If I’m having a conversation with a friend, or even a stranger, I don’t have to call him “your honor,” because it’s just assumed that I have a basic level of respect, or at any rate am willing to feign it for the purposes of smooth interpersonal relations. Even if there’s a guy I really look up to, I’m probably not going to address him by some honorific.
In our society, we’ve mostly done away with a lot of those titles. You probably don’t call your boss “sir,” for example, unless you’re in the military or something. It’s kind of old-school.
Yet judges want to be addressed as “your honor”. I think it’s because they’re paranoid people might think they’re not very honorable, so therefore they need people to constantly verbally reinforce and reassure, “Yes, I honor you.”
If their behavior were plainly honorable, then there wouldn’t be a need for this constant butt-kissing. The judge would just be confident in his own knowledge of his honorableness, and in the fact that intelligent and observant people must be aware of it as well; and not need others to continually reaffirm it explicitly.
If anything, if you’re confident in yourself, you’ll be more likely to expose yourself to being criticized, and maybe even speak in a self-deprecating way. E.g., these guys who aren’t bad-looking, who show up to a ratings megathread and say, “I’m ugly, aren’t I?” They don’t worry people are going to say, “Yeah, you’re pretty ugly,” because they already looked in a mirror and saw they look fine. They’re just fishing for compliments. (Same, of course, with these thots on Facebook posting status updates, “I’m so ugly!!” Talk about worship-bait.)
It’s actually the uglier girls who are the most likely to be vain and ask rhetorically, “I’m pretty all right-looking, aren’t I?” and constantly admire themselves in the mirror (even bringing a mirror to their workplace) from every angle and talk about their beauty sleep and so on. Elliot Rodger wasn’t bad-looking, but he seemed to think he was Chad-tier (which was why he couldn’t understand why girls would go for obnoxious brutes).
Anyone who demands that others kiss their butt 24/7 probably doesn’t do anything to merit that much praise and adoration, or they would not be anywhere near as insecure.
Some might say, “Well, it’s not the judge, but the office that you’re respecting.” That, too, though, is just showing insecurity. The office of Senator, or Secretary of State, or President is also supposed to be honorable (in fact, I think “The Honorable” is the way they’re supposed to be addressed in correspondence), but they don’t mind if you call them Senator, or Madam Secretary, or Mr. President, or whatever; in fact, that’s considered an appropriate form of address.
Theoretically, then, you should just be able to call a judge “Judge” without it being disrespectful. They’re appointed by the executive and legislative branches, so theoretically that makes them LESS important than those politicians, not more, since their power comes from them. Really, it just gets back to the judicial officers’ paranoia about being marginalized as powerless and unimportant, since they don’t have the power to pass or enforce laws, the way that other branches of government do.
They’ve really seized a lot of power that they didn’t have a right to, by claiming the right to say that the Constitution says X when it plainly says Y; and everything they’ve built up is founded on this house of cards. They serve to legitimize what the other branches of government do (which is actually usually illegitimate), so they have to defend their own legitimacy.
So they have these elaborate rituals of decorum to reinforce their sense of authority. At the Kavanaugh confirmation Senate floor vote, you may have noticed there were people screaming and disrupting the proceedings. Nothing serious happened to them. You can even call your elected representatives all kinds of names, and not be punished severely for it (although a legislator who insults another legislator during a debate may be told to sit down). But if you insult a judge in the courtroom, you can actually be sent to the slammer for contempt.
What this is all about, really, is that most people who go to court leave the courtroom feeling like an injustice was done, and they might be inclined to mouth off to the judge if it weren’t illegal. Even if they got the result they wanted, they probably had to pay a butt-ton of money to some lawyer (who is buddy-buddy with the judge and even with the opposing lawyers) to make sure they got “justice”; and they probably had to wait a long time for their hearing, and then take a day off of work, etc. It’s as inconvenient as going to the DMV, yet we’re supposed to glorify these judges because they’re so high and mighty.
Well, I don’t call the DMV worker “your honor” because I’m so happy we have them around to issue me a driver’s license and some license plates. I don’t even call the Commissioner of the DMV “your honor”. What’s the point? He’s just an overpaid bureaucrat who got his position through political connections. Judges are the same way. They’re political hacks who are put in power to advance the agendas and interests of whatever politicians helped put them on the bench.
And to secure their “independence,” they serve a fixed term during which they can’t be fired, which makes them kinda like these unionized teachers or factory workers whom management can’t fire without risking a strike. There’s nothing really all that special about them; they’re just another kind of tenured employee.
Another thing is, usually your elected bodies, all the way down to the local school board, will televise their hearings; but court proceedings (especially at the federal level) aren’t televised. It’s because the judges don’t want the scrutiny, since if people saw what went on, they might not respect them as much.
We might as well just face the reality that the judges aren’t particularly respectable or honorable. They’re just tools of the establishment, for imposing the will of the establishment. In that respect, they’re not much different than these cops who get off on their power trips.
Another stupid ritual I saw today was that we were expected to rise not only when the judge entered the courtroom but also when he left. I can understand standing when he enters, since the goal is to get people to end their conversations and put down whatever they’re doing, to focus on the proceedings that are about to start; but what’s the big deal about when he leaves? In the future, I’m not even going to bother standing for that, unless I’m already on my way out of the courtroom anyway.
To the average person, the judge is the face of tyranny
Most people don’t want the legislative hearings where their representatives consider the evidence for why, e.g., pot should be illegal, and then vote for it to remain criminalized. But there’s a good chance at some point they may be in a courtroom when a pot case is being heard, and witness the judge throwing the book at someone for it.
Judges have the discretion to be lenient, and since they’re not up for election as often as the legislators are, theoretically they have more independence. But they often will not do the right thing, but rather will assist in implementing tyranny. One of the few examples we’ve seen lately where judges have been doing the right thing lately is that some judges have been departing downward in child porn cases, but those should not even be felony offenses to begin with.