• 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!

Things Don Can't or Shouldn't or Should Touch

Camer☑n;1066532885 said:
The "textualist" conservatives are pretty flexible themselves, especially regarding executive authority, depending on who is in the White House or controls Congress.
Click to expand...

Have any examples of this?
 
Crovax said:
How exactly do you think he as president or congress can "touch" gay marriage?
Click to expand...
Appoint non-gay-marriage-advocate SCOTUS judges if the vacancy arises. I agree with eohrnberger. Appoint a textualist or literalist, a judge(s) that interprets The Constitution or amendment as The Constitution or amendment was originally meant to be interpreted.
 
Last edited:
radioman said:
These two issues are extremely important to evangelicals. This group makes up about 1/3 of GOP voters.
Click to expand...
Evangelicals are just as bad as the wealth envious left. Two groups with radical views who want their politicians to write laws forcing everyone else to think like they do. Don't want an abortion? Don't have one. Don't want to marry someone of your same sex? Don't then. Just don't force everyone else to buy into your way of thinking.

Same with gun owners. Want a gun? Fine. Just don't be a terrorist, felon, or insane. It's not that hard.
 
blackjack50 said:
I was just having a conversation about this. Things we as conservative want done, or things we are concerned Don might try to do that will hurt the party.
Click to expand...

That deserves a re-thinking. What hurts the party is immaterial. What hurts the country or the society is what matters.
 
joG said:
What has been tried? Keeping to the Constitution or changing it?
Click to expand...

Attempting to make marriage between a man and woman under the Constitution an new court will not overrule that ruling.
 
joG said:
You might want to think about that. Think about the indivisible nature of fiscal activities.
Click to expand...

I think that you're wrong. Government discrimination based on sexual preference is what's unconstitutional -- you know, equality in the eyes of the law.
 
GhostlyJoe said:
I think that you're wrong. Government discrimination based on sexual preference is what's unconstitutional -- you know, equality in the eyes of the law.
Click to expand...

That is one part of the argument. It is the other part that is necessary to understand the problem.
 
joG said:
That is one part of the argument. It is the other part that is necessary to understand the problem.
Click to expand...

Just make your argument. Why all the tapdancing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom