By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - WSJ: Democracy loses if Prop. 8 is overturned.

stof on 26 November 2008
MrBubbles said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:


If we allow Prop 8 to pass, THAT will be a blow to democracy, because that will allow any majority to discriminate against the minority.

 

Mob rule allows the majority to discriminate against a minority if its their will.

Yes it does, and a constitutional democracy grants the rule of the majority and the rights of minorities. 



I'm a mod, come to me if there's mod'n to do. 

Chrizum is the best thing to happen to the internet, Period.

Serves me right for challenging his sales predictions!

Bet with dsisister44: Red Steel 2 will sell 1 million within it's first 365 days of sales.

Around the Network
steven787 on 26 November 2008
stof said:
MrBubbles said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:


If we allow Prop 8 to pass, THAT will be a blow to democracy, because that will allow any majority to discriminate against the minority.

 

Mob rule allows the majority to discriminate against a minority if its their will.

Yes it does, and a constitutional democracy grants the rule of the majority and the rights of minorities. 

 

Thank god we don't live in a Constitutional Democracy.  Thank god we live in a Constitutional Democratic Republic.

Edit: Well, I do.  Canada and South Korea have what type of governments? ;)



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

akuma587 on 26 November 2008
steven787 said:
stof said:
MrBubbles said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:


If we allow Prop 8 to pass, THAT will be a blow to democracy, because that will allow any majority to discriminate against the minority.

 

Mob rule allows the majority to discriminate against a minority if its their will.

Yes it does, and a constitutional democracy grants the rule of the majority and the rights of minorities. 

 

Thank god we don't live in a Constitutional Democracy.  Thank god we live in a Constitutional Democratic Republic.

MrBubbles can't let those facts get in his way now can he!

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

PS360ForTheWin on 26 November 2008

so much for equality then, seriously homophobia is what should be illegal



Kasz216 on 26 November 2008
akuma587 said:
If we didn't allow courts to make unpopular decisions then abortion would still be illegal in most states and schools would have been segregated much longer than they were.

Its a stupid argument that it defeats democracy, because one of the reasons the Constitution is there in the first place is to prevent the tyranny of the majority against minorities. That is a fundamentally anti-democratic principle, but pretty much everyone in the country believes in adhering to the Constitution. The Constitution requires us to go against what the people want sometime. That is just how it is.

I am not saying that Prop. 8 should be overturned, but this argument is too simplistic.

Unpopular decisions =/= change already established decisions when no real new facts have changed.

The later becomes less about the law, and more about the judges.

I would argue the courts weren't supposed to re-review cases unless something has changed in the law.  You can argue the change in the California constitution, but when there is no change in the actual consitution... when it was already illegal to be biased against sexuality.  There is nothing that should change legality.

 



Around the Network
MrBubbles on 26 November 2008
akuma587 said:
steven787 said:
stof said:
MrBubbles said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:


If we allow Prop 8 to pass, THAT will be a blow to democracy, because that will allow any majority to discriminate against the minority.

 

democracy allows the majority to discriminate against a minority if its their will.

Yes it does, and a constitutional democracy grants the rule of the majority and the rights of minorities. 

 

Thank god we don't live in a Constitutional Democracy.  Thank god we live in a Constitutional Democratic Republic.

MrBubbles can't let those facts get in his way now can he!

 

 

facts are...democracy is the will of the majority.  so its irrelevant that the us isnt because the topic was it being a blow to democracy.  and democracy cant be a blow to democracy, in this situation.



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

TheRealMafoo on 26 November 2008
The Ghost of RubangB said:
But Prop 8 takes away a right based on sexuality, which is unconstitutional in California. We added sexuality to our Equal Protection Clause in May, so we can't have a separate but equal clause like the WSJ suggests. The passing of Prop 8 (if it is allowed) gives us a State Constitution which on one line says "no laws shall discriminate based on sexuality" and on another line says "only people of this sexuality can get married, the other people get their own separate but equal name for it."

Also, a simple majority isn't enough to change a Constitution, and the reason we don't just allow 50% plus one majorities to discriminate against minorities is because then at any point we could just have 51% decide it's suddenly illegal for Chinese to own land (that used to be the law in California).

If we allow Prop 8 to pass, THAT will be a blow to democracy, because that will allow any majority to discriminate against the minority. It is one of the roles of the courts to protect our minorities from our crazy majorities when they want to start taking rights away.

And I don't know what Biden, Obama, or abortion have to do with this. This is a California constitution issue, and this prop is not compatible with our current constitution......

 

Funny how now things like States Rights, and Constitutions matter to you. When it's to protect something you don't like, those concepts are just outdated.



bardicverse on 26 November 2008

1 - Marriage is/was designed as part of a religious ceremony. Gov't should have NO bearing over marriage, and should be up to the churches/temples/etc who they decide to marry. The gov't shouldn't even be included AT ALL in this religious ceremony. Separation of church and state, please.

2 - In replace of marriage, the gov't should only be able to join people in a civil union, and it should have nothing to do with sex, love or anything. It should just be 2 people deciding to team up economically under one roof, this could be 2 friends, you and a family member, whatever. All the gov't/tax breaks and perks without any emotional/spiritual commitment.

On a related but different topic, I am curious as to how a gay couple would go about raising a child. Would they leave the kid to make their own decision on being straight vs gay, or would they be the inverse of a traditional couple, and make the kid believe being gay is the correct way?



TheRealMafoo on 26 November 2008
bardicverse said:

On a related but different topic, I am curious as to how a gay couple would go about raising a child. Would they leave the kid to make their own decision on being straight vs gay, or would they be the inverse of a traditional couple, and make the kid believe being gay is the correct way?

 

What the hell did your parents do to you? Mine never brought up the subject.

My guess is virtually every gay person does not think it's a choice. So, they will not try and make there child anything. They will just raise it like any other family.

 



bardicverse on 26 November 2008
PS360ForTheWin said:
so much for equality then, seriously homophobia is what should be illegal

 

Agreed, in fact, all forms of discrimination should be illegal - sexism, racism, etc. Disallow words of hate from being used in public at all. No more "homo, n*gger, cracker, chink, etc..." Tho I think that would affect popular black entertainment. No more n*gger in rap songs, Chris Rock's skits would pretty much be empty. =)