• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Civil Rights be limited by popular vote?

Should Civil Rights be limitable/removable by popular vote?

  • Yes, they should be able to be limited and removed

    Votes: 3 15.8%

  • They should be limitable, but not removable

    Votes: 3 15.8%

  • No, they shouldn't be limitable or removable

    Votes: 11 57.9%

  • Other

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • Total voters
    19
Zyphlin

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,674
Reaction score
35,460
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This came up a TON during the gay marriage debate. So often you hear people stating that "Civil Rights shouldn't be put to popular vote!". So I'm wondering peoples stances on this. Should Civil Rights, or rights you view as even greater than Civil Rights (fundamental, natural, etc), be able to be limited or removed based on popular vote? Be it through a ballot initiative in Prop 8 or through a standard congressional law.
 
Zyphlin said:
This came up a TON during the gay marriage debate. So often you hear people stating that "Civil Rights shouldn't be put to popular vote!". So I'm wondering peoples stances on this. Should Civil Rights, or rights you view as even greater than Civil Rights (fundamental, natural, etc), be able to be limited or removed based on popular vote? Be it through a ballot initiative in Prop 8 or through a standard congressional law.
Click to expand...

Limitable but not removable. I can't think of any right that shouldn't be limited.
 
Zyphlin said:
This came up a TON during the gay marriage debate. So often you hear people stating that "Civil Rights shouldn't be put to popular vote!". So I'm wondering peoples stances on this. Should Civil Rights, or rights you view as even greater than Civil Rights (fundamental, natural, etc), be able to be limited or removed based on popular vote? Be it through a ballot initiative in Prop 8 or through a standard congressional law.
Click to expand...

To answer your question... **** No.

But I don't necessarily agree with the emboldened portion.... but I will refrain from making other comments because I dont want to ruin your poll.
 
"...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Hmm...
 
I do seem to recall a little tidbit from civics class regarding the three branches of government and the need for checks and balances.

Of course, that was quite some time ago, and with the judicial branch so often under attack from the right, who knows.
 
Zyphlin said:
This came up a TON during the gay marriage debate. So often you hear people stating that "Civil Rights shouldn't be put to popular vote!". So I'm wondering peoples stances on this. Should Civil Rights, or rights you view as even greater than Civil Rights (fundamental, natural, etc), be able to be limited or removed based on popular vote? Be it through a ballot initiative in Prop 8 or through a standard congressional law.
Click to expand...

Absolutely you should be able to remove any right with a constitutional amendment. If you ain't got one of those however...

All rights have limits. I do not have a good definition of where the line is drawn between which limits are ok and which are not except that it should be a few as possible.
 
Zyphlin said:
This came up a TON during the gay marriage debate. So often you hear people stating that "Civil Rights shouldn't be put to popular vote!". So I'm wondering peoples stances on this. Should Civil Rights, or rights you view as even greater than Civil Rights (fundamental, natural, etc), be able to be limited or removed based on popular vote? Be it through a ballot initiative in Prop 8 or through a standard congressional law.
Click to expand...

Not based on popular vote alone, but rather through limitations on affecting the rights of others.
 
Limitable but not removable.

Yelling fire in a crowded theater, calling in bomb threats, a grown man violently threatening to kill a six-year-old girl (but not actually making any physical attempt to injur her at all).

I can think of plenty reasons why freedom of speech could/should be limited.

Likewise, I can think of numerous reasons why other fundamental rights (including 2A rights) should be limited.
 
Zyphlin said:
This came up a TON during the gay marriage debate. So often you hear people stating that "Civil Rights shouldn't be put to popular vote!". So I'm wondering peoples stances on this. Should Civil Rights, or rights you view as even greater than Civil Rights (fundamental, natural, etc), be able to be limited or removed based on popular vote? Be it through a ballot initiative in Prop 8 or through a standard congressional law.
Click to expand...
If you mean a 50%+ majority then, no. If you mean a 3/4 majority I believe that already exists since most states will put constitutional amendments to a popular vote in their state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom