Does Canada have an amendment for "Cruel and unusual punishment" or something equivalent? If no, how about sentence them to crucifixion after the obligatory trial?
Fair point, but even hangings would be fine. It really just needs to be public to get the point across. Stoning is another good biblical option and I don't think anyone can call that one blasphemous.
Don't ask me. I wouldn't allow them the franchise if it were my decision to make.
The women who agree with me politically would still have their interests represented, and much more frequently than they do now while they have the false opportunity to have their voice heard. The women who disagree with me politically are the enemy, and I don't particularly care how they feel about it.
a) You did a bad job, Nincompoop Judge, so you are fired, O otherwise fine compatriot; may you do better, freed, and elsewhere.
b) You deserve to be burned at the stake, Evildoer and Tyrant, so your meat is on fire, O otherwise immortal human; may God have mercy on your thus-freed soul.
I see a judge that needs to be fired
Laws exist only to punish enemies of the regime.
...in a failed state.
In any state that exists long enough.
States, like people, can only exist so long before declining into incoherence and irrelevance.
Out of a cannon?
I’m open to that
Into a woodchipper
Sounds unfair to the volcano.
Active volcano by means of wood chipper?
If we're feeling lenient and merciful.
Does Canada have an amendment for "Cruel and unusual punishment" or something equivalent? If no, how about sentence them to crucifixion after the obligatory trial?
I’d rather not give them the dignity of a public death in the same manner as our Lord. Much cheaper and quicker to use a firing squad.
Fair point, but even hangings would be fine. It really just needs to be public to get the point across. Stoning is another good biblical option and I don't think anyone can call that one blasphemous.
Comment Reported for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Comment Removed for: Rule 2 - Violent Speech
Things like fired out of a cannon are obviously a joke. This was basically not.
The real question is: why are we still letting women be judges?
Don't ask me. I wouldn't allow them the franchise if it were my decision to make.
The women who agree with me politically would still have their interests represented, and much more frequently than they do now while they have the false opportunity to have their voice heard. The women who disagree with me politically are the enemy, and I don't particularly care how they feel about it.
Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
Comment Removed: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
This suggests women are inherently inferior at an intellectual level
It doesn't suggest it. It says it outright, Dom.
Nah. Just make a law that he's not allowed to leave his home because of the risks he poses to society.
Nope.
We're beyond (a), more toward (b)...
a) You did a bad job, Nincompoop Judge, so you are fired, O otherwise fine compatriot; may you do better, freed, and elsewhere.
b) You deserve to be burned at the stake, Evildoer and Tyrant, so your meat is on fire, O otherwise immortal human; may God have mercy on your thus-freed soul.
Speech was a pressure valve. Now we add heat.