Frisivisia wrote:If the government that governs closer to the people is best, why States, and not municipalities? Why not abolish government and have everyone self-govern?
Well, in an ideal world...
Advertisement
by Libertarian California » Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:45 pm
Frisivisia wrote:If the government that governs closer to the people is best, why States, and not municipalities? Why not abolish government and have everyone self-govern?
by Die Oranje-Vrystaat » Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:51 pm
Farnhamia wrote:Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:
Ok, tell me when Nebraskans tried to tell you how to run your state.
Many Nebraskans are Republicans. The Republican Party has tried to institute an amendment to the Constitution to define marriage as only between one man and one woman. That would override any state law allowing same-sex marriage.
by Farnhamia » Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:58 pm
Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:Farnhamia wrote:Many Nebraskans are Republicans. The Republican Party has tried to institute an amendment to the Constitution to define marriage as only between one man and one woman. That would override any state law allowing same-sex marriage.
Okay, we solved that locally. Refer to Article I-29 of the Nebraska State Constitution. I think we are just preserving our states right to have such an amendment, rather than force other states to adopt our stance. You've got civil unions in California and such. We're not attacking those.
by Trotskylvania » Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:59 pm
Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:Farnhamia wrote:Many Nebraskans are Republicans. The Republican Party has tried to institute an amendment to the Constitution to define marriage as only between one man and one woman. That would override any state law allowing same-sex marriage.
Okay, we solved that locally. Refer to Article I-29 of the Nebraska State Constitution. I think we are just preserving our states right to have such an amendment, rather than force other states to adopt our stance. You've got civil unions in California and such. We're not attacking those.
Your Friendly Neighborhood Ultra - The Left Wing of the Impossible
Putting the '-sadism' in PosadismKarl Marx, Wage Labour and Capital
Anton Pannekoek, World Revolution and Communist Tactics
Amadeo Bordiga, Dialogue With Stalin
Nikolai Bukharin, The ABC of Communism
Gilles Dauvé, When Insurrections Die"The hell of capitalism is the firm, not the fact that the firm has a boss."- Bordiga
by Frisbeeteria » Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:11 pm
Terran Empire wrote:I dont think its just the Republicants... I think its also the Democraps. It pretty much everyone.
by Die Oranje-Vrystaat » Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:12 pm
Farnhamia wrote:Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:
Okay, we solved that locally. Refer to Article I-29 of the Nebraska State Constitution. I think we are just preserving our states right to have such an amendment, rather than force other states to adopt our stance. You've got civil unions in California and such. We're not attacking those.
Nebraskans do if they support the Marriage Amendment. Not you, perhaps, but some. Passage of that, which I admit is remote, would force policies supported by not a few Nebraskans on the rest of the country. So be the bigger person and urge your fellow Nebraska Republicans to stop supporting national measures to define marriage.
by Die Oranje-Vrystaat » Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:15 pm
Trotskylvania wrote:Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:
Okay, we solved that locally. Refer to Article I-29 of the Nebraska State Constitution. I think we are just preserving our states right to have such an amendment, rather than force other states to adopt our stance. You've got civil unions in California and such. We're not attacking those.
States have no rights. They have duties to their citizens. The most important of which is that the law must not be capricious, arbitrary and discriminatory. Bans on same sex marriage are all of the above.
by Trotskylvania » Thu Feb 28, 2013 1:27 am
Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:Trotskylvania wrote:States have no rights. They have duties to their citizens. The most important of which is that the law must not be capricious, arbitrary and discriminatory. Bans on same sex marriage are all of the above.
When seventy percent of Nebraskans backed a ban on gay marriage and we have one of lowest gay populations in the country, I believe the public opposes gay marriage. So what, we take the undemocratic route?
Your Friendly Neighborhood Ultra - The Left Wing of the Impossible
Putting the '-sadism' in PosadismKarl Marx, Wage Labour and Capital
Anton Pannekoek, World Revolution and Communist Tactics
Amadeo Bordiga, Dialogue With Stalin
Nikolai Bukharin, The ABC of Communism
Gilles Dauvé, When Insurrections Die"The hell of capitalism is the firm, not the fact that the firm has a boss."- Bordiga
by Die Oranje-Vrystaat » Thu Feb 28, 2013 5:04 am
Trotskylvania wrote:Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:
When seventy percent of Nebraskans backed a ban on gay marriage and we have one of lowest gay populations in the country, I believe the public opposes gay marriage. So what, we take the undemocratic route?
Yes. Gays getting married harms no one, and continued prohibitions against it only serve to reinforce bigotry against gays and warp the moral compass of the people living there by normalizing oppression. The people of Nebraska will get over it, and in fact will probably thank us in the future for dragging them towards the light.
by Valtakuntia » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:17 am
Lemanrussland wrote:
Funny, but the two party system is a serious problem, it stifles democracy quite a lot and makes the vast majority of people unhappy. The reason it's there is because our voting system is quite old and outdated (hardly surprising for the country with the oldest Constitution still in force in the world). If we switched off of "first past the post" for something more modern like mixed member proportional representation (what the Federal Republic of Germany uses), we would have more political diversity in this country.
by Bottle » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:21 am
Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:Trotskylvania wrote:Yes. Gays getting married harms no one, and continued prohibitions against it only serve to reinforce bigotry against gays and warp the moral compass of the people living there by normalizing oppression. The people of Nebraska will get over it, and in fact will probably thank us in the future for dragging them towards the light.
Dragging toward the light? My, but that sure is arrogant. Nebraska will always be a staunchly conservative state. You make it sound as if we're dragging homosexuals from their homes in the night, holding them in jail indefinitely. The "moral compass?" Yes, well our moral compass points against gay marriage.
by Grenartia » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:34 am
Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:Grenartia wrote:
Because I should be able to expect to be treated like a human fucking being in ALL 50 states, as opposed to less than half, as currently stands.
You are treated as a human being, what are you talking about? If you want to feel victimised just go to Uganda or somewhere. I meant Nebraska people will never live as California people do, so just stop trying to put your policies into our laws.
by Bottle » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:37 am
Grenartia wrote:Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:
You are treated as a human being, what are you talking about? If you want to feel victimised just go to Uganda or somewhere. I meant Nebraska people will never live as California people do, so just stop trying to put your policies into our laws.
I live in Tennessee. Not only is my right to marry a man, should I want to, being suppressed, but there are strong voices calling for people to have a right to bully me for who I am at school, and for school counselors to be required to out LGBT students to their parents, even if said parents would abuse their children for it.
How these things are not dehumanizing is beyond comprehension.
Its a matter of common fucking decency. California, New York, Tennessee, Nebraska, it shouldn't fucking matter.
by Grenartia » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:41 am
Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:Trotskylvania wrote:States have no rights. They have duties to their citizens. The most important of which is that the law must not be capricious, arbitrary and discriminatory. Bans on same sex marriage are all of the above.
When seventy percent of Nebraskans backed a ban on gay marriage and we have one of lowest gay populations in the country, I believe the public opposes gay marriage. So what, we take the undemocratic route?
by Farnhamia » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:41 am
Bottle wrote:Grenartia wrote:
I live in Tennessee. Not only is my right to marry a man, should I want to, being suppressed, but there are strong voices calling for people to have a right to bully me for who I am at school, and for school counselors to be required to out LGBT students to their parents, even if said parents would abuse their children for it.
How these things are not dehumanizing is beyond comprehension.
Its a matter of common fucking decency. California, New York, Tennessee, Nebraska, it shouldn't fucking matter.
Hang in there, bro. The reason people like him are begging for us all to stop pushing social justice is because they know they're losing. Human dignity will be respected, even places like Tennessee and Nebraska, we're just having to mop up a lot of bigot-piddle on the way to achieving that.
And, in the mean time, I strongly urge you to take your talents and money and move to one of the more progressive states as soon as possible. Massachusetts is more than happy to drain all the intelligent and capable employees and businesses from the Bible Belt.
by Urmanian » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:42 am
Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:And you know what? It's not hurting California one bit.
by Grenartia » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:43 am
Bottle wrote:Grenartia wrote:
I live in Tennessee. Not only is my right to marry a man, should I want to, being suppressed, but there are strong voices calling for people to have a right to bully me for who I am at school, and for school counselors to be required to out LGBT students to their parents, even if said parents would abuse their children for it.
How these things are not dehumanizing is beyond comprehension.
Its a matter of common fucking decency. California, New York, Tennessee, Nebraska, it shouldn't fucking matter.
Hang in there, bro. The reason people like him are begging for us all to stop pushing social justice is because they know they're losing. Human dignity will be respected, even places like Tennessee and Nebraska, we're just having to mop up a lot of bigot-piddle on the way to achieving that.
And, in the mean time, I strongly urge you to take your talents and money and move to one of the more progressive states as soon as possible. Massachusetts is more than happy to drain all the intelligent and capable employees and businesses from the Bible Belt.
by Bottle » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:50 am
Grenartia wrote:Bottle wrote:Hang in there, bro. The reason people like him are begging for us all to stop pushing social justice is because they know they're losing. Human dignity will be respected, even places like Tennessee and Nebraska, we're just having to mop up a lot of bigot-piddle on the way to achieving that.
And, in the mean time, I strongly urge you to take your talents and money and move to one of the more progressive states as soon as possible. Massachusetts is more than happy to drain all the intelligent and capable employees and businesses from the Bible Belt.
I would, but the climate of most ot the supportive states is too terrible for me. I can't stand the cold. Hell, compared to Louisiana (which is where I'd really want to live), even TN feels like the North Pole.
by Hades imperium » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:53 am
by Khadgar » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:56 am
Hades imperium wrote:may republicans are in that anti abortion anti gay neich. that neich is just dumb. their is nothing wrong with conservatism in its self. to much conservatism leads to stagnation a slow death. so does the other end too much liberal action would lead to rapid mass socalism, mass expendature, a decline in incentive for hard work. both far ends lead to failure. once must balance between the two.
by Grenartia » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:57 am
Bottle wrote:Grenartia wrote:
I would, but the climate of most ot the supportive states is too terrible for me. I can't stand the cold. Hell, compared to Louisiana (which is where I'd really want to live), even TN feels like the North Pole.
I...cannot argue with that. Especially not at this time of year, when Boston features freezing rain and dirty slush.
Sadly, the Gay Agenda did not include plans for a weather control ray.
by Grenartia » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:58 am
Khadgar wrote:Hades imperium wrote:may republicans are in that anti abortion anti gay neich. that neich is just dumb. their is nothing wrong with conservatism in its self. to much conservatism leads to stagnation a slow death. so does the other end too much liberal action would lead to rapid mass socalism, mass expendature, a decline in incentive for hard work. both far ends lead to failure. once must balance between the two.
Me feel me am not smarter now that me read that.
by The Nuclear Fist » Thu Feb 28, 2013 10:11 am
Die Oranje-Vrystaat wrote:When seventy percent of Nebraskans backed a ban on gay marriage and we have one of lowest gay populations in the country, I believe the public opposes gay marriage. So what, we take the undemocratic route?
And you touch the distant beaches with tales of brave Ulysses. . .Farnhamia wrote:You're getting a little too fond of the jerkoff motions.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: 0rganization, Ancientania, Barinive, Deblar, Elejamie, Kortunal, Namkada, The Jamesian Republic, Trump Almighty, Uiiop, Umeria, Verkhoyanska
Advertisement