Derby Trail Forums

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Prop 8 Sucks (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26096)

GenuineRisk 11-12-2008 12:58 PM

Interesting article from fivethirtyeight.com dispelling the idea that Prop 8 is the fault of minority voters:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/...p-8-myths.html

Fivethirtyeight was frighteningly accurate in its predictions about the election. There was an article in New York Magazine about the founder- he started as a baseball stat compiler.

Antitrust32 11-12-2008 01:01 PM

:tro: Well... Connecticut decided to do the morally right thing today! :tro:

GenuineRisk 11-12-2008 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32
:tro: Well... Connecticut decided to do the morally right thing today! :tro:

Hurray for one "C" state doing what's right! East Coast represents!

Danzig 11-12-2008 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmfhb411
I will say the result of elections isn't the fault of any group of voters,
whether we like the outcome or not.
People vote------> majority wins.

Is anyone just as outraged the people of Massachusetts weren't given the opportunity
to vote for, or against gay marriage ?

so...if the majority voted to get rid of the rights to a free press, would that be ok? to stifle free speech, expression?

once again, majority does NOT rule. the constitution is supposed to rule,and all laws that are passed must stand that test. so, does a law that treats some citizens as less equal than others belong in the land of the free? what happened to all being created equal? life, liberty, etc, etc.

Antitrust32 11-12-2008 02:10 PM

Zig if you were not married and were gay I'd be taking you to Connecticut right now!!

:wf

GenuineRisk 11-12-2008 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig
so...if the majority voted to get rid of the rights to a free press, would that be ok? to stifle free speech, expression?

once again, majority does NOT rule. the constitution is supposed to rule,and all laws that are passed must stand that test. so, does a law that treats some citizens as less equal than others belong in the land of the free? what happened to all being created equal? life, liberty, etc, etc.

Darn straight, Danzig. It took a court decision to make it legal for interracial couples to marry- if that one had been left to the voters, I suspect some states would STILL have laws on the books against it.

Or as the US State info site puts it on the "What is Democracy" page under "Majority Rule and Minority Rights":

"The rights of minorities do not depend upon the goodwill of the majority and cannot be eliminated by majority vote. The rights of minorities are protected because democratic laws and institutions protect the rights of all citizens."

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pub...em/whatdm2.htm

And yeah, certainly it's unfair to blame any group of voters. That said, a lot of incendiary things have been tossed at racial minority voters in the blogosphere since last Tuesday and I thought it was a worthwhile piece on 538- that a lot of what is being said is statistically wrong. Most interesting was the difference in percentages the last time it was on the CA ballot compared with this time. Prop 8 will stand for 4 years at the most. Maybe only 2.

Danzig 11-12-2008 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32
Zig if you were not married and were gay I'd be taking you to Connecticut right now!!

:wf


lol

Antitrust32 11-12-2008 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk
Darn straight, Danzig. It took a court decision to make it legal for interracial couples to marry- if that one had been left to the voters, I suspect some states would STILL have laws on the books against it.

Or as the US State info site puts it on the "What is Democracy" page under "Majority Rule and Minority Rights":

"The rights of minorities do not depend upon the goodwill of the majority and cannot be eliminated by majority vote. The rights of minorities are protected because democratic laws and institutions protect the rights of all citizens."

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pub...em/whatdm2.htm

And yeah, certainly it's unfair to blame any group of voters. That said, a lot of incendiary things have been tossed at racial minority voters in the blogosphere since last Tuesday and I thought it was a worthwhile piece on 538- that a lot of what is being said is statistically wrong. Most interesting was the difference in percentages the last time it was on the CA ballot compared with this time. Prop 8 will stand for 4 years at the most. Maybe only 2.

You are right that its unfair to blame any group of voters.

But I just dont understand how a group of people who have fought for equality and achieved it - how they can vote 70-30 in favor of a prop that takes away equality from a different group of people.

Was talking about this with a very religious black woman I work with - and she doesnt know I'm gay.. & she even said regardless of her personal or religious beliefs - that the government shouldnt be able to take rights away from people - and that people shouldnt be able to vote to take rights away from others. I was surprised to hear this from her - as shes very traditional and morally strict... but I was happy to hear it!!

letswastemoney 11-12-2008 02:48 PM

If a proposition to reinstate slavery existed, there would be plenty of votes for it.

Antitrust32 11-12-2008 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by letswastemoney
If a proposition to reinstate slavery existed, there would be plenty of votes for it.

exactly... Prop 8 & the ones in FL, AZ, an AR were so wrong in so many ways... and they all passed.

What does that say about our country?

I know our neighbors to the north & allies in Europe/Australia/New Zealand etc. laugh at the US about this issue... says it sets us back from the countries that have passed civil unions/gay marriage/equality for all.

Antitrust32 11-12-2008 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmfhb411
apples and oranges. A better arguement can be made the rights for free press
and free speech serve the good of all versus, the legalization of same-sex marriage accomplishing the same overall good.

And let's legalize polygamy while we're at it.


Did you vote for Congressman Murtha?

Antitrust32 11-12-2008 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmfhb411
No there wouldn't. Slavery doesn't serve anyone well.


and discriminating against gays serves everyone well?

Antitrust32 11-12-2008 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmfhb411
sorry that's not discrimination.

please explain how supressing peoples rights because you dont agree with their lifestyle is not discrimination?

SniperSB23 11-12-2008 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmfhb411
That means when polygamists go to the courts for their rights to marry
twenty different underage girls, you'll be OK with it.

Where does the line get drawn ?

I actually wouldn't care. I think the line gets drawn in any case where it isn't marriage between two consenting adults. So no bestiality and no underage marriage. Other than that, who really cares?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.