NC Amendment 1 Passes (Constitutionally Prevents Gay Marriage)

What is the rationale for that?

 

So, if the fine citizens of North Carolina, who are so prescient they continually elected a piece of shit like Jesse Helms, vote to take away the right to vote for blacks, that would be "how we are supposed to do things?" How about they vote that only members of judeo-Christian denominations should be provided First Amendment protections. The last way we should decide issues of any real import is by mob rule. That's why we're a representative democracy, not some idiotic version of vox populi.

 

If something said by someone else, about someone else, many years after their lifetime is "too convincing" or "too conclusive" for you, allow me the following:

Elvis is alive. Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy. Aliens landed in Area 51. Bigfoot is real, and Mary [uck fay]ing Poppins can fly.

Oh, and I can find all of those references in a book, too.

Hell, some of them I can even prove lived, at one point.

Neither makes either factual.

 

Federal issues should be handled by the federal apparatus. It ensures reasonably uniform enforcement and protects against the states acting like cowboys.

 

First gays - now immigrants.

I'm waiting on abortion and the teaching of evolution at any minute.

Let's get this party started.

 

But does it make it false?

 

Only when liberals win, Old.

Only when they win.

Otherwise, they just call everyone stupid and blame Jesus.

 

So, you're saying if people don't behave like ignorant bigots, nobody will point out they are ignorant bigots? I agree with that.

 

I'll be as willing as anyone to compare it with multiple conspiracy theories and novels, just as soon as you are.

 

Great point. Letting the populace have its way worked so well in the South in the '50s and '60s. We should do away with elected officials and just sit around voting on the internet on every issue. The public is so well informed and educated, and people do such a great job of managing their own finances and lives, we have obviously evolved beyond the need for the representative Contitutional democracy the founding fathers set up.

 

Agree completely on this point. Many of the voters in NC likely do not fully understand what they voted for and why many view it as bigoted. But people need to be careful....before long they could be the minority for whom the bigoted majority wants to restrict rights.

 

Sounds great, but things obviously aren't working so well for Arizona and the federal government appears more oppositional than sympathetic at this point.

 

Everyone loves majority rule until they aren't in the majority. Then, they thank their lucky stars for the Constitution.

 

Why should they be sympathetic to an entity they see as grandstanding and overstepping its authority?

 

Seems like it is their responsibility to take care of those negatively affected by their ineffectual enforcement of laws. If a symbolic denial of a governor is more important to our federal government...

 

Aren't the elected officials given power as representatives of what the people want?

 

Sympathy is not even the right term really. This is a non issue if the federal government does their job. After that there is no need for grandstanding or over reaching.

 

In this thread, I have been told he really meant "We are," since the trinity is winked and nudged at under the table throughout the Bible, waiting to be discovered 300 years later.

 

Yes, it will certainly work well for states to overstep their authority given by the Constitution every time they perceive the federal government doesn't "do their job". That would be a flawless system.

 

Flawless would be the federal government enforcing a law that my 5 year old comprehends.