McCain gets slammed!!!

[joann]

of course, they should be
that's the point
law makers are responsible for creating the best quality of life for the majority of the people
we vote for these lawmakers, they are elected by majority
laws pass based on the votes in the house, the senate, and the congress
that's the way it works
if this were any other 'interest' group there would be no debate

frankly, I don't know why anyone would want to try to serve this country anymore
there is no respect for the law
and every teenage blogger has the right to 'slam' a politician because his agenda only includes education, health care, and the environment. Not to mention that we are at war.

No one is asking you to change your lifestyle
Get over yourself and take a look at the bigger picture

[LimeTwister]

That's true...but law makers also have a responsibilty to take care of the minority.  Hence, the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments.  Also, it's one of the reasons that Supreme Court justices serve for life: so they can protect the minority (Roe v Wade,  Brown v Board of Eduction).  A majority does not have the right to oppress the minority.

[joann]

protect them from what

who is being oppressed

I can find alot of married people who feel oppressed

edit: and those laws were passed bc the  majority  agreed

[LimeTwister]

hahaha, the argument isn't about how people feel in a marriage, it's about whether or not there should be discremination due to one's sexual orientation.  Denying someone a right* is oppression.

And, by right, I mean a social idea constructed by humans.

[joann]

laws don't stop discrimination

[tylor2000]

After all the trouble straight people have with marriage why the hell do gay people want to get married?  It's like wanting to be a part of the Bush administration right now because of all the love and harmony.

[Grakthis]

^ I know it's sickle cell... I just am more used to writing the word sick and I type fast, it came out wrong. I know what it is and I'm not stupid. Thanks.

Um, actually, if two races of humans branched off to the point where they couldn't reproduce at all, no chance, then we can talk about it. Because honestly that is so far into WHAT IF that it's not even worth comparing at this point.

I mean, it hasn't happened, but if you believe in evolution then you have to accept that it COULD happen.  It's biologically possible.

Isn't it kind of childish to cover your ears and say "la la la I can't hear you" just because it puts a hole in your argument?

You need to be willing to think about possibilities instead of just current reality.

[Grakthis]

of course, they should be
that's the point
law makers are responsible for creating the best quality of life for the majority of the people
we vote for these lawmakers, they are elected by majority
laws pass based on the votes in the house, the senate, and the congress
that's the way it works

We elect people who we think have our best interests in mind, not people who share our opinions.

I choose a politician who will sometimes make decisions that are unpopular if they are genuinely in the best interests of the people.

A politician should not change his position every time his constituents do.  He needs to stick to the beliefs and the traits that got him elected.  That's why we have 2-4 year terms for political positions.

Personally, I think the Law and government has a responsibility to a higher standard than people do.  People are allowed to make mistakes, the law isn't.  People are allowed to be dumb, the law isn't.  People are allowed to be racist, hateful, discriminating, biggoted, angry, unhappy, depressed, whatever but the law ISN'T.

The law should be the BEST traits of mankind.  It should represent the peak of the best of humanity.  It should not be the AVERAGE.

if we wanted the government to be the AVERAGE, we'd have a true democracy and not a representative democracy.

[Grakthis]

laws don't stop discrimination

Yes, they do.

They stop discrimination BY THE LAWS.

Stop being obtuse.  We're not talking about the laws stopping discrimination by the people.  The people can do whatever they want.  But the LAW has to be held to a higher standard.

edit: apparently, Joan supports a tyranny of the majority on the minority.  So whatever we do, we should leave the Kurds alone.  Fuck the minority.  Let'em die.

[NoelleNC]

^ I know it's sickle cell... I just am more used to writing the word sick and I type fast, it came out wrong. I know what it is and I'm not stupid. Thanks.

Um, actually, if two races of humans branched off to the point where they couldn't reproduce at all, no chance, then we can talk about it. Because honestly that is so far into WHAT IF that it's not even worth comparing at this point.

I mean, it hasn't happened, but if you believe in evolution then you have to accept that it COULD happen.  It's biologically possible.

Isn't it kind of childish to cover your ears and say "la la la I can't hear you" just because it puts a hole in your argument?

You need to be willing to think about possibilities instead of just current reality.

You act as though we don't need any further info on this subspecies to make a decision about it... as if we have all the criteria before us needed to make the decision on whether or not the two species should marry. It's childish, imo, to bring up a hypothetical situation that is so far beyond our comprehension of what the world would look like for that to happen. There are reasons that I might say yes they can marry and reasons that I might say no they cannot, but since we don't know anything about these "people", I find it dodging the point to even discuss them.

But bravo.

[twilightcarnival]

Wow, you guys are still debating this. Ah, there's no hope for me catching up in this.
So basically I can be screwed and try to join in and sound like a complete idiot, or leave now.
I think I'll just leave

[Grakthis]

You act as though we don't need any further info on this subspecies to make a decision about it... as if we have all the criteria before us needed to make the decision on whether or not the two species should marry. It's childish, imo, to bring up a hypothetical situation that is so far beyond our comprehension of what the world would look like for that to happen. There are reasons that I might say yes they can marry and reasons that I might say no they cannot, but since we don't know anything about these "people", I find it dodging the point to even discuss them.

But bravo.

Alright, apparently you're not actually smart enough to have this discussion.  My mistake.  I should have known better.

[NoelleNC]

You might be a genius of BS buddy, but that's about it.

[Grakthis]

You might be a genius of BS buddy, but that's about it.

You're incapable of imagining speciation.  I don't really think I need to say anything else beyond that.

[NoelleNC]

I'm not incapable obviously. I can imagine it, but I think before I can make a decision on whether or not they should be allowed to marry, I'd need to know more about the differences that evolved, how the world functions at that point, etc. I'm not going to just say for sure one way or another whether or not these people should be allowed to marry- I think it's premature.