VMI Dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:10 AM
Original message |
Any fucking idiots that think civil rights should be decided on a state by state basis |
|
will not get my money or vote again.
|
msongs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:12 AM
Response to Original message |
1. it's all about imposing religion...states by states is not that relevant nt |
theHandpuppet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. What in the world are you talking about? |
|
What a bizarre response to the OP.
|
anonymous171
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
7. This entire thread is bizarre. So I would say that their response is quite appropriate. |
theHandpuppet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. I found nothing bizarre about the OP |
|
And I share the both the sentiments and anger of the author of this thread.
|
Dogmudgeon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
17. We have to "hit" religions harder from now on |
|
It's not enough to wait until the next third-grader is buggered in the Sacristy -- we have to be pro-active NOW in bringing down the New Pharisees.
As much as I admire Dawkins and Harris and the late Marilyn Murray O'Hair, we need some serious popular-level agitation aimed at the Separation of Church and Deity. There is a crying need to discredit institutional religion. Once we've de-churched society, can work on the atheism at our leisure.
--d!
|
Barack_America
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:15 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Yeah, WTF is going on in Maine? |
MadMaddie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
8. It's happening in Washington state to |
|
two assholes one divorced 3 or 4 times and another that lives in Oregon got an initative on the ballot trying to deny rights to gays in Washington. We will see what happens with the results tomorrow.
|
Tesha
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
11. Catholics are imposing their will on an entire state's population. |
|
Sometimes it's the Mormons, sometimes it's the Catholics, frequently it's fundamentalist Christians.
Religion is a cancer in the body human.
Tesha
|
iamthebandfanman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:16 AM
Response to Original message |
|
i keep wondering when federal courts will put an end to this madness.
i thought we decided along time ago that people couldnt vote for descrimination!
it didnt work before, and it wont work now!
|
safeinOhio
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
18. Isn't there a 14th Amendment? |
bullwinkle428
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:18 AM
Response to Original message |
5. The assholes here in Iowa are trying to get it on the ballot, after |
|
their hysterical pearl-clutching following the State Supreme Court ruling several months back. The Democratic gov. and the state house & senate Dems. are like "No fucking way!" :woohoo:
|
FatDave
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
21. And speaking as an Iowan.... |
|
....I can assure you the sky has not fallen here. In fact, it's almost as if the change is unnoticeable.
|
MattBaggins
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
34. But that's unpossible |
|
If two dudes in Iowa get married, the evil joo joo from it will come to NY and destroy my marriage.
|
MadMaddie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:19 AM
Response to Original message |
6. Yea, our rights are on the ballot in Washington state! |
Fire_Medic_Dave
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:29 AM
Response to Original message |
10. I agree. How can Constitutional rights not apply to the states? It's ridiculous. |
paulsby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
26. fwiw, any state can recognize additional or more expansive rights than the federal |
|
constitution
NO state can deny rights recognized under the federal constitution
for example, my state has an explicit right to privacy in our constitution
police are more restricted in our state, than many others, because of this right to privacy
as one example, DUI checkpoints are unconstitutional (state constitution) in our state.
the scotus has not ruled that marriage rights between same sex partners are a right recognized in the constitution.
|
Unvanguard
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #26 |
28. Actually, states can deny rights in the federal Constitution. |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-04-09 08:45 AM by Unvanguard
The main restriction that applies to them is the Fourteenth, and not all the federal rights recognized in the Bill of Rights have been incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
But this has nothing to do with same-sex marriage, because a general right to marriage has been recognized by the Supreme Court, repeatedly, as a right protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. There's no reason to believe that there's a secret exception "except for same-sex couples" in there, though how a Supreme Court this conservative might rule is anybody's guess.
|
paulsby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
|
no right recognized as applying to the states can be denied by any state.
the 2nd, for example, hasn't been incorporated yet , but i will bet it will be.
the 4th, 6th, 5th, 1st, etc have
the right to marriage HAS been recognized by the scotus. and as i said, the right to same sex marriage has NOT.
|
MattBaggins
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
35. The right to marraige which includes same sex marriage |
|
YOU seem to think they are separate.
|
paulsby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #35 |
37. you seem to have a problem with reading comprehension |
|
i said no such thing.
what i said was that the SCOTUS has not recognized any right to same sex marriage.
if and when they did, then it would apply to the states, assuming incorporation.
|
Unvanguard
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
41. You just turned your statement into a tautology. |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-04-09 05:51 PM by Unvanguard
Obviously any constitutional restriction "recognized as applying to the states" actually applies to the states. But some are not so recognized. They may in the future, true, but that is not the same thing: all case law could in principle change.
As for your marriage/same-sex marriage distinction, this is as ludicrous as saying "The right to free speech has been recognized by SCOTUS, but not the right to free speech for red-haired people." There is no "right to same-sex marriage." There is a general right to marriage for all people, and there is no reason to believe that it excludes same-sex couples.
|
Lex
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:32 AM
Response to Original message |
12. Just think if states got to vote on civil rights for African Americans. |
|
I bet that would've gone just about as well.
It's f'ed up.
|
VMI Dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
15. That did happen. Looks like some people didn't get the lesson. |
treestar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
39. The courts got around that. |
|
Maybe they can do it in this case too. Just argue marriage is a fundamental right, and states cannot deny fundamental rights.
|
951-Riverside
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:32 AM
Response to Original message |
|
You're not going to win anyone over with that nasty attitude.
|
KamaAina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:33 AM
Response to Original message |
14. What if the question read "Shall black people have the right to vote?" |
|
Then would we see the outrage? :shrug:
|
Lilyeye
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #14 |
VMI Dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
KamaAina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
30. Where do we go, exactly? |
|
Either people have rights, or they don't. Like the man said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
|
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
Thothmes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
42. Remember it took a Civil War, a constitutional amendment |
|
and Federal legislation to answer that question.
|
Warpy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:34 AM
Response to Original message |
16. It starts on a state by state business when they're expanded |
|
just like it started for mixed race couples. When it becomes a legal nightmare because some states refuse to recognize legal marriages from other states, the USSC finally steps in.
I don't like it any better than you do, but the Federal government is reactive, not proactive.
|
VMI Dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
19. Like voting rights and segregation? |
Warpy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
|
but the comparison to interracial marriage is a valid one.
They haven't even changed the rhetoric they used against it.
|
VMI Dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
22. I think its extremely valid. As long as we can't depend on the leader of our party to support |
|
civil rights, we sure as hell can't depend on a right leaning Supreme Court.
|
JerseygirlCT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
|
It's frustrating, it's downright maddening... but it's the way it's going to happen.
|
paulsby
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 01:04 AM
Response to Original message |
25. and that holds for the 2nd amendment too! |
VMI Dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 08:10 AM
Response to Original message |
Joe Fields
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 01:48 PM
Response to Original message |
31. It is unconscionable that a civil rights issue is decided by referendum. |
PVnRT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 02:22 PM
Response to Original message |
32. I thought butchered hundreds of thousands of young men some 150 years ago |
|
to settle this whole "states' rights" bullshit.
|
Initech
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 02:29 PM
Response to Original message |
33. I would go so far as to say that; |
|
Anyone who votes with their church or decides that "equal rights" only means certain groups of people should lose their voting privaleges.
EQUAL RIGHTS MEANS EVERYBODY!!!!!!
|
Thothmes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-04-09 07:44 PM by Thothmes
|
Thothmes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #43 |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-04-09 07:44 PM by Thothmes
|
joeycola
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 02:35 PM
Response to Original message |
Odin2005
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 04:42 PM
Response to Original message |
38. Referendums = Tyranny by a majority of BIGOTS. |
JerseygirlCT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
|
How in the world anyone's civil rights (which come before the law, and are not given by a law) could be up for a vote is beyond me.
|
Bluenorthwest
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-04-09 05:14 PM
Response to Original message |
40. I'm with you all the way. |
|
What does voting for hair splitting bigots get us anyway? Mediocrity and weakness.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 03rd 2024, 07:16 AM
Response to Original message |