Recent content by JudgeRightly

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...

Exactly. My position is internally consistent, which is why your objections keep running into the same distinction. If that same distinction answers you through judges, venue, civil disobedience, “rule of law,” legal recompense, and constitutional enforcement, then maybe it is not a dodge or...

I understand the angle, but abdication is not really the point under dispute. If the king voluntarily abdicates, explicitly or by some unmistakable public act, then the throne is vacant and the succession process begins. That is not especially controversial. But Clete’s proposal, as I...

Here's where we're at: Unanswered questions so far, including those raised by your proposed solution: What does “subject to law” mean? Does it mean bound by the law as a standard? Or does it mean under a superior domestic authority or court? Status: Still not sufficiently answered. The king...

Because you keep resetting the discussion without advancing your points in response to what I say. It is not as though I want my posts to be this long. They get long because I am trying to answer what you say, preserve the necessary distinctions, and prevent you from collapsing those...

Worth the watch: Full video:

Right. If the constitution itself explains where jurisdiction terminates, then that answers the jurisdiction question. And that is exactly why I keep pointing back to the actual structure of Enyart’s proposed Constitution. It does not merely say “the law is supreme” in the abstract. It creates...

With that all said, here's where we're at so far, Clete: What does “subject to law” mean: bound by law, or under a superior domestic authority? Partial answer: “same legal standard.” Sufficient? No. This answers “bound by law as a standard,” but not whether the king is under a superior...

You sure about that? Directly from the constitution page: The Judiciary [B P]: Judges serve by the will of the King to enforce America’s Constitution, Criminal Code [B P] and her Code of Use. The Monarch appoints up to ten men as judges, who each appoint up to ten men as judges beneath them...

No, Clete, I am not making the “kill all the lawyers” argument against law, judges, legal standards, or checks and balances. I am arguing against one specific kind of “check”: a domestic legal mechanism by which subordinate men may depose the highest earthly civil authority. You say the...

No one said it was. Then their choice could not be infallibly known by God beforehand as a settled fact before they made it. Again, no one said it is. Correct. Which means they could not have done otherwise. And if they could not have done otherwise, then their non-repentance was not a...

@Clete The points I'm making are not just me not seeing your position. They have been thought about for centuries, millennia even. This video by Christian Heiens is not necessarily on the topic of monarchy, but he makes several relevant points to this discussion. Also, this video by Nick...