2011: The Year for Gay Rights?

by **Phatscotty** on Tue May 22, 2012 6:43 pm

Well, out of all the people who lose control and degenerate into barbaric bigotry and hateful name-calling, I hold the most respect for RDS. He will answer. I know he will because everyone having and equal say on the issue is a fair deal, and a benchmark of equality. You don't get to trample everyone else's rights to have a fair say in order to install your own special rights or change the definition on one issue. If every other minority did the same thing, it would be the end of all equality....as usual, in the name of equality.

"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal."

- Aristotle

by **xeno** on Tue May 22, 2012 11:17 pm

Maybe offtopic but who the f*ck voted for me in the "Which off-topic regular do you think is a closet gay? " thread?? I WANNA FUCKING KNOW RIGHt tHE f*ck NOW!

by **saxitoxin** on Tue May 22, 2012 11:39 pm

xeno wrote:Maybe offtopic but who the f*ck voted for me in the "Which off-topic regular do you think is a closet gay? " thread?? I WANNA FUCKING KNOW RIGHt tHE f*ck NOW!

This is the gayest message board on the internet - you should take it as a compliment, it was probably a fantasy vote.

by **Woodruff** on Fri May 25, 2012 5:11 am

Phatscotty wrote:I'm not sure exactly where you guys stand on the states rights aspect on this issue? Everyone has an equal say on the matter. If it passes, it passes. More power to ya.

How in the world is this not a fair deal?

Is the tyranny of the majority "a fair deal", Phatscotty?

by **PLAYER57832** on Sat May 26, 2012 5:24 am

Phatscotty wrote:I'm not sure exactly where you guys stand on the states rights aspect on this issue? Everyone has an equal say on the matter. If it passes, it passes. More power to ya.

How in the world is this not a fair deal?

Try reviewing 1963, MIssissippi , for just a few clues.

Just because a lot of people agree does not make it correct. That is why we have a government based on laws, not just majority votes.

by **Phatscotty** on Sat May 26, 2012 11:43 am

PLAYER57832 wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I'm not sure exactly where you guys stand on the states rights aspect on this issue? Everyone has an equal say on the matter. If it passes, it passes. More power to ya.

How in the world is this not a fair deal?

Try reviewing 1963, MIssissippi , for just a few clues.

Just because a lot of people agree does not make it correct. That is why we have a government based on laws, not just majority votes.

No Player, just because you have one example that doesn't seem right by 2012 standards (not 1963 standards) does not mean the entire institution of states rights doesn't work.

Power to the people. The people get it right most of the time, and there is no comparison when it comes to the reality of how often the government gets it wrong.

by **PLAYER57832** on Sun May 27, 2012 6:14 am

Phatscotty wrote:
PLAYER57832 wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I'm not sure exactly where you guys stand on the states rights aspect on this issue? Everyone has an equal say on the matter. If it passes, it passes. More power to ya.

How in the world is this not a fair deal?

Try reviewing 1963, MIssissippi , for just a few clues.

Just because a lot of people agree does not make it correct. That is why we have a government based on laws, not just majority votes.

No Player, just because you have one example that doesn't seem right by 2012 standards (not 1963 standards) does not mean the entire institution of states rights doesn't work

.

Actually, its pretty interesting how you wish to pretend that was just "one example". It is, after all, a pretty phenomenal and much more far reaching impact than the one that might be brought by legalizing homosexual unions.

However, its also not just "one example"
You also hae product and worker safety standards.. states can exceed the US rules, but cannot mandate lesser protections.

Environmental protections... just because you manage to convince the powerful in your state to ignore damage done, even damage that is passed onto other states, does not mean its a just or good thing.

Phatscotty wrote:Power to the people. The people get it right most of the time, and there is no comparison when it comes to the reality of how often the government gets it wrong.

Specific examples, please. And ones that meat reality.

And while you are at it, what serious damage is going to occur from recognizing same sex unions?

by **Woodruff** on Sun May 27, 2012 4:49 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Power to the people. The people get it right most of the time, and there is no comparison when it comes to the reality of how often the government gets it wrong.

Specific examples, please. And ones that meat reality.
And while you are at it, what serious damage is going to occur from recognizing same sex unions?

Phatscotty finds it icky. That's serious!

by **Phatscotty** on Sun May 27, 2012 5:22 pm

Democracy is an egalitarian form of government in which all the citizens of a nation together determine public policy, the laws and the actions of their state, requiring that all citizens have an equal opportunity to express their opinion.

I should not have to explain this... Letting the people of each state decide is a fair deal.

by **Lootifer** on Sun May 27, 2012 5:45 pm

Phatscotty wrote:I should not have to explain this... Letting the people of each state decide is a fair deal.

I do wonder why you guys have such a strong constitution as well as a democratic government. To me it seems only natural that these two entities are going to fight at every turn... /shrug

by **Woodruff** on Sun May 27, 2012 6:13 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
Democracy is an egalitarian form of government in which all the citizens of a nation together determine public policy, the laws and the actions of their state, requiring that all citizens have an equal opportunity to express their opinion.

I should not have to explain this... Letting the people of each state decide is a fair deal.

Phatscotty believes that The Tyranny of the Majority is a fair deal!

by **Phatscotty** on Sun May 27, 2012 7:18 pm

Lootifer wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I should not have to explain this... Letting the people of each state decide is a fair deal.

I do wonder why you guys have such a strong constitution as well as a democratic government. To me it seems only natural that these two entities are going to fight at every turn... /shrug

Power divided is power checked

by **Lootifer** on Sun May 27, 2012 7:54 pm

Not really what I meant, but whatever...

by **Woodruff** on Sun May 27, 2012 8:01 pm

Lootifer wrote:Not really what I meant, but whatever...

You realize Phatscotty does that on purpose, right?

by **Lootifer** on Sun May 27, 2012 8:05 pm

Woodruff wrote:
Lootifer wrote:Not really what I meant, but whatever...

You realize Phatscotty does that on purpose, right?

Yeh but I do try to be honest...

by **BigBallinStalin** on Mon May 28, 2012 12:13 am

Lootifer wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I should not have to explain this... Letting the people of each state decide is a fair deal.

I do wonder why you guys have such a strong constitution as well as a democratic government. To me it seems only natural that these two entities are going to fight at every turn... /shrug

As they should, but over the decades, the constitution has failed to be effective in curbing the power of the executive and less so with the legislative.

by **Woodruff** on Mon May 28, 2012 12:14 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Lootifer wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I should not have to explain this... Letting the people of each state decide is a fair deal.

I do wonder why you guys have such a strong constitution as well as a democratic government. To me it seems only natural that these two entities are going to fight at every turn... /shrug

As they should, but over the decades, the constitution has failed to be effective in curbing the power of the executive and less so with the legislative.

You failed to mention the branch that has essentially allowed that to happen. Well, them and the lapdog media.

by **BigBallinStalin** on Mon May 28, 2012 12:19 am

Yeah, but I'm just not sure how that happens. I kind of want to say that the Judges aren't that bright? Their main qualities seem to be party loyalty and impeccably clean records (mainly because it makes good marketing).

Also, maybe their bulldozed by the legislative and executive... again, I'm not sure how that process works. It's not like the government is known to be very transparent, and people don't like talking about secrets which will ruin their reputations.

by **Woodruff** on Mon May 28, 2012 12:21 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:Their main qualities seem to be party loyalty and impeccably clean records (mainly because it makes good marketing).

That's what I'm seeing, as well.

BigBallinStalin wrote:Also, maybe their bulldozed by the legislative and executive... again, I'm not sure how that process works. It's not like the government is known to be very transparent, and people don't like talking about secrets which will ruin their reputations.

It's difficult indeed for the justices to be bulldozed (not that it can't happen). The primary problem seems to be, in my personal view, their devotion to their individual ideologies (which fall strikingly close to party loyalty, with some rare exceptions) rather than the Constitution.

by **Phatscotty** on Mon May 28, 2012 12:47 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Lootifer wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I should not have to explain this... Letting the people of each state decide is a fair deal.

I do wonder why you guys have such a strong constitution as well as a democratic government. To me it seems only natural that these two entities are going to fight at every turn... /shrug

As they should, but over the decades, the constitution has failed to be effective in curbing the power of the executive and less so with the legislative.

Maybe the people have failed to elect real leaders? Maybe the people have become lazy and immoral and dependent?

The constitution does not automatically kick in when it's violated or ignored. People have to use it along with words and actions. It has become cool to support people who ignore the constitution, to mock those who speak about liberty and freedom (as you know) so we are getting exactly what we keep sending to Washington D.C.. Only when the people become a better people and are more aware of the constitution and are talking about the constitution more will we start electing real leaders who actually respect our rights, liberties, and freedoms.

Dont fret, we are in the midst of revolution. The 4th great awakening in American History is upon us! Rejoice brother!

by **BigBallinStalin** on Mon May 28, 2012 1:29 am

Phatscotty wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
Lootifer wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I should not have to explain this... Letting the people of each state decide is a fair deal.

I do wonder why you guys have such a strong constitution as well as a democratic government. To me it seems only natural that these two entities are going to fight at every turn... /shrug

As they should, but over the decades, the constitution has failed to be effective in curbing the power of the executive and less so with the legislative.

Maybe...

Maybe you're trolling or maybe being stupid? I don't really care at this point. You've bankrupted all the fucks I give about you!

by **Phatscotty** on Mon May 28, 2012 1:33 am

Maybe you are just wrong about your assumptions. Maybe your emotions are getting the best of you. I am truly puzzled by your hatred. I did not think supporting democracy and state's rights would piss off anyone, honestly...

It's totally fair, everyone has an equal say, and I just hold it's the best way to deal with the issue given the reality of our situation. If you can't stand the heat of my arguments of crazy and hateful things like democracy and state's rights, you don't have to respond to my posts.

by **BigBallinStalin** on Mon May 28, 2012 1:38 am

It's page 24, phatsco! Time to post another propaganda video! Maybe add a sentence or two of phatsco-quality?

by **Phatscotty** on Mon May 28, 2012 1:43 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:It's page 24, phatsco! Time to post another propaganda video! Maybe add a sentence or two of phatsco-quality?

Saul Alinsky...is that you?

by **Neoteny** on Mon May 28, 2012 7:31 am

I love when you latch onto something that you don't understand, and parade it around. It's demonstrative of your complete lack of honesty, and that you don't even care to pretend to be honest.