Oh yay, another political thread! (Prop 8, gay marriage stuff)

TheBig3 · 05-06-2009, 06:18 PM

Apprently NH passed it, still waiting a sig.

Edit: That being said, California tends to be more show and less do. I'm hoping the increased pressure from Iowa, and lets so us, will once again commit them to, ya know, voting.

**Janszoon** · 05-06-2009, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBig3KilledMyRainDog

California tends to be more show and less do.

Having lived here for a little while now I have to say I agree.

TheBig3 · 05-06-2009, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

Having lived here for a little while now I have to say I agree.

and despite my traditional war on the west coast for who's the most liberal, theres something to be said for show.

Massachusetts kinda just did it. If we take a cue from the NRA (and who cares if you agree with them, a good idea is a good idea), the payoff is in the battle, not the win.

Keeping *** marriage in the national spotlight makes it more successful. They should get a national leader, and they should stick to winning principles. Argue on the grounds of "right to privacy" and "equality for all" and not the personal reasons that leftist pundits want to take it.

"everyone should have the right to find love" and the like is a losing strategy.

sleepy jack · 05-06-2009, 08:35 PM

I just don't understand why they've never tried to appeal to their opposition - the Republican/Conservatives - and argue that the state should have no role in marriage and all that small government crap they get hard for.

Quote:

Originally Posted by adidasss

It's moving forward. All three west coast states have legislation which recognizes same-sex relationships and gives same-sex couples the same rights as opposite-sex couples (I believe the governor of Washington is set to sign the latest bill expanding the rights of same-sex couples in a few weeks). It's only a matter of time before they give full marriage rights to same-sex couples methinks...(: Same-sex couples...

I just wish Washington would do it quicker =[ we're so democratic to I don't see it have any problems. It's probably all those goddamn hicks east of the mountains.

TheBig3 · 05-06-2009, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy jack

I just don't understand why they've never tried to appeal to their opposition - the Republican/Conservatives - and argue that the state should have no role in marriage and all that small government crap they get hard for.

I just wish Washington would do it quicker =[ we're so democratic to I don't see it have any problems. It's probably all those goddamn hicks east of the mountains.

When have republicans ever done anything to suggest they want small government?

sleepy jack · 05-06-2009, 09:34 PM

Well then it undermines their whole small government message they always harp on about. If they start saying they want government to intervene on social matters as intimate as marriage (which they do) it makes them appear to the general public to be Orwellian in their idea of what the role of government is - in a more directly stated manner that is. It doesn't seem to be an issue approached in a what's the role of the state? manner it's usually all emotive stuff like undermining the family and romance (as you already stated.)

TheBig3 · 05-06-2009, 09:49 PM

Oh ethan.

the majority of people think its Orwellian? really?

Hang in there, they either elect Charlie Christ or they eradicate themselves. They ought to stop calling for Reagan, and start begging for Ford.

Small government means low taxes. and thats all it means.

Marriage, Terry Shivo, Patriot Act, Stem Cell...they aren't taxes. The great plains don't care.

sleepy jack · 05-06-2009, 09:52 PM

What I was more getting at was if supports of gay marriage argue it in the right way the opposition can be backed into a corner to phrase it in a manner that would just be perceived as horrendous (e.g. it's the government's job to tell two consenting adults what their preferences out and who they can spend their lives with.)

I'm perfectly aware what the Republicans mean by small government - they don't mean lower taxes they mean lower it on the wealthy. Bush raised the taxes on the lower-middle/middle class to compensate for the people he gave tax cuts too. It's no coincidence that over his administration the middle class steadily started shrinking as more and more people started slipping below the poverty line.

SATCHMO · 05-06-2009, 11:32 PM

As of tonight you can get married here in Maine.

adidasss · 05-07-2009, 02:11 AM

Congratulations...

05-06-2009, 06:18 PM	#311 (permalink)
TheBig3 killedmyraindog Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 11,172	Apprently NH passed it, still waiting a sig. Edit: That being said, California tends to be more show and less do. I'm hoping the increased pressure from Iowa, and lets so us, will once again commit them to, ya know, voting. __________________ I've moved to a new address

05-06-2009, 09:49 PM	#317 (permalink)
TheBig3 killedmyraindog Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 11,172	Oh ethan. the majority of people think its Orwellian? really? Hang in there, they either elect Charlie Christ or they eradicate themselves. They ought to stop calling for Reagan, and start begging for Ford. Small government means low taxes. and thats all it means. Marriage, Terry Shivo, Patriot Act, Stem Cell...they aren't taxes. The great plains don't care. __________________ I've moved to a new address

05-07-2009, 02:11 AM	#320 (permalink)
adidasss Slavic gay sauce Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Abu Dhabi Posts: 7,993	Congratulations... __________________ “Think of what a paradise this world would be if men were kind and wise.” - Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle. Last.fm

05-06-2009, 11:32 PM	#319 (permalink)
SATCHMO Al Dente Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 4,708	As of tonight you can get married here in Maine.