35 years old, and be a natural-born citizen of the USA.

Not to say that there aren't incompetents and assholes in the mix -- there obviously are -- but that things like endorsements from the ABA and such can and do tip judiciary elections, which generally have fewer votes cast.

That...that just makes no sense. I mean...

(September 3, 2015 at 12:22 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(September 3, 2015 at 12:05 pm)abaris Wrote: That's what I suspected according to my limited informations on the system. And that's what I was afraid to hear. So, basically, a burger flipper could make life or death decisions.

In principle, yes. However, the check built into the system is the appeals process, in which you don't have to go far up the ladder before you run into a judge, or panel of judges, who actually do know something about the law.

Still, it's always seemed perverse and deeply stupid to leave any judicial position up to a vote, as if we were electing just another county commissioner or city alderman. Think of how ignorant the average voter is about issues that get discussed 24/7 on the cable news outlets. Now think about the likelihood that these same voters will have anything other than a cartoonish idea of the law based on what little they remember from high school civics classes and what they glean from television cop/court procedurals. It's scary.

But isn't that expensive? If you are already a low income person-maybe an abused spouse- how are you going to afford to keep making appeals? You are right, that is scary.

(September 3, 2015 at 1:44 pm)Nope Wrote:

(September 3, 2015 at 12:22 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: In principle, yes. However, the check built into the system is the appeals process, in which you don't have to go far up the ladder before you run into a judge, or panel of judges, who actually do know something about the law.

Still, it's always seemed perverse and deeply stupid to leave any judicial position up to a vote, as if we were electing just another county commissioner or city alderman. Think of how ignorant the average voter is about issues that get discussed 24/7 on the cable news outlets. Now think about the likelihood that these same voters will have anything other than a cartoonish idea of the law based on what little they remember from high school civics classes and what they glean from television cop/court procedurals. It's scary.

But isn't that expensive? If you are already a low income person-maybe an abused spouse- how are you going to afford to keep making appeals? You are right, that is scary.

In the U.S., one gets all the justice one can afford.