Civil War: Law and Morality of the SHRA

[jaydawg]

Jaydawg says what?

A realisitc possibility of what will happen in a couple of years?

 

[BrianWilly]

People like me like to say that the SHRA isn't moral, but what isn't pointed out very often is that, well, it's not very legal either.

Maybe in its original incarnation, whatever the heck that was (Joe Q seems to have always had the current incarnation of the SHRA in mind, even when the series was first starting), a case could be made for necessity...a case might even be made for the [empty] notion that you should follow it because it's the law, and you shouldn't break the law even if you think it's wrong. Let's forget for the moment that Tony decided to clone a dead friend and sic some psychotic supervillains into freedom because those are personal choices that may not reflect the reality of the law.

Well, all of that "law" talk went straight out the figurative window and became completely indefensible when the the pro-reg side started to skip due process and incarcerate people indefinitely without trial, thereby skipping Amendments 4-8 out of the Bill of Rights.

What in the hell?

This is the Consitution of the United States of America. It is the highest. ****ing. Law. OF THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. You can not say "follow this law because it is the law" and then go piss all over Constitutional rights. Even the persecution of rapists, murderers, child molestors, and Martha Stewart can be thrown out if it is even suspected of violating the Bill of Rights, that's how seriously it's taken in a courtroom. The pro-registration side is displaying the utmost in legal hypocrisy right now and thus their entire argument of legality and lawfulness is a broken, moot point. No one should have to follow the SHRA not just because it isn't moral, but also because it isn't legal.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I've noticed that supporters of the SHRA invoke the law to defend it. "Whatever we think of compulsory registration, it is the law and therefore we must obey it or suffer the consequences."

The trouble is with this argument is that it is defective morally. Perhaps this is not the place to dwell on religion, but it is surely worth noting that as Catholic theologians from St. Augustine to Thomas Aquinas have held, an "unjust law" is essentially no law at all( a point forcefully made by Americans as different to Henry Thoreau to Dr Martin Luther King when they went to jail for things they believed in deeply). One need not point to tyrannical regimes such as the Third Reich or Stalin's Soviet Union but just to established democracies such as the US (or UK) which tolerated slavery or denial of equal rights to the slaves descendants, those of Native Americans or women( ethnicity irrelevant) as "legal".(Don't even get me started on abortion!).

Does the US Government have the right to virtually "nationalize" super heroes? ( That is to say to force them to become wards of the state subject to the Governmental diktat- I would say no. it was for these reasons that the Soviet Super-Soldiers defected to the US). No matter what we may think of Captain America in the past, he and his fellow heroes who resist this tyrannical diktat are surely in the moral right!

Terry

Morally, that's differs from person to person. But if your asking "does it have the right" as in can America do it. Yes America can do anything it wants so long as you cannot or don't prove it constitutionally wrong. But things seen as human rights violations typically are challenged.

However Joe Quesada is an idiot in how he seems to think Government works. Using international agencies to enforce federal law (saying it's like the UN joining the CIA or something...I mean seriously does he know anything ), having an Act such as this being passed overnight (Does he know how long any act sits in Congress...wow), and finally claiming "oh yeah courts cannot challenge it...only the supreme court"....DUDE HOW DO YOU FREAKING THINK IT GETS UP TO THE SUPREME COURT.

I mean he is literally an idiot.

Yeah here is the quote

Peter: Jennifer Walters in the courts everyday. Defending these guys, making motions.

Tony: She can make all the motions she wants. This is outside the justidiction of local and federal courts. This is an Act of Congress...only the Supreme Court can intervene.

First off the Supreme Court doesn't "intervene". It's not a team of superheroes. You'll never see Ginsberg run in and go "Chief Justice Roberts, the Government is up to no good we must stop them....Supreme Court ASSEMBLE!!!!!". What they do is select cases from local and federal courts they feel have a significant impact of precedent. Such as Brown v Board, which started out as a LOCAL case which ended up challenging federal law. It even spawned an *gasp* Act of Congress to be passed under LBJ. Therefore if Jennifer Walters is challenging the law at a local and federal level, if her case shows a significant constitutionality problem with an act of congress then that specific case will end up on the floor of the Supreme Court.

 

[Trask]

Ok I just read the recent Civil War and Spider man (a bit behind on my comics) and I have to say I am very dissapionted with the direction the whole story is going. When Marvel was advertising Civil War they said it was going to be a balanced argument that would split the comic reading community into two groups. Well it might have started out that way, but now it looks like it is just a plain old Bad Vs Good story.

I dont mind the heroes doing some questionable things in desperation or because they belive it is for the better good, but when they do a whole 180 and act like some of the villans they have fought all of their costumed life then the whole balanced argument goes out the window.

Now I have been a supporter of the SHRA from the beginning, and I am really disappointed the way they have turned a very good and vallied argument for registration into nothing more than an "evil government" Vs Superheroes story.

 

[Trask]

Sorry double post

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I wish they would get crap about their own law right too. Some books say you can quit superheroics, others you can't. Some books claim the heroes will be given multiple options to join, or can find some sort of *extra* Government work. Some say they are going to be Government employees, other say SHIELD employees.

And then Reed Richards talking about his uncle. He was arrested for being communist...that's why we should follow the law". That's the stupidest sh** I've ever heard in my entire life. That's like saying "My grandfather slept with other dudes...that's why we should allow gay marriage". Really? That's your reason, you sure you don't want to say something about second class citizens and gay rights and such....no.

I mean c'mon, Richards is the SMARTEST MAN IN THE MU, and the best he can come up with "My uncle was a suspected commie, they ruined his life, thanks McCarthyism".

Furthermore the logic is bullsh**. Watcher showing up is foolish and makes no sense. The idea that after alien invasions, New York getting torn to shreds on a few occasions, Apocalypse causing worldwide war, being almost eaten by a giant being, and having being known as Onslaught reak havoc. All because heroes and villains existed and caused violence. After all that..."A SADISTIC MURDERER BLEW UP A SCHOOL...and you could not stop him...." that is what drives you over the edge. You, the same people who erected a statue of the Incredible Hulk which he destroyed. Now you hate them....God Quesada quit trying to out do DC. It's pathetic.

 

[prins777]

Morally, that's differs from person to person. But if your asking "does it have the right" as in can America do it. Yes America can do anything it wants so long as you cannot or don't prove it constitutionally wrong. But things seen as human rights violations typically are challenged.

However Joe Quesada is an idiot in how he seems to think Government works. Using international agencies to enforce federal law (saying it's like the UN joining the CIA or something...I mean seriously does he know anything ), having an Act such as this being passed overnight (Does he know how long any act sits in Congress...wow), and finally claiming "oh yeah courts cannot challenge it...only the supreme court"....DUDE HOW DO YOU FREAKING THINK IT GETS UP TO THE SUPREME COURT.

I mean he is literally an idiot.

Yeah here is the quote

Peter: Jennifer Walters in the courts everyday. Defending these guys, making motions.

Tony: She can make all the motions she wants. This is outside the justidiction of local and federal courts. This is an Act of Congress...only the Supreme Court can intervene.

First off the Supreme Court doesn't "intervene". It's not a team of superheroes. You'll never see Ginsberg run in and go "Chief Justice Roberts, the Government is up to no good we must stop them....Supreme Court ASSEMBLE!!!!!". What they do is select cases from local and federal courts they feel have a significant impact of precedent. Such as Brown v Board, which started out as a LOCAL case which ended up challenging federal law. It even spawned an *gasp* Act of Congress to be passed under LBJ. Therefore if Jennifer Walters is challenging the law at a local and federal level, if her case shows a significant constitutionality problem with an act of congress then that specific case will end up on the floor of the Supreme Court.

Well to be fair , he may have simply meant that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has “original jurisdiction” in a very small number of cases arising out of disputes between States or between a State and the Federal Government. Maybe in the Marvel Universe, the court also has original jurisdiction for all things relating to the SHRA.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Well to be fair , he may have simply meant that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has “original jurisdiction” in a very small number of cases arising out of disputes between States or between a State and the Federal Government. Maybe in the Marvel Universe, the court also has original jurisdiction for all things relating to the SHRA.

I suppose. However judging by the fact that Quesada seems to think "the UN can enforce US law (His justification for using SHIELD)" I doubt thats what they meant.

 

[Trask]

Well to be fair , he may have simply meant that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has “original jurisdiction” in a very small number of cases arising out of disputes between States or between a State and the Federal Government. Maybe in the Marvel Universe, the court also has original jurisdiction for all things relating to the SHRA.

Would that not then mean that Jennifer Walters would then have made her case to the Supreme Court instead of the local and federal courts? Or would not the case get pushed up to the Supreme Court if they are the ones handling all cases related to the SHRA?

 

[prins777]

Would that not then mean that Jennifer Walters would then have made her case to the Supreme Court instead of the local and federal courts? Or would not the case get pushed up to the Supreme Court if they are the ones handling all cases related to the SHRA?

If the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction then Jen is making her case directly to the Supreme Court. It will not go through the lower courts.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

If the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction then Jen is making her case directly to the Supreme Court. It will not go through the lower courts.

So basically then it would make no sense for Tony to say "she is making motions and defending these guys" in the lower courts. This is especially a problem when you consider they are suppose to be detained without trial. The families must be filing suit, I guess.

You know what...f*** it...this story is just obviously poorly planned out.

 

[3dman27]

as i've said before this storyline can't end soon enough for me
part of the civil war storyline is to blend the616 and ULTIMATE UNIVERESES
in ultimate coninuity shield is an american agency and it is illegal to possess superpowers and not work for the government
CIVIL WAR is an attempt to comment on the war on terror AND MAKE THE mu CONFORM to ultimate u. standards wher the heroes are almost as amoral as the villians
why do you think they are called SUPERHEROES misters quesada and millar?
because thay are BETTER than the villians thats why
if you don't like to write about heroes don't write superhero stories in the first place

 

[fifthfiend]

having an Act such as this being passed overnight (Does he know how long any act sits in Congress...wow)

If the PATRIOT act is any kind of example, you can ram all kind of awful authoritarian bull**** through Congress in any kind of time frame you like, under the right circumstances.

First off the Supreme Court doesn't "intervene". It's not a team of superheroes. You'll never see Ginsberg run in and go "Chief Justice Roberts, the Government is up to no good we must stop them....Supreme Court ASSEMBLE!!!!!".

... No seriously, why isn't this in a comic?

This is the Consitution of the United States of America. It is the highest. ****ing. Law. OF THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. You can not say "follow this law because it is the law" and then go piss all over Constitutional rights.

Sure you can. I mean ****, they just did it, like, a week ago, here in real life. Suspended habeas corpus, legalized torture, the whole nine yards. It's how we do things now.

I mean I do try not to dredge the politics into comics-talk and all, but all these arguments how implausible all this sort of thing is, bills scarcely even read being forced through in the dead of night, Congress voting to legalize indefinite detention and physical abuse, well, someone apparently forgot to tell the Executive and Legislative branches of the US government, here in the actual real world, how implausible all this sort of thing is.

 

[roach]

If the PATRIOT act is any kind of example, you can ram all kind of awful authoritarian bull**** through Congress in any kind of time frame you like, under the right circumstances.



... No seriously, why isn't this in a comic?

If the Patriot Act said they were gonna round up and inprison everyone in the US of Arabian descent or Islamic faith how quick would it have gone thru

 

[daveswb]

why do you think they are called SUPERHEROES misters quesada and millar?
because thay are BETTER than the villians thats why
if you don't like to write about heroes don't write superhero stories in the first place

The most wonderful sentiment I've seen so far on this board!

Exactly, Aunt May said it in SM2, People love a hero, they wait in the rain for hours just to get a climpse of them.

People want to read stories about people that are something more than they are, sometrhing better than they are. it gives them hope. Yes they can be flawed, but in the end they are "superheroes"

 

[daveswb]

If the Patriot Act said they were gonna round up and inprison everyone in the US of Arabian descent or Islamic faith how quick would it have gone thru

I think it would of still passed. No one really new about it till it was voted on. Did you have an oppertunity to campaign against it? No, they didn't want you to. Didn't this country gather up all the people of Native american decent and put them on reservations? Didn't this country gather up all the people of Asian decent and put them in interment camps during WW2? Didn't they gather up some suspected terroist after 9/11 and put them in interment camps in cuba?

 

[3dman27]

The most wonderful sentiment I've seen so far on this board!

Exactly, Aunt May said it in SM2, People love a hero, they wait in the rain for hours just to get a climpse of them.

People want to read stories about people that are something more than they are, sometrhing better than they are. it gives them hope. Yes they can be flawed, but in the end they are "superheroes"

that is why i wish marvel'd kept this superheroes must work for the us government crap out of 616 and kept it in ultmates wher it belongs if it belongs ANYWHEREat all

 

[Darthphere]

If the Patriot Act said they were gonna round up and inprison everyone in the US of Arabian descent or Islamic faith how quick would it have gone thru

But it didnt, and fact is, its not going as far as to what youre saying, but there are people that are being held for years, no charges brought, never saw a lawyer, and they get released later without even an apology.

 

[roach]

But it didnt, and fact is, its not going as far as to what youre saying, but there are people that are being held for years, no charges brought, never saw a lawyer, and they get released later without even an apology.

but I was comparing it to the SHRA....

 

[Darthphere]

but I was comparing it to the SHRA....

Well its tricky since it seems like they have a choice though, just like most criminals are given a plea bargain. Register or die. They chose to die.

 

[BrianWilly]

Sure you can. I mean ****, they just did it, like, a week ago, here in real life. Suspended habeas corpus, legalized torture, the whole nine yards. It's how we do things now.

I mean I do try not to dredge the politics into comics-talk and all, but all these arguments how implausible all this sort of thing is, bills scarcely even read being forced through in the dead of night, Congress voting to legalize indefinite detention and physical abuse, well, someone apparently forgot to tell the Executive and Legislative branches of the US government, here in the actual real world, how implausible all this sort of thing is.

I agree and understand that in the real world, this sort of thing has happened in the past, happens all the time today, and will happen in the future. It's just one of the various sorry corruptions in the world that hasn't quite gotten worked out yet.

But as far as this event goes, everyone and their mothers over at Marvel keep stressing to us how the anti-regs are reprehensible for breaking the law whereas the pro-regs are only upholding the law. My point is that they are not upholding the law, so that entire debate is just moot. They have no moral high ground in terms of legality, as if legality has to uphold morality which does not necessarily follow at all in the first place.

Let me reiterate: Constitution = Highest ****ing laws of the entire country. They're the laws that all the baby laws want to be when they grow up. In fact, they gave birth to those baby laws, resurrected Mother Theresa, made sweet love to Rosa Parks, freed Willy, slapped Hitler, and helped Jesus to save the world from demonic alien invaders at the same time. Hitler I say, HITLER!! If Marvel thinks that they are still courting ambiguous moral ground by saying "Well, sometimes you have to sacrifice stuff 'for the greater good' and all that" as far as the "stuff" refers to the Constitution, they're either stupid as all hell or thinking that we're as stupid as all hell. Just like all those politicians you mentioned.

 

[fifthfiend]

But as far as this event goes, everyone and their mothers over at Marvel keep stressing to us how the anti-regs are reprehensible for breaking the law whereas the pro-regs are only upholding the law. My point is that they are not upholding the law, so that entire debate is just moot. They have no moral high ground in terms of legality, as if legality has to uphold morality which does not necessarily follow at all in the first place.

Okay, gotcha. I'd been reading your statement as a commentary on realism, but it was meant more as a commentary on that side's moralism? In that case yes, I quite agree.

To be honest it doesn't even really occur to me to consider things along that dimension because from the get go this thing has been like okay, the side registering heroes is evil, no ****. I mean this is practically the Third Law of Superheroics, going all the way back to goddamn Zorro. It's like, of course they're going to upend their claim to morality by way of vicious and nakedly unconstitutional hypocricies, they're the pro-authority side, therefore they are The Villains, and upending tenuous claims to the moral high ground by means of vicious unconstitutionality is what villains do.

 

[BrianWilly]

I am...sort of attempting to apply some real world legal grounding to this whole mess. In the real world, the ways that the SHRA are being enacted right now simply would not stand, period. Any courtroom would shoot it down in an instant; if not the technicalities of the act itself, then its methods at least go so crazy overboard as to incite a lot of unwanted legal action. If we as a country can try to say that the mention of "God" in the Pledge of Allegience unconstitutional, there's no way alternate dimension prisons go by unnoticed unless there's some serious government cover-up going down.

Now, with that said, I completely agree and am aware of the fact that unconstitutional laws get passed all the time and unconstitutional actions are undertaken by the government on an hourly and public basis. So unfortunately, how the laws of the real world should work and how the laws of the real world does work don't always sync up. The thing is, though, that Marvel claimed a SHRA that, while it wouldn't exactly be legally ideal, would at least be legally sound. In other words, that it would reflect how real laws should work. And, well, obviously that didn't happen.

I know that most of us called it way back when this project was first announced that it was just going to another Big Bad Government vs Victimized Superheroes story...it's just that, I think most of us also held out some hope that it wouldn't be that since Marvel very, very specifically told us that it wouldn't be. *shrug* I guess that'll show us, eh?

The word "registration" has always left very uncomfortable taste both in real world history (memories of South African apartheid and Nazi Germany antisemitism) and in Marvel universe history (memories of Mutant registration which ended in GIANT KILLER ROBOTS). If Marvel had wanted to make this fair and balanced, they had their work cut out for them right from the start. Instead it seems like they went straight for the opposite reaction. I mean, Quesada stated right from the start that it was no different from the Mutant Registration Act...just, y'know, New and Improved or something. But wasn't the MRA supposed to be bad? I mean, with the giant killer robots?? Maybe that should have been a clue...

 

[Darthphere]

This whole thread turned into a really bad Political Science class debate.

 

[roach]

This whole thread turned into a really bad Political Science class debate.

That is because we dont really know the specifics of this act.