• 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!

Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

Elena said:
I think it's you who don't know your history.

You really buy into this "The North went to war with the South to free the slaves" crap? If that so, why slavery was legal in the North up until the END of the war?

No, your civil war was about the piss-poor Nothern states denying the rich and abundant in labour Southern states their rights to leave the union. You see, without the South the North was destined to struggle for decades to come, and the North didn't like the prospect.
Click to expand...

So Elena,

You really want to talk about the US Civil War and it's History then fine let do it. What shall we discuss the reason and cause behind the Civil War or better yet since you brought it up shall we discuss the difference between Northern States and Southern State's and to have fun shall we throw in the Missouri Compromise,Kansas-Nebraska Act and Dred Scott vs. Sanford and the ramification it had on the Civil War and the United State as a whole.
 
:(
Korimyr the Rat said:
Fifty three percent. Compare that to what would have happened ten years ago and this is good news. Ten years from now, they will no longer have a majority.

This is only bad news if you believe that it is necessary for gay marriage to be legalized now. No matter how much I would like certain policies to become law, I believe that it is best for social institutions to change slowly, at a pace that the public can easily tolerate. Rapid, unpopular changes lead to public backlash and regression.
Click to expand...

You know I wonder how many people that could vote voted? You know what I am saying. Most of the times, voter turnout for state issues is lower than 30% of the registered voters. I really believe most people don't care about gay marriage, and that most would not be bothered by having gay couples living next door to them.

So what I am saying is that social institutions are rarely representative of the majority. Because the majority don't care therefore gay marriage should be legal. But the government is full of extremists because that is what the voters vote for.
 
Ikari said:
HAHAH, no the opposite.
Click to expand...

What declaration by Southern states preceded the war?
When slavery was abolished in the US?
When did the war begin, and when did it end?
 
PeteEU said:
But the debate in the US (like it was in Europe) has been hijacked by especially the radical religious right and together with the radical gay movement, it has turned into something that it, it is in reality not.
Click to expand...

Is it? The religious right is at fault? Really?

Fact of the matter is that Proposition 8 in California failed for one reason and one reason only: the bigots that voted for their Messiah in California also voted FOR Prop 8. They didn't want any of that tolerance in their neighborhoods, not. Roughly twenty percent of all Messiah voters in California had to have voted for Proposition 8, assuming 100% of McCain voters supported it, which didn't happen.

The LEFT wrecked gay marriage in California, not the Right.
 
Charles Martel said:
You mentioned government contracts, not me. You stated marriage is nothing but a government approved contract. I'm asking why I cannot enter into this contract with my sister.
Click to expand...

Because your sister hates you?

In reality because incestuous relationships are bad, medically speaking, for the offspring, or, more precisely, the children of those offspring.

Because incestuous relationships tend to involve some element of child abuse, so it's questionable whether true unfettered consent is possible in that case. Brainwashing becomes a possibility.

But hey, if there's no Messiah Care to make me or my children pay for your genetically defective grandchildren of an incestuous marriage, go ahead, marry as many of your sisters as you can.
 
Last edited:
jackalope said:
Plurality win for candidate A. :2wave:
Click to expand...


Good! So, can I say "A was voted by a majority of people?" or "A was voted by a plurality of people?"
 
Elena said:
Good! So, can I say "A was voted by a majority of people?" or "A was voted by a plurality of people?"
Click to expand...

It was clearly stated several times that by definition that is a plurality win without majority.

Elena said:
And two of my opponents said that it's both...
Click to expand...

You don't have "opponents" just bad math skills.
 
Last edited:
Scorpion89 said:
Yes they are getting older do you live in Maine???
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. Getting older does not mean they're changing their social positions. Unless of course you can prove they are. I got a tip. They aren't.

Over the past 10 Years the Population of Maine has been getting smaller. In 2000 we had around 1.6 Million Living in the State we are now down to around 1.2 Million and of these over 45% of them are over the age of 45. The highest # of folks leaving and not returning are the age groups between 18-25. Maine Ranks in the top 10% of folks entering the US Military per popultaion, also for per population Maine is one of the highest in folks under the age of 30 moving and never returning to the State.
Click to expand...

AGAIN - For the 4th time. What does this have to do with political positions? What does you living in Maine have to do with a population that is solidly left leaning as far as voting goes and has been for nearly 20+ years? For your argument to work you have to find a connection with age and changing voting patterns. You have not.

Maine is a republican State if you take out Portland and Lewiston-Auburn Population between then they make up 1/3 of the States Population and are the two biggest Blue area in the State.
Click to expand...

Maine in the elections :

Maine once again displayed it status as a blue state, with Democrat Barack Obama taking the state with 57.71% of the vote and a difference of 126,650 votes. Maine has voted Democratic since 1992 and is the only state other than Nebraska to split its electoral votes, though it has not yet done so.

It is also the only state in New England where a county voted for Republican John McCain, with Piscataquis County giving McCain roughly 50.7% of the vote.
Click to expand...

In the 1960s, Maine began to lean toward the Democrats, especially in Presidential elections. In 1968, Hubert Humphrey became just the second Democrat in half a century to carry Maine thanks to the presence of his running mate, Maine Senator Edmund Muskie, although the state voted Republican in every Presidential election in the 1970s and 1980s. Maine has since become a left-leaning swing state and has voted Democratic in five successive Presidential elections, casting its votes for Bill Clinton twice, Al Gore in 2000, John Kerry (with 53.6% of the vote) in 2004, and Barack Obama in 2008. Republican strength is greatest in Washington and Piscataquis counties. Though Democrats have carried the state in presidential elections in recent years, Republicans have largely maintained their control of the state's U.S. Senate seats, with Ed Muskie, William Hathaway and George Mitchell being the only Maine Democrats serving in the U.S. Senate in the past fifty years.
Click to expand...

Any talk of Maine being Republican is blown out of the water. Seriously. I mean you've got a SINGLE county going for McCain and with a difference of a few thousand votes. My comment that this is a sign of a dying right wing majority is undisturbed. Maine is leaning to the left.

Hmm a Blue State since the 80s really let see 1980 went for Mr. Reagan 1984 went again for Mr. Reagan in 1988 went for Mr. Bush Sr. in 1992 went for Mr. Perot in 1996 went for Mr. Clinton in 2000 split down the middle for both Mr. Bush and Mr. Gore in 2004 it went for Mr. Bush Jr. barely and in 2008 for Mr. Obama.
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with being a blue lean state? But lright Mr "I live in Maine". I'm getting sick of your inability to put an argument that doesn't rely on a position of authority together. It's not so much that you can't provide any kind of coherent explanation for your beliefs. But that you can't even debate those which are presented to you. But I'll just leave you and your great knowledge of sociology principles be for now with this little fact :

Ross Perot achieved a great deal of success in Maine in the presidential elections of 1992 and 1996. In 1992 as an independent candidate, Perot came in second to Bill Clinton, despite the longtime presence of the Bush family summer home in Kennebunkport. In 1996, as the nominee of the Reform Party, Maine was again Perot's best state.
Click to expand...

As I said. Regardless of whether you live in Maine, **** a chick from Maine or sleep with a donkey in Maine. Maine is proof that the right wing position is losing ground. This is proven in the elections and voting patterns of the individuals. Not the knowledge of some guy who says he knows better because he lives there. I seriously do not know where you get your great information from. But a quick check on the internet will show you how erroneous you are not only as far as voter patterns in Maine are concerned but on who won the elections of the state you claim to live in.
 
Last edited:
Elena said:
Good! So, can I say "A was voted by a majority of people?" or "A was voted by a plurality of people?"
Click to expand...

No, you cannot say that candidate A was voted by a majority of people. Half is not a majority. Half plus one, is a majority. As stated, candidate A in your scenario is a plurality win.
 
Scorpion89 said:
So Elena,

You really want to talk about the US Civil War and it's History then fine let do it. What shall we discuss .
Click to expand...

Just this:

What declaration of the Southern states preceded the war?

When was slavery abolished?

When did the war begin, and when did it end?
 
Scorpion89 said:
Maine is a republican State if you take out Portland and Lewiston-Auburn Population between then they make up 1/3 of the States Population and are the two biggest Blue area in the State.
Click to expand...

So why don't the Mainiacs send Republicans to the US Senate instead of those washed up RINO hags Snow and Collins?
 
scourge99 said:
As I said before, gay, single, and non-married people have all the capabilties to contract the same things covered by state marriage contracts. You couldn't list one thing that wasn't.
Click to expand...

Then there's no problem with them simply being married.

scourge99 said:
The only difference is that hetero couples are given an expediant process via the government which was enacted through LEGISLATION. Hetero couples do not have to use this.

If non-hetero people wish to have the same expediant process then they need to contact their local representative or start a propisition to have it LEGISLATED.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's called making same sex marriage legal.

Really, why not? It's not like you have to get married if you don't want to.

scourge99 said:
Its not a RIGHT to have the process expediant.
Click to expand...

But if it's offered to one group, but not another, it's discriminatory and hence probably in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Fourteenth Amendment.
 
Ikari said:
It was clearly stated several times that by definition that is a plurality win without majority.



You don't have "opponents" just bad math skills.
Click to expand...

That was not the question.

Can I say: "A was voted in by a majority of people", or "A was voted in by a plurality of people"?


Yes, Ikari, it was you who said "both". Is 3 out of 5 "both", as you put it, or a majority?
 
jackalope said:
No, you cannot say that candidate A was voted by a majority of people. Half is not a majority. Half plus one, is a majority. As stated, candidate A in your scenario is a plurality win.
Click to expand...

The win might be "by plurality", but can I say "A was voted in by plurality of people"?
 
Elena said:
That was not the question.

Can I say: "A was voted in by a majority of people", or "A was voted in by a plurality of people"?


Yes, Ikari, it was you who said "both". Is 3 out of 5 "both", as you put it, or a majority?
Click to expand...

for the 3/5 it's both, for the 3/6 scenario it's only plurality. Is there something about this that is really difficult to understand?
 
Elena said:
That was not the question.

Can I say: "A was voted in by a majority of people", or "A was voted in by a plurality of people"?


Yes, Ikari, it was you who said "both". Is 3 out of 5 "both", as you put it, or a majority?
Click to expand...

A majority is defined as 50%+1 vote.

A plurality is defined as the most number of votes garnered by one candidate in a three-way or greater contest, when that number is less than 50%.

Three outta five is majority, and not a plurality.
 
stalin_was_a_nice_being said:
:(

You know I wonder how many people that could vote voted? You know what I am saying. Most of the times, voter turnout for state issues is lower than 30% of the registered voters. I really believe most people don't care about gay marriage, and that most would not be bothered by having gay couples living next door to them.

So what I am saying is that social institutions are rarely representative of the majority. Because the majority don't care therefore gay marriage should be legal. But the government is full of extremists because that is what the voters vote for.
Click to expand...


It was a pretty high turnout, 60% of registered voters

Election contested races updated at 4:13 PM on Wednesday, November 4, 2009. 597 of 605 (99 %) of precincts have been reported. 567057 of 969912 ( 60%) registered voters have participated in this election.
Portland Press Herald: Elections 2009
 
Does the expression "plurality of people" exist?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
A majority is defined as 50%+1 vote.

A plurality is defined as the most number of votes garnered by one candidate in a three-way or greater contest, when that number is less than 50%.

Three outta five is majority, and not a plurality.
Click to expand...

Whew, it's impossible to get the point across. I don't know if it's just stubbornness or what. But as a friend of mine always says, "Ignorance can be solved with a book. Stupidity can be solved with a shotgun and a shovel"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom