Recent content by JudgeRightly

The Journal.ie piece critiques Pearson's 2019 extrapolation to 250k as flawed (mixing broad CSE with specific gang cases + hotspot bias). Fair enough on the math. Extrapolations have limits, and official reviews admit exact national totals are hard due to poor data. But that's not a debunk of...

I think what RD is trying to say is, "how do you get from those verses, to your claims he quoted?"

But is he facing towards or away from the chart?

No it doesn't. Yes, thats what we said to you. Does Polly want a cracker now? Again, no one said it was. Calling it a modal fallacy does not make it one. Which premise are you rejecting? If God infallibly foreknew before they existed that they would not repent, could they repent? If...

No, it wasn't. You're making this way more difficult than it has to be. It's a simple yes or no question about your principles. Fine, different question: are the king and the judges coordinate offices under the law, each with distinct authority and jurisdiction? In other words, neither office...

That's not what I asked. Are the judges and the king under the law in principle?

Are judges and kings under the law?

If judges have final say over whether the king remains king, then they are sovereign over the kingship, whatever else you may call it. They may not be sovereign over every royal function, but they are sovereign over his continued possession of the office. That's the contradiction I've been...

How does authority flow, Clete? From top to bottom, yes? From God, to government, to men?

I still think that, because you have not convinced me otherwise. That is exactly why I am asking you, yet again, to demonstrate that I am wrong. There is nothing contradictory about saying, “I think your proposal fails on principle,” and then asking you to specify the proposal so that the...

There is nothing contradictory about saying, “I think your proposal falls into a dilemma,” and then asking you to specify the proposal so that the dilemma can be tested. Correct. I am skeptical of your position. The onus probandi is on you to convince me otherwise. "Onus probandi incumbit ei...

My contention is that once you specify the mechanism, it will either be too weak to restrain the king or strong enough to become the real final earthly authority. “Narrow jurisdiction,” “high evidentiary standard,” “limited removable offenses,” “defined triggering process,” and “defined...

Sure, history is replete with wicked kings, wicked heirs, and corrupt dynasties. But history is not replete with nations governed by anything like this proposed Constitution. Most historical monarchies were pagan kingdoms, Catholic kingdoms, divine-right absolutist systems, hereditary power...

And the HPT. Let me take a different approach here. As itchy as I am to respond to the many things you said in your post here, I'm going to refrain. Let's say I grant you your position. Let’s say the king needs a lawful removal mechanism. Let’s say civil disobedience is not enough. Let’s...

Which is my point exactly! Clete has it in his head that a wicked king is not only possible, but guaranteed within a short period of time, and not only that, but that his wickedness (which his heir will apparently also follow in his footsteps) will destroy the nation within a generation or two...