voting/politics thread

Here you can chat about anything that's not Warriors related.

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

who are you voting for?

Barack Obama / Joe Biden
22
67%
John McCain / Sara Palin
3
9%
other (Bob Barr, Ralph Nader, etc)
1
3%
I'll decide later
3
9%
No one. Voting is for jerks
4
12%
 
Total votes : 33

User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 9202
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 11:07 pm
Location: Land of the Lacob.
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 1:23 am
I wonder if Obama will make all his rivals join his cabinet. He seems to be already going down that path.
Don't hate yourself in the morning... sleep 'til noon.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 7512
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 2:44 pm
Location: Brighton, England.
Poster Credit: -5
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:08 am
JOEL wrote:
bigstrads wrote:
migya wrote:So your pro poof, I mean gay, Bigs?


LOL.............ohh Mig.

Im pro anything that promotes understanding and acceptance in this world still full of so much ignorance and pathetic/incorrect pre-judgements.

"Poofs", as you eloquently put, are still human.............just like any other person on this earth who is still discrimated against, so voting on whether they should have the same rights as any other human, is wrong in the first place, let alone when it is voted "Yes" to take away a basic right of any human.

Sadly, so many people still have alot to learn about life, understanding and what it means to truelly be a decent person.

Im sorry but those who voted yes to Prop 8, are not good people, no matter what else they do in life, to take away this right for gay people is simply wrong...........no matter how it is spun, "sanctity of marriage" give me a f*cking break.............who are you to vote on how a person should live? its discrimination because these people are different, the same as racism............simple as that.



well at least i know what you think of me.....i can see how you can make this statment....as you must know all those folks in order to make that call. :mrgreen:


As soon as I typed that I thought of you JOEL.............but I was on a rant so wanted to get my point down.

I should have put an aterix next to that because to say that all people who voted for Prop * are not good people is not really what I wanted to say............

It was late, and my girl was complaining about me being up so late.

What I meant to say was that I dont understand good people who voted for Prop 8..........as I dont understand how a great person, such as yourself JOEL, who is so considerate, caring, thoughtful and jsut generally one of the nicest people here............feels you have the right to discrimate against another human being and take away a right that all humans should have?

Sorry bud, I didnt mean it the way I wrote it............I sort of did but not in a matter of fact way as I typed it.

The way I see it, its like saying "Ohh yeah, I dont mind black people but they cant have the same basic human rights as me!!! that would be wrong".............there is no difference.

All Star
Posts: 2742
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:09 pm
Location: surviving in your world
Poster Credit: 3
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:41 am
i knew you were to smart to make that statement so thats why i :mrgreen: it...

i do see your point of view .....many who are pro 8 are haters.

i posted all my thoughts a month ago ....most here have a different take which is cool ...so no need for me to have another go around.
Image
I had the meaning but missed the experience.
T.S. Eliot
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 7512
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 2:44 pm
Location: Brighton, England.
Poster Credit: -5
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:00 am
JOEL wrote:i knew you were to smart to make that statement so thats why i :mrgreen: it...

i do see your point of view .....many who are pro 8 are haters.

i posted all my thoughts a month ago ....most here have a different take which is cool ...so no need for me to have another go around.


Cool. :wink:

I know youve explained yourself and so much respect to you for doing so aswell, when you pretty much knew that people wouldnt like it...............so = :D

But!!!...........let me ask you one thing, something I dont think was posed to you before.

You Joel, as probably the nicest, most generous, most courteous, most accepting (which I dont get) person here............how does it make you feel, and more to the point, don you feel some kind of conflict in you when you vote for something that is basically discrimation against another person because they are different?

I know you explained about wanting to protect your kids and what not (and Ill be honest, I dont know everything about Prop 8 ) which is understandable if you feel something is threatening them.................but what about the fact you voted for a discriminatory policy?

There is NO difference between this part of Prop 8 and the bills of old that would not allow black people to marry, simply because they are deemed different and threatening.

All Star
Posts: 2742
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:09 pm
Location: surviving in your world
Poster Credit: 3
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:22 am
good questions bigs....they deserve an answer , which i will give.....
but right now im still shacking out the cob webs 9 i drank a good amount last night at the game) and i dont want my reply to be half baked.
so later today i will respond.

freaking awsome seeing three-morrow last night in person.
i had to celebrate after the game. and im paying for it now , added by the fact my wife has an issue with her knee and cant walk so i got kids and taking care of wife duty on top of it ...haaa haaa im a little screwed right now. :mrgreen:
Image
I had the meaning but missed the experience.
T.S. Eliot
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:52 am
bigstrads wrote:You Joel, as probably the nicest, most generous, most courteous, most accepting (which I dont get) person here............how does it make you feel, and more to the point, don you feel some kind of conflict in you when you vote for something that is basically discrimation against another person because they are different?

I know you explained about wanting to protect your kids and what not (and Ill be honest, I dont know everything about Prop 8 ) which is understandable if you feel something is threatening them.................but what about the fact you voted for a discriminatory policy?

There is NO difference between this part of Prop 8 and the bills of old that would not allow black people to marry, simply because they are deemed different and threatening.


Let me answer it from a more... let's say, theoretical (because it doesn't have any kind of practical use) point of view.

Prop 8 (don't know much about it, but I do know the basics) is discriminatory on both sides, and, at the same time, it isn't. At least, legally, it isn't. If it doesn't approve equal rights for the gay community, it obviously creates a void regarding their legal rights, but not only theirs, because it affects to all the population equally.

I mean, they have the same rights other people have, so there's not such a discrimination. The real definition of a legal discrimination is when you award a certain set of rights to a group of people while somebody else do not have access to those rights. That ain't happening here. Let me explain it with an example: if a gay couple can't get married, that also means that any heterosexual man cannot get married to any other man (it certainly seems like a retarded example, but that's the best way to understand it). Hence, there's no legal discrimination, with the key word being legal. You may consider it as something... unethical for today's society or anything like that, but it's not a legal discrimination. It can be an ethical one, tho, but that's not legally binding.

Once that point is clear, there's another problem, and that's that Prop 8 damages something wheter it passes or not. It either damages the ethical rights of gays expressed above, or it damages the freedom of religion, clearly opposed to gay marriage. A different topic is if religion should have a vote on this (which basically questions the need of Prop 8 to go through public voting, instead of being "imposed", one way or the other, by the government, which, btw, is what happened here), but as people has that freedom of religion, nobody should question wheter it's right or not what those religious ideas (although it would be more accurate to say "what those religious leaders") say about the issue. If there's a voting, everybody is free to vote whatever they want. Problem is, if there's a voting, you're gonna have campaigns towards one or the other side.


I would be against Prop 8, but from a legal point of view, it ain't as easy as it seems.



Man, I guess this post is a bit of a mess of ideas. Hope it's still comprehensible.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 7512
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 2:44 pm
Location: Brighton, England.
Poster Credit: -5
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:16 am
TMC wrote:
bigstrads wrote:You Joel, as probably the nicest, most generous, most courteous, most accepting (which I dont get) person here............how does it make you feel, and more to the point, don you feel some kind of conflict in you when you vote for something that is basically discrimation against another person because they are different?

I know you explained about wanting to protect your kids and what not (and Ill be honest, I dont know everything about Prop 8 ) which is understandable if you feel something is threatening them.................but what about the fact you voted for a discriminatory policy?

There is NO difference between this part of Prop 8 and the bills of old that would not allow black people to marry, simply because they are deemed different and threatening.


Let me answer it from a more... let's say, theoretical (because it doesn't have any kind of practical use) point of view.

Prop 8 (don't know much about it, but I do know the basics) is discriminatory on both sides, and, at the same time, it isn't. At least, legally, it isn't. If it doesn't approve equal rights for the gay community, it obviously creates a void regarding their legal rights, but not only theirs, because it affects to all the population equally.

I mean, they have the same rights other people have, so there's not such a discrimination. The real definition of a legal discrimination is when you award a certain set of rights to a group of people while somebody else do not have access to those rights. That ain't happening here. Let me explain it with an example: if a gay couple can't get married, that also means that any heterosexual man cannot get married to any other man (it certainly seems like a retarded example, but that's the best way to understand it). Hence, there's no legal discrimination, with the key word being legal. You may consider it as something... unethical for today's society or anything like that, but it's not a legal discrimination. It can be an ethical one, tho, but that's not legally binding.

Once that point is clear, there's another problem, and that's that Prop 8 damages something wheter it passes or not. It either damages the ethical rights of gays expressed above, or it damages the freedom of religion, clearly opposed to gay marriage. A different topic is if religion should have a vote on this (which basically questions the need of Prop 8 to go through public voting, instead of being "imposed", one way or the other, by the government, which, btw, is what happened here), but as people has that freedom of religion, nobody should question wheter it's right or not what those religious ideas (although it would be more accurate to say "what those religious leaders") say about the issue. If there's a voting, everybody is free to vote whatever they want. Problem is, if there's a voting, you're gonna have campaigns towards one or the other side.


I would be against Prop 8, but from a legal point of view, it ain't as easy as it seems.



Man, I guess this post is a bit of a mess of ideas. Hope it's still comprehensible.


Barely. :wink:

The issue here Im talking about is not a legal one.............because of course, in terms of the law, this proposition had to be sound (as were the ones banning black people from marrying) because gay people would simply sue on the ground of discrimnation.

Although the legal "fact" of the matter, is total bull sh*t but we wont argue that.

The fact that this bill wasnt imposed, and left up to the people to decide whether or not they wanted to discriminate against gay people is what frustrates and angers me.


TMC wrote:The real definition of a legal discrimination is when you award a certain set of rights to a group of people while somebody else do not have access to those rights. That ain't happening here.


How is that not happening here???...............straight people can marry, gay people cannot............ie: one set of rights for one group of people, whilst another doesnt have them.

This is the definition of what you said there...........although, you are the legal man TMC, so I wont argue but that statement sounded pretty contradictory to me.

At the end of the day............no matter whether any "laws" have been broken..............its wrong, and the laws of human decency have certainly been broken, and will continue to be.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:17 am
bigstrads wrote:
TMC wrote:The real definition of a legal discrimination is when you award a certain set of rights to a group of people while somebody else do not have access to those rights. That ain't happening here.


How is that not happening here???...............straight people can marry, gay people cannot............ie: one set of rights for one group of people, whilst another doesnt have them.

This is the definition of what you said there...........although, you are the legal man TMC, so I wont argue but that statement sounded pretty contradictory to me.

At the end of the day............no matter whether any "laws" have been broken..............its wrong, and the laws of human decency have certainly been broken, and will continue to be.



Ok, let me try to be more... didactic, if possible. Although it's a bit hard when you have to translate spanish legal terms to everyday english. I'll try, anyway...

Bigstrads wrote:There is NO difference between this part of Prop 8 and the bills of old that would not allow black people to marry, simply because they are deemed different and threatening.


First, it's gotta be clear than I'm trying to explain why Prop 8 is not the same as those bills not allowing black people to marry. That sentence is what made me try to clear the point. It's not the same, not even close.


Let's compare the following two rules:

A.- Black people cannot marry a person of their same sex

B.- Nobody can marry a person of their same sex

The first one it's discriminatory. The other is not (always according to the legal definition of a discrimination, not a moral one).

The first of those rules affects only a limited group of population. The second affects everybody. Why does it matter?. Because any rule that affects EVERYBODY cannot be considered as legally discriminatory. And, once again, why does it matter?. Because if it's not discriminatory, no sue based on discrimination grounds can be won.


And now that the Sesame Street episode is over, what's the point of it all?. That most people attack Prop 8 because it's considered to be discriminatory, when it's not. There are hundreds of reasons to vote against it, all of them perfectly valid, but being discriminatory ain't one.



Whatever... it may be a difference that only matters to me. In that case, please, feel free to ignore the pile of nonsense I've just posted.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 7512
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 2:44 pm
Location: Brighton, England.
Poster Credit: -5
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:17 pm
TMC wrote:
bigstrads wrote:
TMC wrote:The real definition of a legal discrimination is when you award a certain set of rights to a group of people while somebody else do not have access to those rights. That ain't happening here.


How is that not happening here???...............straight people can marry, gay people cannot............ie: one set of rights for one group of people, whilst another doesnt have them.

This is the definition of what you said there...........although, you are the legal man TMC, so I wont argue but that statement sounded pretty contradictory to me.

At the end of the day............no matter whether any "laws" have been broken..............its wrong, and the laws of human decency have certainly been broken, and will continue to be.



Ok, let me try to be more... didactic, if possible. Although it's a bit hard when you have to translate spanish legal terms to everyday english. I'll try, anyway...

Bigstrads wrote:There is NO difference between this part of Prop 8 and the bills of old that would not allow black people to marry, simply because they are deemed different and threatening.


First, it's gotta be clear than I'm trying to explain why Prop 8 is not the same as those bills not allowing black people to marry. That sentence is what made me try to clear the point. It's not the same, not even close.


Let's compare the following two rules:

A.- Black people cannot marry a person of their same sex

B.- Nobody can marry a person of their same sex

The first one it's discriminatory. The other is not (always according to the legal definition of a discrimination, not a moral one).

The first of those rules affects only a limited group of population. The second affects everybody. Why does it matter?. Because any rule that affects EVERYBODY cannot be considered as legally discriminatory. And, once again, why does it matter?. Because if it's not discriminatory, no sue based on discrimination grounds can be won.


And now that the Sesame Street episode is over, what's the point of it all?. That most people attack Prop 8 because it's considered to be discriminatory, when it's not. There are hundreds of reasons to vote against it, all of them perfectly valid, but being discriminatory ain't one.



Whatever... it may be a difference that only matters to me. In that case, please, feel free to ignore the pile of nonsense I've just posted.


Of course man!!!.............I already said that I understand the legal difference, and the fact that it is blanket policy so cant be considered discriminatory in the eyes of the law.

But..............it is discriminatory.................straight can marry, gay people cant because of this bill............so its discrimating against gay people, as a seperate group of people to straight people.............fine, it may not hold up in the legal terms but whats wrong is wrong.

The problem with this world, is that there are ways in which "legally" things like this can happen.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:35 pm
bigstrads wrote:Of course man!!!.............I already said that I understand the legal difference, and the fact that it is blanket policy so cant be considered discriminatory in the eyes of the law.

But..............it is discriminatory.................straight can marry, gay people cant because of this bill............so its discrimating against gay people, as a seperate group of people to straight people.............fine, it may not hold up in the legal terms but whats wrong is wrong.

The problem with this world, is that there are ways in which "legally" things like this can happen.


Ok, you're right regarding all that. I just wanted to prove that, legally, it's not the same situation as black people being denied their right to marry.
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 7512
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 2:44 pm
Location: Brighton, England.
Poster Credit: -5
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:40 pm
TMC wrote:
bigstrads wrote:Of course man!!!.............I already said that I understand the legal difference, and the fact that it is blanket policy so cant be considered discriminatory in the eyes of the law.

But..............it is discriminatory.................straight can marry, gay people cant because of this bill............so its discrimating against gay people, as a seperate group of people to straight people.............fine, it may not hold up in the legal terms but whats wrong is wrong.

The problem with this world, is that there are ways in which "legally" things like this can happen.


Ok, you're right regarding all that. I just wanted to prove that, legally, it's not the same situation as black people being denied their right to marry.


Sure, of course because back then it was "legal" like this is "legal"

I know its all "legal".............its just not right and in human decency terms, it is discrimination, thats all. :mrgreen:

So, Joel, as someone who voted for it............but is obviously a very nice guy.............does it create a conflict in you when you realise that you denying another human the right to marry someone they love? (and the other way I phrased the question up there)..............when your ready bud! get well first before we talk all this stuff. :wink:
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 1758
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 11:49 am
Location: napa
Poster Credit: 2
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:52 pm
bigstrads wrote:
TMC wrote:
bigstrads wrote:Of course man!!!.............I already said that I understand the legal difference, and the fact that it is blanket policy so cant be considered discriminatory in the eyes of the law.

But..............it is discriminatory.................straight can marry, gay people cant because of this bill............so its discrimating against gay people, as a seperate group of people to straight people.............fine, it may not hold up in the legal terms but whats wrong is wrong.

The problem with this world, is that there are ways in which "legally" things like this can happen.


Ok, you're right regarding all that. I just wanted to prove that, legally, it's not the same situation as black people being denied their right to marry.


Sure, of course because back then it was "legal" like this is "legal"

I know its all "legal".............its just not right and in human decency terms, it is discrimination, thats all. :mrgreen:

So, Joel, as someone who voted for it............but is obviously a very nice guy.............does it create a conflict in you when you realise that you denying another human the right to marry someone they love? (and the other way I phrased the question up there)..............when your ready bud! get well first before we talk all this stuff. :wink:


The passing of this proposition troubled me. One of the guys that works for me is old school and he was trying to break it down why it passed....and I told him to justify to me why he voted for it...and it was so painful to listen to his explanation. Its basically a vote against human rights. A couple items above this prop was one that called for better treatment of food animals and it passed with flying colors (old school dude voted in favor of this one). When I asked him how he could vote for animal rights and against human rights he gave me another painful to hear explanation.

How do people figure gay marriage will bring down society? If anything, it may help increase the success rate. In a society where half of marriages work, the sanctity of marriage should not be put onto such a pedestal.

All Star
Posts: 2742
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 1:09 pm
Location: surviving in your world
Poster Credit: 3
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:42 pm
bigstrads wrote:
TMC wrote:
bigstrads wrote:Of course man!!!.............I already said that I understand the legal difference, and the fact that it is blanket policy so cant be considered discriminatory in the eyes of the law.

But..............it is discriminatory.................straight can marry, gay people cant because of this bill............so its discrimating against gay people, as a seperate group of people to straight people.............fine, it may not hold up in the legal terms but whats wrong is wrong.

The problem with this world, is that there are ways in which "legally" things like this can happen.


Ok, you're right regarding all that. I just wanted to prove that, legally, it's not the same situation as black people being denied their right to marry.


Sure, of course because back then it was "legal" like this is "legal"

I know its all "legal".............its just not right and in human decency terms, it is discrimination, thats all. :mrgreen:

So, Joel, as someone who voted for it............but is obviously a very nice guy.............does it create a conflict in you when you realise that you denying another human the right to marry someone they love? (and the other way I phrased the question up there)..............when your ready bud! get well first before we talk all this stuff. :wink:



well let me start with one of my beliefs....

all people are created equal their is neither jew nor gentile.... meaning no one person is better than another.


i do not really like being put in a position to make someone feel like i am treating them unfairly. I take NO pleasure in doing something that hurts another.

ok here i go ...
i know there is a right and a wrong. i also know each person needs to decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong. it is wrong for a group of people to change what is right.

i have some hella cool people around me that are gay....they are wise ,contributors to society , educated , loving reasonble people.

but their lifestyle is wrong. i dont try and change them i accept them.
this does not mean i would support their wrong choices by voteing to make their wrong choice seem more right due to a law change.

if my kids turn gay i would love them but i would never say their choice is right. because its not.

would i attend my boys wedding ( a show of approval ) THATS WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD.
I think I would ......however the marriage would be wrong , but out of love i would show up and try and accept my child, accepting a wrong and supporting it can be a tight rope walk.

i guess i can say i can love the person who makes a wrong choice without loving the choice itself.


one problem i have is this.....why are the rights and feelings of the gay's
more important than my rights.

marriage has always been man and woman......
why are my rights to maintain this status lesser than those who want to change what marriage has always been.
are my rights and feelings not as real.

with all politcal social agendas .....once the door is opened it created more room for a said agenda to gain speed ....this concerns me.

at the end of the day ifeel like im being wronged and made out to be the bad guy when all i am doing is saying no i dont want to change .

its the United States of America....every person has a say.
this time the majority said yes on 8 ......

hope that answers your question bigs
Image
I had the meaning but missed the experience.
T.S. Eliot
User avatar
Franchise Player
Posts: 7512
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 2:44 pm
Location: Brighton, England.
Poster Credit: -5
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:03 pm
Thanks Joel, as always, big respect to you for answering a difficult question when you know that most wont like what you will say.

All I will say back to you is this =

1 - When you say, "marriage has always been between a man and woman" and so "where are my rights being respected to keep it that way"

The difference is, no one is taking away your right to think or do anything!!! (whereas you are taking away the rights of gay people)..........what does it matter to you if gay people can marry? what does that do to your perception of marriage?

2 - When you say that gays peoples lifestyles are "wrong"............

A: Why? just because you find it disgusting or something you would never contemplate, doesnt make it "wrong"........its just makes it different to what you want out of life.

B: Perhaps you feel that gay people are too promiscuous? all the freedom and lack of responsibility/faith to another gay person is what you find wrong...........would letting them marry possibly eradicate some of this?

3 - This "agenda" you keep talking about..........that saddens me dude, it really does. What seriously do you think would happen if Prop 8 was voted no???..........GAYS WOULD TAKE OVER!!! RUN AWAY!!!...........give me a break man, come on, your smarter than that bro.

What possible agenda would come into place? spiked water to turn everyone gay!............what is this agenda you worry about?
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:15 pm
bigstrads wrote:1 - When you say, "marriage has always been between a man and woman" and so "where are my rights being respected to keep it that way"

The difference is, no one is taking away your right to think or do anything!!! (whereas you are taking away the rights of gay people)..........what does it matter to you if gay people can marry? what does that do to your perception of marriage?


You're doing it just by questioning why he thinks what he thinks, Bigs. Or would you do the same with anybody that voted against Prop 8?. Everybody has a right to have their own opinion, and that's the right that's at stake here.
PreviousNext

Return to Off-Topic Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest