07-13-2014, 05:33 PM | #1 |
Problematic Fave
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
|
Nix vs. Hedden (1893) mock debate
The Debate forum has been boring lately. Let's spice it up.
I won't reveal the details of the case in just the opening post, but Nix vs. Hedden (1893) is one of the more important Supreme Court decisions from history. I'd like to see your take on it now, over a hundred years later, and any justifications or rationales behind the logic of either side. Begin!
__________________
|
07-13-2014, 06:05 PM | #2 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
Well I mean, 'vegetable' is a meaningless term as far as botany goes, it's a culinary thing. Given that you almost universally use tomatoes as a vegetable, they're vegetables. Seeds aren't relevant to that.
|
07-13-2014, 07:15 PM | #3 |
プラスチック♡ラブ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
|
This was a debate that had to deal with taxation and its interaction with goods markets, not with any sort of botanical or nutritional meaning. The terms of this ruling really aren't relevant to us today, considering the historical context for this kind of case is entirely lost on us today.
|
07-13-2014, 07:19 PM | #4 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
|
Yeah but since no framing context was provided I picked the thing I occasionally rant about and ran with it. It's fun!
|
07-14-2014, 08:16 PM | #6 | |
我が名は勇者王!
|
I'd much rather talk about Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978 ), since there's a 'health worker famine' going on in California in part due to the rulings in that case.
Quote:
I mean, nutrition is often seen as a "plus minus" thing. Eating a serving of vegetable "undoes" the damage eating a chocolate chip cookie does. Wrong! Energetics and metabolism doesn't work like that.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望 今 信じあえる あきらめない 心かさね 永遠を抱きしめて |
|
Lower Navigation | ||||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|