Libertarians Like Rehnquist

Jacob Sullum | July 1, 2003

A review of the U.S. Supreme Court's last term in today's New York Times quotes Walter Dellinger, acting solicitor general in the Clinton administration, who says "this term suggested a split between two kinds of conservative Republicans."

Justices Kennedy and O'Connor "share the sensibilities of corporate Republicans, who often have a bit of a libertarian streak in them," he said, while on social issues, "Scalia and Thomas represent the Moral Majority strain, which is vocal but not necessarily dominant."

Chief Justice Rehnquist, Mr. Dellinger said, often occupies a middle position between the two groups.

By "libertarian," Dellinger seems to mean socially tolerant, since "corporate Republicans" are, if anything, less libertarian on economic issues than GOP members further to the right. But it's hard to imagine how Rehnquist, a majoritarian who is more deferential to government than any other member of the Court, could be seen as more libertarian than Scalia and Thomas in any sense of the word. In cases involving freedom of speech, property rights, and federalism, the latter two justices have repeatedly voted to limit government power.

Then, too, Dellinger seems to assume that justices have (or should have) no compunction about reading their political preferences into the Constitution. In Lawrence v. Texas, Thomas said he personally considered the sodomy ban "uncommonly silly" and would vote to repeal it if he were a legislator. But not every bad law is unconstitutional. The maddeningly vague, unmoored reasoning of the majority's opinion in Lawrence suggests the importance of this distinction, especially since the evolving standards that the Court uses to reinterpret the Constitution aren't always friendly to liberty.

Comments

|7.1.03 @ 1:36AM|#

One problem with welcoming any Supreme Court decision that strikes down a stupid or unjust law, regardless of the reasoning, is that it makes it hard to insist that the Court stick to the Constitution when a law is clearly contrary to the Framers' intent. The Court has used an "evolving standards, changing times" approach to uphold all sorts of federal encroachments under the Interstate Commerce Clause, for example, and those cases have done more damage than local tyrannies such as Texas's sodomy ban. On balance, I think, it pays to argue for a jurisprudence more closely tied to the Constitution's text and intent than the Lawrence decision was. Sometimes the result will be that states are allowed to unjustly infringe on people's freedom, but more often it will be that the federal government's power is curtailed.

|7.1.03 @ 2:04AM|#

jacob: don't forget that it is easier to overturn an unjust state law than to remedy an unjust ruling

Croesus|7.1.03 @ 2:06AM|#

Jacob Sullum,

Given your rationale, _Plessy_ ought to still be on the books, because it to be frank mirrors quite better the 14th Amendment's framers notions than does _Brown_. The court should have also upheld interracial marraige bans according to your logic as well. And the 8th Amendment's mandate would not preclude capital punishment for blasphemy (ignoring the 1st Amendment for the moment), a common offense in 18th century America, or preclude the state governments from using the typical techniques of torture common in 1791 either. To be frank, being hamstrung by the prejudices of men who have been dead for nearly two-hundred years is not the way to go. As I note before, there are lot of wacky libertarians who would be willing to sacrfice the liberty of others on the altar of "states' rights," because of some desire for ideological purity. To be frank, the dangers presented by an overactive court are far outweighed by the dangers of the governments we elect.

Croesus|7.1.03 @ 2:08AM|#

Anon @ 2:04,

Actually, it depends on the context; it was much, much easier to overturn _Plessy_ than it ever would have been to end segregation in the South via the ballot box.

jacob|7.1.03 @ 2:27AM|#

^thanks, i was just gonna say that. (or something like that, anyway.)

|7.1.03 @ 2:35AM|#

Frankly, Croesus, I'm not certain it would have been quite as impossible as you suggest. It is of course difficult to know, but it's not completely unreasonable to suppose that attitudes would have shifted anyway. You fail to recognize the importance of the "culture of honor" that exists in the South. All the insults and threats from the North were bound to make most Southerners only more obstinate about segregation. For a lot of Southerners, "states' rights" did have a real meaning-- not a technical legal or philosophical one, but more in a sense of "defending ourselves against a bunch of Yankees insulting us and telling us what to do."

Having one's honor insulted will make a man do stupid things, especially in the South.

Mr. Sullum, thank you for expressing my own dissatisfaction with the decision. A Court which claims that rights shift with public opinion is dangerous, because public opinion can shift in many ways, not all of them protective of rights.

GR|7.1.03 @ 2:36AM|#

Stephen Fetchet:
OK, since I'm more of a minarchist than a pure anarchist I'll clarify my statement so you won't make such interesting conclusions.

"i consider liberty the absence of laws that take away personal and economic freedoms, so regardless of how or why anyone gets rid of a law of that nature, i see that as being friendly to liberty."

better?

and, as i said before...i'm talking about the end result not the process. this nit-picky federalism really makes me sigh. I agree with Croesus on this:
"As I note before, there are lot of wacky libertarians who would be willing to sacrfice the liberty of others on the altar of "states' rights," because of some desire for ideological purity."

personally, i could care less who makes the damn laws (feds, states, local, etc), i just want government's role in my life minimized. it seems like moving the problem from one spot to another really doesn't solve anything. especially when the only check you are going to put on local laws is mob opinion. that sounds even more dangerous than what exists today.

|7.1.03 @ 3:05AM|#

When the libertarian revolution comes, liberals like me will do just fine in a low-intensity reeducation center and a lower management job in a small business. Those of you who are a slightly wrong shade of libertoid, however, will end up making tie dye in a gulag somewhere.

Thomas|7.1.03 @ 3:10AM|#

GR, I'm not sure I follow you. Most legislation, it seems to me, doesn't create new 'law' in the sense you mean. For example, think of the employment relationship. Today, that relationship is subject to extensive regulation--wages, conditions, etc. In the past, however, there was still law on those subjects. There has always been 'law' on the subject of what a person must be paid as a wage--it's just now the minimum is dictated by the state.

It may seem a pedantic point, but in some cases it makes it easier to see that rights are simply being shifted around.

Croesus|7.1.03 @ 3:24AM|#

John Thacker,

The South had to be dragged kicking and screaming into modernity - partly by the courts. Why do you think black people used the court system the way they did? That is the NAACP and other groups? Because it was a political power outside of the South which could be used topple Dixie. The Scottsboro Boys case is a perfect example of this. Nine young men (most under the age of 18 at the time they were arrested) were given drumhead's court justice by a racist Alabama court system, and the only thing that saved them from the hangmen's noose was the actions of the SCOTUS, which mandated not only that they had to receive adequate counsel, but that the jury system could not exclude black jurors as it had since the time the Redemption governments came to power in the 1870s.

As far as a "culture of honor" is concerned, I don't see much that is honorable about a system which treats other human beings as sub-humans, and mandates that they play a secondary role in society on political, economic and other levels no matter what their talents are.

BTW, if getting the racist Southern governments to change their minds about civil and political rights was so easy, why did every Southern government when faced with change over a thirty period (the civil rights movement starts in the 1930s after all, so its not like they didn't have time to "adjust") go down swinging?

What really pisses me off is the fucked up assumption that we should have simply allowed the Southern governments to continue to evolve slowly over time, when every day they existed was an affront to liberty. GR I suspect that you are White, and that the only way you could make such an horrifying argument is because you've never felt the sting of racist oppression. Like I said earlier, many libertarians seem to willing to sacrifice the liberties of others on the altar of states' rights.

GR|7.1.03 @ 3:37AM|#

Croesus:

why are you attacking me when i was agreeing with you.

was that a typo??

Croesus|7.1.03 @ 3:39AM|#

GR,

Whoops. I meant John Thacker. Sorry dude. I went a little apoplectic there. :)

|7.1.03 @ 4:40AM|#

Now I'm confused. Is GR the cracker or is John Thacker?

|7.1.03 @ 5:13AM|#

Jacob is correct that we are better off, on balance, with a court that limits itself to applying the Constitution as written. Judges, like the odious O'Connor, who believe it is their role to reflect "emerging political consensus" or somesuch claptrap are exceedingly dangerous to liberty.

These judges can all too easily be sold on positive "rights" that result in infringements on the liberty of the rest of us. For example, the closure of male sports programs through Title IX, the infringement on speech and association of "hostile workplace" doctrines, and the entire discriminatory edifice of affirmative action, are almost entirely the result of judicial activism with little to no textual support in statute or, needless to say, the Constitution. One can multiply examples of judicial legislation by activist judges that result in a reduction of liberty ad infinitum.

I find it incredible that purported libertarians would fall into the trap of supporting judicial activism just because, today, it resulted in a decision you like. This contravenes the basic rule of libertarianism - keep the government's powers limited because someday your enemies will wield those powers.

Kevin Carson|7.1.03 @ 6:30AM|#

GR:

The worst the SC and other federal courts can do is NOT nothing. Ever hear of an injunction? There are some school districts, like Little Rock's for instance, where more policy is made by the courts than by the school board. Right now, the Arkansas Supreme Court has effectually turned the state into one big school district run by the legislature, based on a state constitutional guarantee of equity in school funding. Don't you think W's "Leave No Child's Behind Untouched" act presents similar potential for using placing local schools under direct court supervision?

And don't even get me started on the role of court injunctions in labor disputes.

Croesus|7.1.03 @ 6:43AM|#

T Hartin,

"For example, the closure of male sports programs through Title IX..."

There would be no Title IX w/o the US Congress.

"...the infringement on speech and association of "hostile workplace" doctrines"

Wouldn't be any of that without a right to sue created by the US Congress.

"...and the entire discriminatory edifice of affirmative action..."

Again, Congress and the state legislatures created AA, and the courts ruled that it was Constitutional under some circumstances. Without the actions of the Congress, etc. it wouldn't exist. Should I call you clueless?

I'm not a libertarian.

Kevin,

Seems to me you have even less to complain about, given that you have described the court's decision being ground in your own state's constitution. If you don't want equity in funding, it seems that a state consitutional amendment is in order.

Croesus|7.1.03 @ 6:45AM|#

joe,

He he he - you are absolutely correct. A libertarian revolution and the "political order" that would follow would mirror the "revolution eating itself" that occurred in the USSR and Revolutionary France. :)

|7.1.03 @ 8:15AM|#

Although there is some unfortunate language in the Lawrence opinion, the ultimate holding does not seem to me to do violence to the Constitution. As Glenn Reynolds has argued in several published papers, there is historical support for an interpretation of the Constitution that permits certain powers to be reserved to the people through the Ninth Amendment, whether or not there is any actual text supporting the right in the Constitution.

It is an unfortunate byproduct of the Bill of Rights that the enumeration of those rights was implied to mean there were no others, and Legislatures (either state or Federal) could restrict liberty when it felt like it. It is entirely consistent with the Constitution to hold that a right of privacy is a power reserved to the people except when the Constitution explicitly delegates power to the government to regulate that liberty in certain limited ways.

Viewed in that context, the right of privacy that was expanded in Lawrence is not an invitation to an activist court to rewrite the Constitution to restrict liberty. Instead, it is a recognition that the framers intended through the Ninth Amendment to leave broad powers to the individual to act as he pleases.

Viewed in this way, Lawrence and its progeny simply stand for the proposition that the majoritarian view that the Constitution generally should not interfere with the Legislative process at the state level (permitting tyrannies in the name of States Rights) is inconsistent with the powers reserved to the individual.

There is a strong element of Natural Law to this argument, which was certainly a prevalent strain of legal thought in eighteenth century America. Thus, although I can respect Justice Thomas' position, I am not convinced that the libertarian response to that position should be disappointment at the process, even though the result is consistent with libertarian ends.

GR|7.1.03 @ 11:25AM|#

i guess it depends on what you consider liberty. as i said in a separate post, do you consider liberty to be your ability to limit the freedom of others by criminalizing their actions?

i consider liberty the absence of laws, so regardless of how or why anyone gets rid of a law, i see that as being friendly to liberty.

perhaps it's not friendly to process, but that is a separate argument.

let's think about this...
every year, legistlative branches meet and pass more and more laws. this means that every year the citizens of the US are less free than they were the year before.

do the legislative branches ever meet for the purpose of reducing the number of laws restricting the freedoms of the people they represent? i've never heard of this happening, especially not on a regular basis.

so, what branch of government is the only one that regularly meets with the purpose of deciding whether a law limiting the freedom of US citizens should exist? the Supreme Court. the worst thing the SC could do is uphold a law that already exists...they cannot spontaneously generate laws. Therefore, they can only keep our level of freedom the same (uphold the law), or increase freedom by limiting/throwing out laws. so, their effect on freedom is only 0 or a positive number, never a negative. Therefore, this is the only branch of government that makes us a freer people each year.

know your enemy.

JM|7.1.03 @ 12:01PM|#

GR, wait until Bush nominees get onto the court, your net 0 to positive rating will plummet like the stock market.

GR|7.1.03 @ 12:15PM|#

please elaborate if you think this is true. your statement doesn't really carry much weight.

the only foreseeable way this could happen is to uphold a law that is unconstitutional, no?

my argument is simply that there cannot be a "tyranny" of the SC since some other "majority" (whether public or legislative) was the root cause of the problem by having the law(s) passed in the first place. so, the worst thing the SC can do is nothing.

Stephen Fetchet|7.1.03 @ 12:18PM|#

>>i consider liberty the absence of laws, so
>>regardless of how or why anyone gets rid of
>>a law, i see that as being friendly to liberty.

So then GR, Rwanda, Afghanistan, and Liberia, which have gotten rid of all laws, are the truest expressions of human liberty in the world?

And I guess machete-fueled genocide is okay with you, too.

Of course I'm giving short shrift to Cuba, North Korea and China, where there are supposedly laws on the books, but everybody knows that there are no laws, only the whims of the oligarchs.

So which social philosopher provides your organizing theories - Rousseau, Hobbes, or both?

|7.1.03 @ 12:22PM|#

GR,

Bussing. Not taking a side here. Just sayin'.

jacob|7.1.03 @ 12:58PM|#

GR; remember that there are situations where a particular law is not universal, but rather just in a few states, that the SC upholds in such a way that all states have to have that law. The bush nominees aren't necessarily bad; they cerainly will be better than the Sandra O'Connor vote, particularly if it happens to be Alberto Gonzales, who is a good guy.

Mona|7.2.03 @ 1:37AM|#

"Viewed in that context, the right of privacy that was expanded in Lawrence is not an invitation to an activist court to rewrite the Constitution to restrict liberty. Instead, it is a recognition that the framers intended through the Ninth Amendment to leave broad powers to the individual to act as he pleases."

Codswollop. No one is less friendly to anti-gay laws than I am, but this bending and reaching to pretend that _Lawrence_ is anything but raw judicial power that secures a result we happen to very much like, is most unseemly coming from libertarians, who generally are possessed of a high degree of intellectual honesty. (Indeed, I think it is one of our defining characteristics.)

Sodomy was a felony at common law when the BOR, including the 9th Amendment, was adopted. Neither the drafters nor the ratifiers REMOTELY understood themselves to be creating a legal aparatus for abolishing that felony. I'd like to see that done however -- properly -- and so would ardently support an amdnement adding a privacy right for all consensual behavior between or among adults (includuing the right to ingest, inject or or inhale any susbtance we like). But that principle does not honestly reside in the document we have now. Period.

If ANY current outrage would tempt me to welcome judicial activism and an erstaz right to privacy, it would be the war on drugs. That obscenity is destroying lives and the 4th Amenendment, as well as property and other rights. But we won't see that happen, because the word "drugs" causes judges to contract liberties, notwithstanding the clear purpose of the 4th Am. But homosexuals currently enjoy favor among the intellectual class, so a small outrage (in comparison) like that TX statute gets deep-sixed while we continue to lock folks up for acting as if they should be able to decide what chemicals should go into their own bodies. Whatever all this is, it has nothing to do with an honest jurisprudence; it is pure faddishness. It is still chic to revile drugs and those who use and sell them, but homophobia is no longer something the well-educated wish to be associated with -- that is a desireable social trend, but how does it constitute jurisprudence?

And finally, Sullum is correct: embrace Lawrence, and I'd like to see the principled argument that the Supremes err when they eviscerate the 10th Am and turn the Commerce Clause into a carte blanche for federal power.

|7.2.03 @ 12:12PM|#

"Sodomy was a felony at common law when the BOR, including the 9th Amendment, was adopted. Neither the drafters nor the ratifiers REMOTELY understood themselves to be creating a legal aparatus for abolishing that felony." Yes, Mona, and marital rape was not a felony - a husband had the right to demand sex from his wife, and take it by force if necessary. Do you have a Constitutional objection to the new and improved understanding of rape laws? Why do you insist that our legal system has to be trapped in the ignorance of prejudices of people who died before my great-grandparents were born? The Constitution doesn't, for example, say "cruel and unusual (as we writing the document understand the terms) punishment..." Public hangings were not considered cruel back then.

We need to drop the Ouija Board routine, and apply the timeless principles of the Constitution in the only way we mere mortals can - through our own knowledge and experience.

Tritter Michael|9.10.04 @ 12:25AM|#

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 68.173.7.113
URL: http://mail-order-pharmacy.drugsexperts.com
DATE: 01/09/2004 05:46:16
He who wishes to secure the good of others has already secured his own.

Davidov Veronica|9.10.04 @ 12:25AM|#

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 218.27.89.146
URL: http://preteen-sex.info
DATE: 05/19/2004 04:26:29
My father never raised his hand to any one of his children, except in self-defense.

|2.4.05 @ 2:20AM|#

Another name of the Japanese history is Kojiki ( = the beggar, the homeless.).

That they are doing is only to steal with dancing with making noise, now.

(Japanese-Windows-Hotmail)

Warning !

Mail of help　 　 　　Dear Head of the country
You can be God by Hacking to Server !
It's almost PARADISE !
Believe me ! or you must regret forever ! It's terrorism ! You are controlled by radio wave unconsciously sent by Japanese-hacker(Taka-tsukasa (Duke)).
Your consideration is a thing sent by radio wave at your skull, nerve network(= antenna). You can control the anybody's brain wave(= consideration. emotion. speech. action. secretion) by radio wave, even make girls go to rut.(real) The theory is like a crystal radio set, a string telephone.【a(loud)speaker = a microphone. an antenna = a radio wave sending instrument. Telephone Server and TV is listening to your speech and action by radio wave come out from TV when it is ON. Make noise and sound in it not to stop the autorecording. Switch it on and off by a timer during your absence. Telephone Server is listening to your voice when the line is not dead, and watching your position when the telephone is ON. Computer Server is watching and operating your computer. Password is not effective. Mailbox has no lock. Submarine cable and Artificial satellite can relay it to the hacker in other country. It maybe written by Java. Every PC-System is only a rule of word like a law.】
It makes two marionettes have a conversation, fight and run on a rail. So they are felt like being keep watched perfectly and cannot run away. All Japanese and the head of Korea Russia China USA are the same. Even Communist Party, too (If they had declared off the USSR, it might be found out in more early time. Everything is a drama to make the racist, economist, politician obey their aim "My Soft and Secret Paradise". The election is so, too. It's a fiction by PC.). Sadam, Sendelo were so, too. They obeyed to be killed. The race of the development of nuclear armament and the power struggle bought time of you. The future of your country and you are a slave, which eats the same tribe like a puppet government of a colony. Teach them this for you ! Certainly, it is probably difficult to retrieve their brain wave. But it gets worse and worse. Ｉｔ's only a few person. It occures big change. Hurry up ! Try it ! Or you must regret forever. Send them various frequency of radio wave,　and check their reaction. Even if it is difficult to control their motion, you can put them to sleep at least. Please understand and realize ! for you and every mankind, if you can be unmanipulated.
We need a law ( = When the person who obstructs the other person, makes the person unfortunate by the law. For example, a murder and a damage case. Punish a criminal. Make it impossible to obstruct the other person. Even if someone obstructs, the victim to have obstructed make not unfortunately. To secure the life of the whole nation ( = guarantee a minimum income and marriage.). Like a social security system and an insurance system.)
They continue to order however they don't find whether or not they should do. They fear to lose the leadership. They, too, can not expect when they become a victim. There is No security for them, too.
And we need a absorbing matter of radio wave.　Have a helmet(mask) of it and cover your house with it ! Cut the every network with them ! Crush the spider ! Control the Server ! Please kill them, now ! Or you be done ! Put the blame for it on others ! Then, everything is OK. Nobody blame you for it. Anybody will give support to you. Kill them ! Believe me ! or you must keep on smiling in the bed disturbed and in the bathroom watched by their camera named sensor(Look at Toride building in Japan = Their paradise.). Believe me ! I want to help you (and me). Please understand ! You are being stolen one after another. Your country will be stolen everything, can say nothing (money, woman, liberty). Why are you bringing up the Devil which eats up you, like a spider, thief, Damian？Don't listen to their voice. Don't look at their dance and face and TV and news. Think nothing ! Kill them ! They have nothing ! So they must dance to deceive you. They use a complicated language to conceal the fact that they have nothing. They do so, to deceive you !
Don't play money-game. They are A controlled trap. Don't be deceived ! It's a lie ! How stupid you are ! Wake up ! Break off business relations with them ! All their money and what they have is what was stolen from your country by them. They steal it saying "I don't want it.", and kill you saying "I help you.". Don't give them ! Because they think it for their power. They never thanks ! They repay kindness with evil ! Wake up ! Their figure is ugly because they are Devil which crush and curse each other. So they cannot do even sleeping in soft bed. Devil lives not in Mars but in the edge of the earth, Japan. (Why do you pay so much for CG？for thief？) Kill them ! Make a big inflation ! Then, they will lose the money, much income from interests, and many mistress. There is no wrong for laborer. Don't forget USSR killed by Japanese-hacker for joy. The half of Japanese is disappeared by radio wave in 50 years with smile, saying "Thanks,　I won Korea, Russia, China, USA. We are the champion ! ", in hell of lash with writhe･･･It's falling together with your country. They are a descendant of a farm thief.　So they could live just in Asia. Domestic animal is hard to rob. They have created nothing for 13 centuries. All they have done is disturbing, fraud, theft. Now, too ! Greedy Devil ! Only misery of others is their pleasure. They follow only a lash. They can understand only an instinctive feeling.
For example, it is a pain and a pleasure and so on. Bury them alive ! It's the best way to make a peace and make you happy. They will say thank you. Not Sadam, Not North Korea, But they are Devil ! Iraq　is their TV-game. Don't look at it ! They live in Japan because safety and enjoyable. It's their PARADISE ! If you meet them, say "SINE" for you and them, keep on disturbing and complaining, while say them "MANE (=It's following your way.)". And if you can, kill them, now ! Every Japanese will say "Thank you for your help.", even if they vanish. You have the power for it, no time to hesitate !
Believe me ! Believe me ! Kill them ! Kill them ! NOW !
They will make a toy of you all year long. They are not God. They are the expert of computer only.
Believe me ! I do anything I can do and give you all I have For it. Believe me ! This is your future. I am your future. Believe me ! Save who hits you, but he will help you.
Please help you and me ! I am Marquis.

(Copy and distribute and Exhibit on your web for the fine balance of force, by free.)

Rising sun？No ! Look ! Falling Sun ! more and more･･･for pleasure･･･in hell･･･with you !

To Japanese, value of human is that of chicken scraped. Believe me !

TV, phone, PC → Server → Hacker → Server → your hed, mail, PC

Hednism !


You will not want to believe this. It's OK. I, too, was so for a long time. No one tries to ask me the name of the hacker. They don't know what to do if he knows it.





≪≪≪The claim≫≫≫

The mail of the help

●●●●●let's believe ! ●●●●●

Let's distribute to all over the world !

This is Japan !
Japan is dominated by them.

① The eternal noble who depends on the interest rate.
As for the foreign currency deposit with stuck expensive interest rate, too, it is burdened with the tax of Japan.
( The tariff of the company is about 50 % )
The person who concerned the bank by the financial transactions pays the half of.
If moving it to another bank account by a little, the inheritance tax, too, is unnecessary.

② The hacker---Extraordinary in the steal by the unjust approaching to a server, the hacking.

The electric wave goes out of the TV.
speaker = mike TV = A cell phone

A cell phone = the present location, sending e-mail, a photograph, are seen by them.
It is possible to send an order. It is possible to hear.

It operates the PC in the Internet and it is extraordinary.
It corrects the record of the automatic recording.
Make the noise during ON.

TV, phone, PC make a triplet by the server in the phone company
貞 "sada" = The ring → OFF !

Change it to the auto printing type and it is possible to search single shot.
The brain is a wire circuit → electric wave ⇔ electric current.

③ To be troublesome, the fraud, the thieving, and the making take off and commiting a woman,
they do only them.
Always trying to show themself strongly and god.

As for the present situation, only they are free.
It is not to be free, is reckless.

All they do is the obstacle, the destruction, the undress !
Hedonists =The devil
The armor of the law is being broken by them.
Keep a law ! If it is not･･･
Tomoko who waits in Island (Matsushima Tomoko) She is bitten by the lion. It's you.

We all are defended by the law.
The income, the safety, the service and the status, all of the others
It leaves in 6 laws, 生国厚健労雇, which breaks 666. ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・ Now, writing.



◆ The mass communication is increasing a starved man, by interfering with woman's dreaming of the marriage.
( Evidence: As for the actor in Japan, all faces are bad ).
→ Because it makes a profit because it is easy to make take off a woman, it is easy to commit her, it is profitable and they are glad.
It is the hoodlum who throws away the money that the country worked by the processing trade to the foreign country by mass consumption.
（ The sponsor and they = The casino sales person who is only making noise. The destroyer. The child of the sponger. ）
They are only making the atmosphere that they are strong and right !
Because they make a profit when they are in the many crime !

Because it is possible to be seen, that they who are saying the abuse of the criminal are right and then being strong.
At money, it is doing the liking and extraordinary thing.
The paradise !
By the law, it should regulate !
→ It should assume that the sex at the thing except the subscribed bawdy house and all exposure of the skin are a rape charge and an obscenity charge !
Moreover, to do them is enough at the divorce woman !
Let's make them an official !
Even if it becomes sick, let's make be guaranteed !
Islam which is supported all over the world.
( The man, too, Long skirt = the turban = can live on the desert if doing attentively ).
It is to make it not be possible to have crowds of lemen !
It is to decrease the criminal and the hacker as glad that it obstructs a man because it has crowds of lemen by obstructs !
It is to make the whole nation equal !
Not to be taken by the foreigner, is the only excusing of them !
Now isn't important how the person thinks, already !
･･･ because all isn't moving in his will.
･･･ because the tripper seeks a temporary partner.
The man with the much marriage number of times is should impose a heavy tax !




Only that the mass communication, too, continues to pursue its pleasure is in the head.
They are ･･･ while pretending to do a good man.
First, they makes take off a woman at the model fee of 5,000,000 yen, and next they threatens her using it, and makes her appear on the sex video by 500,000 yen.
Next, it is ･･･ by 50,000 yen.
This is a famous trick.
The profit of the creating supplier continues forever.
The successful pornography actress is the successful man who was made to deceive a lot of ignorant girls and their parents.

The victim has no choice but to be laughing.
Because it is afraid of ･･･ to seem to be the person who doesn't have luck.
In other words the person who was abandoned in the hacker.

They put a camera to the compartment at the lavatory.
They are ･･･ saying it is a sensor while deceiving people.
The general public can not do in the distinction of the sensor and the camera and so on.
The ones such as the sensor are unnecessary completely.
If being not to make use a restroom, it should not make restroom itself.
It is the excusing to put a camera, to be false.
The facility supplier in the civilian tells a lie willingly for a little profits and pleasure.
The administrator in the public facilities is thinking only of trying to make there only his paradise.
Only the person who has power is happy.

It is a paradise for them.

◆ The one to seem a camera like the sensor at the locker room and the restroom and to make feel anxiety should think as the flagrante delicto of the crimes of threatening !
→ At all, let's do a complaint and an arraignment to the Public Prosecutor's Office ! ( by the letter is OK )
Or, let's file a suit to the court !

Let's do the report every day from the public telephone !
Because it has understood who is the owner when using a cell phone.

The power of the majority vote = the association and the general meeting

There is not authority which judges it in the police !
To do it becomes an official authority misappropriation sin !
The Criminal Procedure Code.
Let's publish their address and name to the style that it isn't possible to do a selfish thing !
Only the person who want to become a policeman in such condition, let's admit to become a policeman !
Consequential !
The official is the public server of the people chosen people task ! It is an entrusting contract on the civil law.
⇒ It is free originally !
The difference between the government service and the people overflows !
◆もともと女性は、男性ホルモンが・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・Now, writing.

To grumble is said as frivolous.
It is because the hearing person is troublesome.
It is because he wants to do to be easy.
It is running about trying to escape from the thing where the immediateness is troublesome for all.
It tries to move around to the side which seems as strong as possible, the side which it seems that is as easy as possible.
It is ･･･ while thinking only of stealing existing one.

Victims are killed by devil being called a god and smile.
If continuing to strike the person who is in from the outside at the jail with the lash, the person do bloodshed each other in it.
It is because the person who is in seeks morphine.
It seeks the relative superiority complex which can be easily gotten by the immediate victim.

They are telling for all men to die silently.
It is thinking only of all immediate pleasures.
Only the person who could get status by good fortune can get high pay and is happy.
They are dropping an immediate person on the hell for a little pleasure.
The person of the blood type of A has such a tendency specifically.
They die while they are glad about the misfortune of the person.
They can forget even in their misfortune by the misfortune of a stranger.
In other words, the group commits suicide.
In the Europe, the thing that the developed time of the law, the welfare and the ethnology ( the Bible ) was early will be one of the reasons.
Because the consideration circuit is simple, the O person is thinking only of wining in the atmosphere.
All of they die while they make them cool.
It is just like to the style of the hell's angel and the soldier.
Therefore, no one wakens to the present situation.
It likes for the person of AB to be riding a wind in the singleness.
The person of B is very disadvantageous status.
It is because the instinctive greed is strong and an animal they like-ly, and moreover they have an imagination and they are an equalitarianism.

The Buddhism is the trap which India floated down.
It is a revenge on the rice ( the U.S. ) thief.
To make them do bloodshed.

It loses life if knowing an enemy and knowing you.

There is not a father.

In the Buddhism, no father lets me know.
Because it is killed when saying what it is.
Nothing is written in the scripture, too.
It uses a character like the cryptography and only the appearance is excellent.
Even what it is saying is unclear.
Rather, it is saying that you die silently.
The father brandishes a stick.
It beats a head ( the wooden drum ) and it intimidates neighborhood.
In Shorin-ji, the father does a fight and is doing a person by the beating to death.
It shaves a hair off by itself and it becomes an appearance like the skeleton, it recommends a fast and it is devil itself.
All is dreaming a dream.
It is a foolish crowd !
To escape from the pain, it is immersed to the pleasure of morphine.
All has an ugly face.
The body to crush each other !
They are the devil who left livestock in exchange for the bean.
All is being upset.
They call the criminal ( the hacker ) who kills us a god.


In Japan the sales person in the department and the supermarket think that it is permitted to put a poison in the food if he sells at the half price.
Though it is illegal that they do the one package sale which put a condition, they do it because it is glad because the superiority complex can be noticed.
Policeman do nothing because they want to be easy. Because it is easier to support to the strong side.
Rather, they seem to glad about the misfortune of the person.

It's a novel, you hope.