World of Pageantry

World of Pageantry

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Are you voting?
Poll ended at Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:07 am
Yes 70%  70%  [ 26 ]
No 16%  16%  [ 6 ]
Under 18 13%  13%  [ 5 ]
Total votes : 37
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 6:38 pm 
Offline
Veteran
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2002 3:06 pm
Posts: 704
Location: Gig Harbor
Quote:
For those of you blinded by the right who have demonized the word liberal by using it in a negative connotation for the last 20 years, look it up. It's not an insult to be called "broad-minded".


nor should it be an insult to be called conservative 8-)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:57 pm 
Offline
Drum Major
Drum Major
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 12:38 am
Posts: 2858
Location: Los Angeles
No on everything except 11

The people in control of the legislature shouldn't be allowed to draw district lines to keep them in power. Democrats and Republicans are both in trouble for this for agreeing with each other to maintain a 60% D and 30% R ratio. This 60/30 ratio is just a magic number that the politicians were able agree upon so that they can move on to their number 1 priority: protecting each other's seats. I believe that was what the ratio was during the 2000 census. Since that number is set in "stone", the only thing that keeps these guys in office is by voting by party lines (So they know where to draw their districts).

Politicians being buddies with each other to maintain a 60D/30R ratio + gerrymandering + Supermajority vote for budgets to pass = fail.

Prop 11 isn't perfect but its a step towards change. It doesn't matter if some Ds or some Rs will loose their seats if this passes.
It will allow us to better hold the politicians responsible for whatever they do in Sacramento. It will also stop this 60/30 ratio nonsense and more accurately reflect the political opinions of Californians.

_________________
WHS '05, UCSB '10
WOP OT Round 1 Picture Battle Champion!
WOP OT Mafia Game II: First ever mafia champions
http://officeofstrategicinfluence.com/spam/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 8:45 pm 
Offline
Drum Major
Drum Major
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 2:23 am
Posts: 2342
Location: Home
Hmm, kinda reading some of these for the first time....

Prop 1A: NO (the cause doesn't concern me and I don't want my money going towards it)
Prop 2: NO (you people are lucky to be human beings, stop degrading yourself to the animals' level by trying to defend them)
Prop 3: NO (who the hell cares about hospital renovation? just find a cure!)
Prop 4: NO (she got pregnant, she brought this onto herself, SHE should decide what's best)
Prop 5: YES (those with serious drug problems need all the help they can get, and many innocent and/or good people are in jail for merely possessing illicit drugs)
Prop 6: NO (it's fine enough already, thank you)
Prop 7: NO (random question: why is it considered "going GREEN"? isn't the majority of the earth BLUE??)
Prop 8: NOOOO (Hostrauser is saying it best, and the church is and always will be a TERRIBLE influence on politics and society, keep living in the past you religious nuts)
Prop 9: NO (doesn't concern me in the slightest bit)
Prop 10: NO (maybe if money wasn't an issue....)
Prop 11: YES (never heard of this concept before unlike most of you probably have, but it sounds more logical to me at the moment)
Prop 12: NO (keep living in the past, no one cares about what you did 40 years ago)

_________________
"I haven't slept for ten days......because that would be too long." - Mitch Hedberg


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 8:58 pm 
Offline
Drum Major
Drum Major
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:21 pm
Posts: 2412
Location: Jerusalem, Israel
Sorry all for the long post, but since I'm all alone on this side, I have a lot to respond to. :P .

fieldshowqueen wrote:
My personal opinion is we as a culture are morally bankrupt

I couldn't agree more.

fieldshowqueen wrote:
The biggest issues here are:
1) The church and state are SEPARATE;
2) The states have priority over the federal government;
3) We CAN change what is perceived as a violation of human rights.

I actually agree here too. I would love to see the institution of marriage severed from the US government and replaced by civil unions (for everyone, same and opposite-sex). For the government, it's about civil benefits, so it should be a civil union.

Chapagne wrote:
Yes. Any news program that spends at least several minutes of air time on each story, making sure both sides are represented with additional commentary and interviews is definitely liberal. We definitely need to pay more attention to the blowhards who lie and twist the stories to serve their own agendas.

I was not attacking NPR. In fact, I happen to listen, and at various times (when financially feasible) have been a member. I was pointing out that even traditionally liberal news outlets acknowledge the threat same-sex couples pose to religious institutions. If you would prefer, next time I'll post something from Bill O'Reilly.

Hostrauser wrote:
Phooey. You look back thousands of years and what do you see in EVERY society across the globe? Arranged marriages, political alliances, large dowries of stock animals and land... I'd argue that marriage has always been about business not religion.

That's a pretty heavy claim (especially considering how limited our knowledge about early history is). While I agree that these exceptions exist, I think they're just that: EXCEPTIONS. I know that in at least Jewish history, there has never been these kinds of power games relating to marriage. It's always been one man, one woman, and a relationship solemnized by G-d. FYI, Jewish history goes back 5768 years.

Hostrauser wrote:
Look, bottom line: when you engage in business in America (and I'm not talking just about profit: any activity or service used by the American public) you have to serve everyone.

Really? So if I ran a kindergarten alternative care program, should I be obliged to let pedophiles work on my staff? If I own a zoo, do I have to let zoophiles work as animal keepers? Rapists working at the woman's shelter, thieves working at the banks, terrorists working in Homeland Security, and murderers working in the police department... all in the name of "serving everyone".

The fact is, people can (and SHOULD) make discriminatory decisions every single day. Perverse elements have no place in certain parts of society. In the realm of religion (and by extension religious marriage), homosexuality is perverse (I'm aware that some religions don't take this stance. Most do).

I have a right to practice my religion in the US. That includes refusing to perform convenience abortions (which I religiously consider murder), refusing to promote casual sex (through the proliferation of contraception in public places like schools), refusing to perform insemination on same-sex couples, refusing to approve of same-sex relationships, and countless others. Going against any any of these things would be a grave religious transgression, and yet you claim that it doesn't matter because of "equality".

Any kind of equality that promotes one group to the detriment of another (eg same-sex couples over religious institutions) is NOT equality.

Nreuest wrote:
Prop 4: NO (she got pregnant, she brought this onto herself, SHE should decide what's best)

She's a MINOR. She has not developed to the point where she can comprehend the long term effects of this kind of decision. She already has a culture of crazed "abort now" groups trying to convince her not to "let one mistake ruin her life"; shouldn't she have the chance to hear another opinion?

Nreuest wrote:
the church is and always will be a TERRIBLE influence on politics and society

What rock do you live under? Pre-religion society involved such gems as child sacrifice, ritual cannibalism, mass murder, total contempt and disregard for human life, absolute indulgence of the senses to the point of self-destruction (eg literally eating yourself to death), and countless others. No religion, no morality. No morality, no quality of life. FYI, ideas like equality spring from morality, and therefore, from religion.

Nreuest wrote:
keep living in the past you religious nuts

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. If you mean fight to preserve the moral fiber of society (which used to be stronger) than I fully intend to "keep living in the past".

_________________
It's 5:00... do you know where your ancestors came from?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:19 pm 
Offline
Drum Major
Drum Major
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 2:23 am
Posts: 2342
Location: Home
mkosbie wrote:
Nreuest wrote:
the church is and always will be a TERRIBLE influence on politics and society

What rock do you live under? Pre-religion society involved such gems as child sacrifice, ritual cannibalism, mass murder, total contempt and disregard for human life, absolute indulgence of the senses to the point of self-destruction (eg literally eating yourself to death), and countless others. No religion, no morality. No morality, no quality of life. FYI, ideas like equality spring from morality, and therefore, from religion.


No. Morality is what sparked religion, not the other way around. There had to be a concept of right and wrong before a religion taught it. But that's not the point, morality and religion are mutually exclusive, especially today. Many people aren't aspiring to religious ideals anymore but instead to their own. Sure back then it was a solution for much of what you mentioned, but now it's a problem. First off there are many more religions out there now (with extreme differences) than there were during the time you are talking about. Each religion is full of judgment and bias towards anything different from their ideals, and it is for that reason than many have parted ways with them. Religion established their own respective forms of morality years and years ago, nothing recent has been established. Nowadays, people perceive the established morality however they want to and somehow most Americans still manage to harmonize with each other despite religious differences.

The rock I live under is called America. Here there is an amendment that supports "freedom of religion", yet there is now a proposition that is attempting to conform to religious ideals? Doesn't add up. And if equality came from religion as you say it did, why are they not persisting with that today?

That's "living in the past".

_________________
"I haven't slept for ten days......because that would be too long." - Mitch Hedberg


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:47 am 
Offline
Support Staff
Support Staff
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:58 pm
Posts: 3598
Location: Escondido, Ca
mkosbie wrote:
Hostrauser wrote:
Look, bottom line: when you engage in business in America (and I'm not talking just about profit: any activity or service used by the American public) you have to serve everyone.

Really? So if I ran a kindergarten alternative care program, should I be obliged to let pedophiles work on my staff? If I own a zoo, do I have to let zoophiles work as animal keepers? Rapists working at the woman's shelter, thieves working at the banks, terrorists working in Homeland Security, and murderers working in the police department... all in the name of "serving everyone".

The fact is, people can (and SHOULD) make discriminatory decisions every single day. Perverse elements have no place in certain parts of society. In the realm of religion (and by extension religious marriage), homosexuality is perverse (I'm aware that some religions don't take this stance. Most do).

I have a right to practice my religion in the US. That includes refusing to perform convenience abortions (which I religiously consider murder), refusing to promote casual sex (through the proliferation of contraception in public places like schools), refusing to perform insemination on same-sex couples, refusing to approve of same-sex relationships, and countless others. Going against any any of these things would be a grave religious transgression, and yet you claim that it doesn't matter because of "equality".

Any kind of equality that promotes one group to the detriment of another (eg same-sex couples over religious institutions) is NOT equality.


He never said anything about equal rights for criminals....as a convicted criminal you lose certain rights that normal citizens have, being gay does not make you a criminal. Although some right-wingers might think it does.

_________________
Go read "Ishmael" a novel by Daniel Quinn. It will literally change your life.
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:33 am 
Offline
Support Staff
Support Staff
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 6:46 am
Posts: 7936
Location: West Allis, WI
mkosbie wrote:
Hostrauser wrote:
Look, bottom line: when you engage in business in America (and I'm not talking just about profit: any activity or service used by the American public) you have to serve everyone.

Really? So if I ran a kindergarten alternative care program, should I be obliged to let pedophiles work on my staff? If I own a zoo, do I have to let zoophiles work as animal keepers? Rapists working at the woman's shelter, thieves working at the banks, terrorists working in Homeland Security, and murderers working in the police department... all in the name of "serving everyone".

There are two huge flaws in your logic...

1) All your examples assume these people have been convicted of a crime (which homosexuality is not) and that you know about it.

2) You're not dealing with the receipt of service, like I was and like what was mentioned in the article: you're dealing with the performance of service, which is entirely different. But, to flip it around as best I can: just because a man is convicted of bank robbery does not eliminate his right to use a bank once he has been released; just because a man is convicted of murder does not eliminate his right, once released, to be protected by the police like any other citizen.

mkosbie wrote:
Perverse elements have no place in certain parts of society. In the realm of religion (and by extension religious marriage), homosexuality is perverse (I'm aware that some religions don't take this stance. Most do).

Good. KEEP IT IN THE REALM OF RELIGION, AND NOT THE REALM OF GOVERNMENT.

Also, sorry, but in America marriage is the domain of THE GOVERNMENT, not religion. Do you HAVE to get married in a church? Do you HAVE to have a religious ceremony? No. Do you HAVE to purchase a marriage license? Do you HAVE to register with the government your change in marital status? YES.


mkosbie wrote:
I have a right to practice my religion in the US. That includes refusing to perform convenience abortions (which I religiously consider murder), refusing to promote casual sex (through the proliferation of contraception in public places like schools), refusing to perform insemination on same-sex couples, refusing to approve of same-sex relationships, and countless others. Going against any any of these things would be a grave religious transgression, and yet you claim that it doesn't matter because of "equality".

Correct. You have a right to practice your religion at home and in the church. Not in the business world and not to the detriment of others. No freedom is allowed to run rampant and without restriction for the good of the public. This includes freedom of speech (can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater when there isn't one just to cause a panic, can't call in phony bomb threats, etc.) and freedom of religion. Freedom of religion is not limitless.

If you feel you have to refuse to treat homosexuals or perform abortions, don't become a doctor. You wouldn't be allowed to discriminate and refuse to perform IVF on an interracial couple, either, even if you didn't approve of their lifestyle. In the public sector, professional and legal considerations override personal and religious morals.

This is the point that seems to be missed. This is not Iran or Saudi Arabia. America is not a religious oligarchy, or a place where the church is above the law and/or in control of the law. The rules of government and law take precedence over the rules of religion. Every U.S. citizen is entitled to the same rights. Period. There are no qualifiers: not race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. Your individual religious prejudices are NOT more important than the rights of every American to enjoy the same rights that you enjoy.


mkosbie wrote:
Any kind of equality that promotes one group to the detriment of another (eg same-sex couples over religious institutions) is NOT equality.

Could not have said it better myself.

Any kind of equality that promotes one group to the detriment of another (eg religious institutions over same-sex couples) is NOT equality.

This difference is, allowing same-sex marriage does not PREVENT religious institutions from worshiping their faith, nor does it place any restrictions or hindrances upon them whatsoever. The reverse of that is not true: outlawing same-sex marriage does prevent, restrict and hinder same-sex couples from obtaining and enjoy the same freedoms as everyone else.

Therefore, NO on 8.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:09 am 
Offline
Drum Major
Drum Major
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:24 am
Posts: 2490
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
mkosbie wrote:
fieldshowqueen wrote:
The biggest issues here are:
1) The church and state are SEPARATE;
2) The states have priority over the federal government;
3) We CAN change what is perceived as a violation of human rights.

I actually agree here too. I would love to see the institution of marriage severed from the US government and replaced by civil unions (for everyone, same and opposite-sex). For the government, it's about civil benefits, so it should be a civil union.

And with that you have just contradicted yourself. You say here you want civil unions for everyone, same and opposite-sex, yet you are against same sex marriage based on religious beliefs. Read my #1 again ... CHURCH AND STATE ARE SEPARATE. Also, the States have the right to establish laws regarding marriage NOT the federal government ... thus marriage IS already severed from the US government. And restricting marriage to only certain people IS a violation of civil rights (my #3). Who are YOU to tell someone they can or can't get married because you have problems with their personal choices? I don't care if you are a member of the Church of Nreuest and bathe in raspberry-chocolate sauce at the full moon. That has nothing to do with who you should be allowed to marry. Both religion and marriage are personal choices ... SEPARATE personal choices.
Hostrauser's last post was probably one of the best I've read so far.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:07 pm 
Offline
Rookie
Rookie
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 11:20 am
Posts: 293
Location: Sacramento, CA
Maybe those of you who are for Proposition 8 in California should go here:
http://jrnr416.wordpress.com/2008/10/21/love-not-8

Those are MY children. MY family. I AM who you hurt by voting yes on 8.

_________________
~twinmomma


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 2:36 pm 
Offline
Drum Major
Drum Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:12 am
Posts: 1819
Location: Amory
Prop 1A: yes. i think having less cars on the road is a good idea.
Prop 2: yes. i likes my aminals.
Prop 3: yep. it's a kids hospital! i say it's a worthy cause.
Prop 4: yes. parents need to take a bigger interest in their children.
Prop 5: we don't need to be locking up nonviolent offenders like the violent ones.
Prop 6: no. they have enough money.
Prop 7: yes. the world is going to crap with all the pollution and such
Prop 8: NO. "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."


those are the only ones i care about.

_________________
Image

Cybernations


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 2:51 pm 
Offline
Veteran
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 6:09 pm
Posts: 486
Location: Between a wand, a ring, and a galaxy far, far away
I'm kind of glad I don't vote in California, I got to vote on a bond issue for children's health insurance, a levy for the public university system, and a bond to build a new law and justice center.. It's a little less complicated up here right now I guess.

_________________
"Never look at the trombones. You'll only encourage them. " -Richard Strauss

'05-'08 MSU Spirit of the West Marching Band!
'08 Drum Major

Kappa Kappa Psi- Beta

The Sun Never Sets!
Mt. Carmel '01-'05


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:08 pm 
Offline
Veteran
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 7:31 pm
Posts: 561
1: This will help thousands of college students in the future commuting back and forth from school. Infrastructure doesn't seem to be available.

2: Opponents argue this will cause more salmonella...

4: Yes:Girls will learn their lesson either by inflicting harm or by their parents finding out. No: have sex and then take the easy way out.

7: This should have already been mandated.

8: vote no and you carry on with life as is. vote yes and you carry on with life as is. come on people.

10: REnewable energy. Ethanol is not renewable, does not help the environment, creates food shortages, pollutes the air and water et. cetera.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:04 pm 
Offline
Drum Major
Drum Major
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 5:21 pm
Posts: 2412
Location: Jerusalem, Israel
I don't have the time/patience to sift through all the counter-posts to mine time and again, so let me be brief.

1) I'm glad to see a number of people on this site supporting Prop 4. It's about time we ask people to exercise personal responsibility.

2) Of the people supporting Prop 2, I would be interested to hear your reasoning. Please don't tell me "it's because I like animals." That's nice. Go live with a cow and some chickens and get back to me.

3) I'm still not convinced that my personal religious rights won't take a backseat if Prop 8 fails. If you want my moral view (which I've tried to avoid pushing), I don't think homosexuality should be tolerated at all. I recognize, however, that this country is built on a system of freedoms that prevent one party from imposing their morality on another. In fact, that system is the reason I have the freedoms I hope Prop 8 will protect to begin with.

It's for the integrity of the system alone that I support granting same-sex couples civil rights (like visitation, children, and insurance benefits - I don't support the tax breaks which were designed to encourage couples to have children). I would vote yes on any proposition protecting or widening the civil liberties of same-sex couples, or homosexual individuals, provided they did not deal with an issue I consider to be primarily religious. I would even vote yes (as stated before) on creating a civil form of marriage (eg domestic partnership or civil union) and leaving marriage up to religious institutions. Voting yes on 8 doesn't change our ability to enact that kind of law later on.

The majority of counter-arguments to my legitimate fear of persecution (based on cited case law) have agreed with the case law. This shouldn't surprise anyone, but that sentiment only makes more afraid of the consequences of Prop 8 failing. Granted, I have other reasons for supporting Prop 8, but this is my main one. If anyone has a compelling argument that I'm wrong, I would love to hear it.

As for fieldshowqueen's contention that supporting same-sex civil unions while opposing same-sex marriage is hypocritical: I don't think so. It's never been about rights/equality for me (as I've tried to stress over and over). It's about the institution of marriage, which I believe belongs squarely in the realm of religious institutions.

One more FYI to everyone out there that's positive I'm so removed from this that I don't understand it: both of my two siblings are homosexual. I promise you this election has created more tension and more hurt feelings in my family than any of yours. I live with this issue every day. I'm voting the way I feel I need to in order to protect myself.

_________________
It's 5:00... do you know where your ancestors came from?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Thu Oct 30, 2008 11:46 am 
Offline
Drum Major
Drum Major
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 2:23 am
Posts: 2342
Location: Home
fieldshowqueen wrote:
I don't care if you are a member of the Church of Nreuest and bathe in raspberry-chocolate sauce at the full moon.


Actually we sunbathe in strawberry jelly during summer at the beach. You're welcome to join us!

By the way, nice avatar.... :wink:

_________________
"I haven't slept for ten days......because that would be too long." - Mitch Hedberg


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Big Ol' Can of Worms (aka California Propositions)
PostPosted: Thu Oct 30, 2008 12:36 pm 
Offline
Drum Major
Drum Major
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:24 am
Posts: 2490
Location: Moreno Valley, CA
Nreuest wrote:
fieldshowqueen wrote:
I don't care if you are a member of the Church of Nreuest and bathe in raspberry-chocolate sauce at the full moon.

Actually we sunbathe in strawberry jelly during summer at the beach. You're welcome to join us! By the way, nice avatar.... :wink:

Oh! I'm soooo sorry but I really dislike strawberries. Thanks anyway.
And the avatar was changed just for you don't you know (based on the 5-words thread). :)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
  http://www.worldofpageantry.com Copyright © 1996 - 2006 Email:  admin@worldofpageantry.com  

Site design and maintenance by Dave Schaafsma at Dave's Web Dynamics