disneydude
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2006
- Messages
- 25,528
- Reaction score
- 8,470
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
The people of California gave a resounding no to gay marriage in California....They are the ones who should decide............It is a dead issue there............
The people of California gave a resounding no to gay marriage in California....They are the ones who should decide............It is a dead issue there............
Well I guess at least I can say you are consistent with being inconsistent. In one post you say you agree that the issue should be decided by the Legislature...and in another you say that it shouldn't be decided by the legislature, it should be decided by a popular vote....
(I guess its kinda like your jumping around from candidate to candidate to candidate during the GOP primaries, huh Navy?)...
Consistent inconsistency is your MO.
By the way...Prop 8 was by no means a "resounding" vote. At it is far far FAR from a dead issue here. The California Supreme Court still hasn't announced its ruling and efforts are already underway for it to be back on the ballot in the next election.
The tide is turning...the clouds are clearing...and we will win this battle...if not tomorrow, then the day after that. I'm beginning to see that this is going to occur even within your lifetime.
If the issue of slavery should ever come back to a popular vote, should we accept it if a majority approves?
Some things are too important to be decided by popular mandate.
As slavery has been outlawed in the 13th Amendment, slavery would have to be re-authorized by another Constitutional Amendment. A mere popular majority is insufficient for this.If the issue of slavery should ever come back to a popular vote, should we accept it if a majority approves?
Perhaps, but to whom else do we dare consign our trust?Some things are too important to be decided by popular mandate.
Nice try my left wing friend but this has nothing to do with slavery........Hige difference when you try and compare a race of people against one defined by their sexual preference.............
He is absolutely right on target Navy. Since it is up for the people to decide, shouldn't the issue of slavery be decided by a 50% +1 vote?
What about the rights to own property?
What about the right of women to vote? Should we put that to a 50% +1 vote.
I know, lets let people decide if people should be allowed to own guns. Under your theory that should as well be put to a 50% +1 vote.
Lets let the people decide, huh Navy?
Would you be "OK with it" if the People of Washington passed a law that said "Marriage is only between a black man and a black woman"?
In women and African Americans you keep naming true minorities and as far as I know gays can and do own a lot of properrty..........
How would a 50% +1 vote have any legal standing on the matter?What about the right of women to vote? Should we put that to a 50% +1 vote.
He is absolutely right on target Navy. Since it is up for the people to decide, shouldn't the issue of slavery be decided by a 50% +1 vote?
What about the rights to own property?
What about the right of women to vote? Should we put that to a 50% +1 vote.
I know, lets let people decide if people should be allowed to own guns. Under your theory that should as well be put to a 50% +1 vote.
Lets let the people decide, huh Navy?
Would you be "OK with it" if the People of Washington passed a law that said "Marriage is only between a black man and a black woman"?
How would a 50% +1 vote have any legal standing on the matter?
Because Navy is advocating that everything should be put to the "Will of the people". Thus, if 50% +1 of the people in this country vote to say "voting shall only be for males" or "marriage is defined as 1 black man and 1 black women"...then so be it. Its the "will of the people" ...."That's how things are done in this country".
I suspect that people are OK with a 50%+1 popular vote on Constitutional rights that don't effect them....but somehow feel a little differently when it is their Constititional rights being decided by a popular vote.
Why are you comparing fundamental constitutional rights to state-sanctioned gay marriage?
In all of your ranting, you completely failed to answer my question. Navy's positions are not relevant to my question.Because Navy is advocating that everything should be put to the "Will of the people". Thus, if 50% +1 of the people in this country vote to say "voting shall only be for males" or "marriage is defined as 1 black man and 1 black women"...then so be it. Its the "will of the people" ...."That's how things are done in this country".
I suspect that people are OK with a 50%+1 popular vote on Constitutional rights that don't effect them....but somehow feel a little differently when it is their Constititional rights being decided by a popular vote.
There is no constitutional right to state-sanctioned marriage.... AT ALL. It doesn't even make sense.
Marriage has been recognized as a fundamental right.
Regardless, Constitutional Equal Protection applies to privileges granted by states as well as those that are considered "fundamental rights"
In all of your ranting, you completely failed to answer my question. Navy's positions are not relevant to my question.
How does a 50% +1 vote have any legal standing on the right of women to vote?
Sure, gays can get "married" all they want. They just don't have the right it being "legitimized" through the state.
So you are claiming that a mere 50% +1 vote would legally remove the right of women to vote in this country, correct?The same way a 50% +1 vote has any legal standing on the right of a state to deny a contract based on sexual orientation.
He is absolutely right on target Navy. Since it is up for the people to decide, shouldn't the issue of slavery be decided by a 50% +1 vote?
What about the rights to own property?
What about the right of women to vote? Should we put that to a 50% +1 vote.
I know, lets let people decide if people should be allowed to own guns. Under your theory that should as well be put to a 50% +1 vote.
Lets let the people decide, huh Navy?
Would you be "OK with it" if the People of Washington passed a law that said "Marriage is only between a black man and a black woman"?
So you are claiming that a mere 50% +1 vote would legally remove the right of women to vote in this country, correct?
Yeah the people could pass a laww that up is down and down is up to but that is not going to happen and neither is your ridiculous example.....
A 50% +1 vote cannot possibly affect the right of women to vote. Not in the United States of America.It shouldn't. But look at Prop 8. That's exactly what it did.
So, if the people did pass such a law, would you support it? After all, it is the will of the people right?
Sure they do. The government should not be involved in denying issuance of contracts based on a person's sexual orientation, any more than they should deny it based on the color of a person's hair.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?