The federal governments responsibilities are different from state’s responsibilities, wouldn’t you agree?
Maybe a quick look at the Bill of Rights (The Tenth Amendment) should clarify it for you: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
I have many friends from around the world who offer their opinions of what is going on in the US, but have never read even the Preamble to the Constitution…We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Yeah, like CA Prop 4. Haven’t we voted on abortion notification a number of times in the past 10 years? Why do we have to keep voting on it, again and again with the same result? So annoying!
I’m not sure what you’re asking. I was complaining about how the initiative process allows people to make us vote on the same issues over and over in a short period of time just because certain people aren’t happy with the results.
Yea. It took a lot of research for me to decide what to do about “Question 1” in CT, whether to have a constitutional convention or not. Seems like a lot of good could be done with it, but all the YES sayers seemed to be right winged extremest who wanted to use the CC as a way to strip the rights of gays, and make abortion illegal.
Still I was leaning toward YES, as how could a majority actually pass something so awful. However, there was a lady in the parking lot of my town hall (just over 75 feet from the door) trying to get people to vote yes. I didn’t give her much of a chance to talk her point, I kinda just rambled the mixed up thoughts I had learned about the CC. Her expressions alone, to what I was saying, were enough for me to vote NO. She had EVIL pouring out of her eyes, and when it hit me I knew that the evil extremist were more apt to push for something bad, than the happy go lucky Joe Sixpack would push for something good.
Not to mention to many good things may lead to a bankrupted state. I don’t think the people as a whole are smart enough to budget their good ideas. Making your state do something it can not afford seems just to easy for “the people” to do without even giving it a thought.
With all of those states stripping human beings of their rights is quite saddening, I am sooo glad that I voted NO on a CC and that the majority in CT did as well.
The world is full of people whose principles tell them very clearly and firmly what other people should be allowed to do.
If it helps any of you gay people reading this and feeling left out: I’ve been married, and it’s no fun. Trust me, you’re missing nothing. I should have just found a woman I didn’t like and bought her a house.
Under the constitution people have the right to vote on these issues. If people did not the civil rights act of 1964 would never been passed. It was in fact passed by mostly white men. the people who voted against it also were mostly democrats
If nobody has a right to vote on issues like these who decides them then?
You?
The supreme court?
God?
These issues should be decided by evaluating morals and ethics independently from religious ideals or norms.
If only the supreme court was objective enough to uphold equality and abolish discrimination and put forth rules to enforce this, I’d say them. Unfortunately they probably aren’t completely objective, and even if they were, I have no idea what kind of process would be required to bring a topic like this (and other discrimination) to the supreme court. I’d expect the majority would resist enough to stop such a thing from ever happening.
We the people elect them. Then our job is done. Except to possibly sway their vote (when the elected officials vote on issues). Lobby groups lobby. Individuals call, write letters, and email. The elected want to get re-elected, so they pay at least some attention to what the people want. And lastly, public opinion and consent is manufactured by the media and the invisible guiding hand of the PR agencies. It’s a big loop, which feeds back into itself every step of the way.
I don’t know why we vote directly on issues. The US isn’t a direct democracy. The Wikipedia article on democracy is an interesting read. Scroll down to “Direct Democracy”, which has a mention of California’s extensive use of referendums.
Also, near the top, the third paragraph says…
The “majority rule” is often described as a characteristic feature of democracy, but without responsible government it is possible for the rights of a minority to be abused by the “tyranny of the majority”.
So again, why do we vote on issues at all? Isn’t our job simply to elect the officials?
I suspect a nonmarried person would have a difficult time trying to adopt a child. I’m under the impression that adoption officials place a great deal of stock in what they consider “a stable family environment.”
I think the thing thats a problem is that marriage is part of religion and states that it is between a man and a woman.
What I don’t get is why they don’t try and get separate a but equal arrangement that would get the same benefits of marriage but not be tied to religion.
Its like a teenager wanting to apply for a senior citizen discount. There’s logically no reason to want one but at the same time there should be a teen discount with the same discount amount.
For the most part it should be. Those representatives also need to follow the rule of law, which they don’t. We’ve been sold the idea that we are a democracy for over a century that people have lost the concept of there being any rule of law.