• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

This is gay

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the examples you posed of Negro freedom and women's sufferage actually resolved through the legislative will of the people?

Only after the courts found pointed out problems.

That is the history of the US. Somebody sues the government/the state/some official something, years later legislation is enacted to comply.

But, as you said, "the people be damned ... " Just so your pet judicial interpretation is the one followed, right?

My interpretation is that we should all have equal rights.

In fact the constitution says.. uh, well exactly that. I'm not getting the same rights everybody else is. Something is wrong. I don't care *how* it is fixed, but it needs fixing.

Maybe we could cut out the legislative process altogether and just ask you which rules a democratic society should be allowed to choose for themselves.

1. This is not a democratic society. It never has been, and it never will be. As I said, our form of government speaks specifically *against* ochlocratic tyranny, which is exactly what true democracy would give us.

2. Our system is set up in the forms of Checks and Balances. One branch keeps another in line. If Bush were to push through any more "defense of marriage" type legislation, the Supreme Court would likely strike it down. Why? Because it is up to them to ensure that our laws jive with the constitution.

However, our lawmakers are concerned with winning votes (popularity) rather than doing their jobs (creating laws that follow the guide lines set down by the constitution) so our courts have historically had to do that job too.

I don't know the solution to the problem, but I think the Checks and Balance system is viable.

By the way, how do you feel about polygamy? Since our system is, as you point out, set up to prevent "ochlacracy" (sic), you would certainly agree that laws prohibiting such a practice represent an unjust denial of civil rights, yes?

The same way I feel about everything else.

If it they are consenting adults, it is not my business to tell them that their consensual activities are wrong. It is also not the business of the government to give special preference to one type of relationship over another, when neither is causing any harm to society, or the people within them.


What bugs me about this entire mess is that Bush is not only doing exactly the opposite of what he said he would do in his campaign and inauguration speech, he's doing things that are unconstitutional. The powers of the federal government are enumerated. The rest falls to the state. Bush is, in principle, over-riding state sovereignty on issues that fall far, far outside the realm of the constitution.

What bugs me more is that people don't see that our cherished system is being blatantly destroyed, and they don't care. They can't see past their idiotic bigotries, whether religious or personal, to see that what is going on is wrong.

It's ironic to me that I, the true patriot, am in the minority with my views. I wasn't even born here, and I understand the system far better than most Americans.


Edit-

Damn irregular verbs.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom