• 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!

Vermont legalizes gay marriage with veto override

No... it's relevant because people want to change the law and the norm of society for millennia, and if this norm is to be discarded on a political whim, what else do you want to discard?

Most of us believe it is between a man and a woman.
That is our line in the sand.

What is your line in the sand and why?

.

In other words, you can't think of any real reason and fall back on the old, "my daddy did it that way, and his daddy before him" argument.

My line is that I don't care what two people do. If they want to marry each other, its no problem to me. If they happen to share the same mechanical equipment, don't tell me and I won't look under their skirts to check, either.

What do you care?
 
Binary_Digit said:
nothing you say can change the fact that gays and lesbians do not have the same rights as heterosexuals - the right to marry the adult citizen with whom they are in love.
Nor do polygamists. Why isn't anyone championing their "rights?"
One thing at a time.
 
Psst! What about economic populism? You know, when people vote to take money away from others? Is that okay, too? I mean, since you hate mob-rule so much I figured I'd ask.

The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises [ . . . ] but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States [ . . . ][1]

Guess what document that comes from.
 
I am surprised you would even question it........That is how we do it in this country when activists get out of hand.........

Other than prop 8...when have Constitutional rights EVER been put to a popular vote in this country?
 
Other than prop 8...when have Constitutional rights EVER been put to a popular vote in this country?

Gay Marriage is not a constitutional right, unless you're saying its a constitutional right IN YOUR OPINION.

Please show me the SCOTUS case that shows that gay marriage is a constitutional right.
 
Gay Marriage is not a constitutional right, unless you're saying its a constitutional right IN YOUR OPINION.

Please show me the SCOTUS case that shows that gay marriage is a constitutional right.

Well wouldn't it still be putting a constitutional right to a majority vote irregardless of the US constitution and SCOTUS rulings? The California courts ruled that banning same-sex marriage violated the California constitution and then the Constitution was changed to remove the right to marriage for same-sex couples with a simple majority vote.

The constitutional system in California seems kind of confusing/screwed up with the whole constitutional revisions and amendments thing.
 
Gay Marriage is not a constitutional right, unless you're saying its a constitutional right IN YOUR OPINION.

Please show me the SCOTUS case that shows that gay marriage is a constitutional right.

News Flash: The California Supreme Court found gay marriage to be a Constitutional right. That's old news.
 
News Flash: The California Supreme Court found gay marriage to be a Constitutional right. That's old news.

However, SCOTUS hasn't despite having cases they could've taken to make a ruling on it. If people want to bring legal action against California they can take it to the Supreme Court. But the highest court in the land currently has not stated it as a constitutional right.

Unless you're meaning the fact that the Cali supreme court found it violated the STATES consitution...in which case your use of Consitutional, with its clear implication with the big C of being referencing the United States Consitution, seems to be a big dishonest or at the very least decieving.
 
Last edited:
However, SCOTUS hasn't despite having cases they could've taken to make a ruling on it. If people want to bring legal action against California they can take it to the Supreme Court. But the highest court in the land currently has not stated it as a constitutional right.

Unless you're meaning the fact that the Cali supreme court found it violated the STATES consitution...in which case your use of Consitutional, with its clear implication with the big C of being referencing the United States Consitution, seems to be a big dishonest or at the very least decieving.


Yes...I am referring the the California Constituion.

There is no "implication with the big C" referencing the U.S. Constitution.

What I was commenting on was Navy's comment that it is common for the voters to change the Constitution when "activist judges" go against the will of the people.
My comment was, other than prop 8 where has that EVER been the case?
 
Other than prop 8...when have Constitutional rights EVER been put to a popular vote in this country?

There are many...............every state constitutional amendment against gay marriage was decided by popular vote DD............There are close to 30 including one of the biggest liberals states in the union in Oregon.........


Oh and approved by huge majorities...........
 
Last edited:
If that were true the DEA wouldn't be raiding Cannabis Clubs in CA.

And it was the conservatives who voted against the DEA in that case. Your guys were a-ok with it.


Yes...I am referring the the California Constituion.

There is no "implication with the big C" referencing the U.S. Constitution.

What I was commenting on was Navy's comment that it is common for the voters to change the Constitution when "activist judges" go against the will of the people.
My comment was, other than prop 8 where has that EVER been the case?

People amend laws in response to court decisions constantly. The fact that most of them deal with statutory issues rather than constitutional issues is merely a reflection of the fact that it's difficult to amend constitutions.
 
I guess pork will now be the official meat of Vermont.
 
There are many...............every state constitutional amendment against gay marriage was decided by popular vote DD............There are close to 30 including one of the biggest liberals states in the union in Oregon.........


Oh and approved by huge majorities...........

Sorry Navy...none of those amendments took away Constitutional rights. They were for lack of better terminology "pre-emptive strikes".

Oh...and we all know to take it with a grain of salt when you use the term "HUGE".
 
And it was the conservatives who voted against the DEA in that case. Your guys were a-ok with it.




People amend laws in response to court decisions constantly. The fact that most of them deal with statutory issues rather than constitutional issues is merely a reflection of the fact that it's difficult to amend constitutions.


As it should be. I don't dispute that statutory issues are often amended. However, the comment was raised in response to Navy's argument that Constitutional rights have often been subject to a "popular vote", which is wrong. Outside of prop 8, I don't know of a single case where Constitutional rights have been put to a popular 50%+1 vote.
 
As it should be. I don't dispute that statutory issues are often amended. However, the comment was raised in response to Navy's argument that Constitutional rights have often been subject to a "popular vote", which is wrong. Outside of prop 8, I don't know of a single case where Constitutional rights have been put to a popular 50%+1 vote.

?

Most states have provisions saying that their constitutions can be amended by referendum.
 
?

Most states have provisions saying that their constitutions can be amended by referendum.

But give an example of any time where a person's Constitutional Rights have been eliminated by a referendum (other than prop 8).

If I'm wrong....then I'm wrong. But I don't know of a single case in this country (other than prop 8) where Constititutional rights have been eliminated by a 50%+1 popular vote.
 
Last edited:
There are many...............every state constitutional amendment against gay marriage was decided by popular vote DD............There are close to 30 including one of the biggest liberals states in the union in Oregon.........


Oh and approved by huge majorities...........

So? Since when has it been American to allow the majority to define what rights the minority is allowed to have? Okay, I mean outside of slavery and outside of taxing the rich and outside of jim crow and outside of interracial marriages, etc....
 
But give an example of any time where a person's Constitutional Rights have been eliminated by a referendum (other than prop 8).

If I'm wrong....then I'm wrong. But I don't know of a single case in this country (other than prop 8) where Constititutional rights have been eliminated by a 50%+1 popular vote.

Every single state referendum on gay marriage?

Marriage_amendment_animation.gif


My guys? Who are my guys and what were they a-ok with?

The liberals on the Supreme Court who were okay with allowing the DEA to conduct raids on medicinal marijuana patients over state objections.
 
Every single state referendum on gay marriage?

Marriage_amendment_animation.gif




The liberals on the Supreme Court who were okay with allowing the DEA to conduct raids on medicinal marijuana patients over state objections.

No. I think you are wrong. I don't know of any state where gay marriage was recognized as a Constitutional right and then taken away by a referendum
 
No. I think you are wrong. I don't know of any state where gay marriage was recognized as a Constitutional right and then taken away by a referendum

lol

Either you consider gay marriage a constitutional right, or you don't.

If you do, then every one of these states took away a constitutional right by majority vote.

If you don't, then no constitutional right was taken away in any situation.

What CA did was exactly the same as what everyone else did - the CA court just got there before the legislature did.
 
Gay marriage? No marriage is happy (rim shot) :2razz: Sorry couldn't resist

Seriously though, isn't simply an issue of how we define marriage, "husband and wife", or 'spouses for life"? All this talk of rights is really a matter of rites.
 
Back
Top Bottom