The ppl decide - Political Forum

Moah · 09-22-2007, 08:37 AM

I couldnt think of a better name 8(

Ive read alot of everyones posts here. And im curious, how would you feel about putting key issues like abortion, gun control, gay marriage and such on ballets and let the ppl decide versus the governtment? Also why?

And lastly how would you feel about these issues being decided state by state and why.

IMO i would like these issues to be on ballets state by state. So in Texas you may have illegal abortion, lose gun control and no gay marrage, but in California you would have abortion, strict gun control and gay marrage. I know this solution isnt perfect either but i would rather that than a supreme court that goes back and forth as far as repub/dem control deciding that the founding fathers meant, but didnt actually write.

emptypepsi · 09-22-2007, 09:36 AM

Why would you let some states vote on some issues and others not? Wouldn't that still be the Federal government dictating what the people can or can't have freedom of choice in - choosing what they can and can't hold ballots on? I don't think that is such a good idea. By letting California have gay marriage and Texas Gun Control votes, it seems there'd be little State blocks where certain people flock to - further dividing the country than it is already.

I'd rather not have people that likely never study or read the constitution making what could be whimsical decisions (often based on personal convictions than by the Consitution) rather than have people that we pay to interpret the Constituion. At least in that case we can demand that they are removed and put someone else more suitable in their place. Your suggestion sounds a little bit too much like mob-rule democracy to me. We have paid Representatives for a reason. If you think there's too much back and forth with a few Supreme Court cases, wait until you have the whole body public griping back and forth about it.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · 09-22-2007, 03:15 PM

Well people do decide these issues, we have used a combination of federalism and state government to decide those issues, IMO. What you really seem to be saying is allowing the states to decide all social issues. I would be in favor of that for some issues, but not others. I think that the blue states are a bit too liberal on abortion, so I would like to see them hemmed in a bit by the federal government. I would like to see us making abortions illegal after the first trimester for starters.

I think that gun control is a national issue as people traffic guns through different states.

The Gay marriage issue might be something we want to give up to each individual state.

Bradgriff · 09-22-2007, 03:25 PM

Abortion, Gay Marrage, Immigration, should not be key issues. Personally what I consider more important is the price of gas, college tuition, healthcare, getting out of Iraq and redirecting our foreign policy back towards diplomatic solutions. The issues you bring up as key issues only affect 5% of the population max? When the ones I mentioned affect almost everyone

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · 09-22-2007, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bradgriff

Abortion, Gay Marrage, Immigration, should not be key issues. Personally what I consider more important is the price of gas, college tuition, healthcare, getting out of Iraq and redirecting our foreign policy back towards diplomatic solutions. The issues you bring up as key issues only affect 5% of the population max? When the ones I mentioned affect almost everyone

That still begs the question of what to do with those issues. Maybe you are right that those issues are less important, but tens of millions of people don't feel that way, so what is your solution to dealing with people who want a policy to be set on those issues?

Bradgriff · 09-22-2007, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W.E.B. Du Bois

That still begs the question of what to do with those issues. Maybe you are right that those issues are less important, but tens of millions of people don't feel that way, so what is your solution to dealing with people who want a policy to be set on those issues?

OK, my intial problem is that people who are not gay, should have no input on the issue of gay marriage being legal or not, it doesn't affect them. If you live in a state like Ohio that according to Ohio farmers has no illegal Immigrant population, you should have no input on illegal immigration because it doesn't affect you. If you're not the mother or father of a fetus that's being aborted or not it doesn't affect you and you should have no input. Immigration aside. If tens of millions of people are trying to meddle by letting what the bible says dictate what laws we make regarding matters concerning gays and a woman's decision about what to do with her own body.....those people are doing nothing but forcing thier religious and or moral views onto others in what is supposed to be country that embraces religious freedom and should finally NOT be discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.

Just because 10 million ummmmm people want something that isn't right, doesn't mean they should have it becasue they can't resist judging and meddling

Moah · 09-23-2007, 07:46 AM

I would let all states vote on all those issues. I was just giving an example that i thought would happen. Cali being more liberal and Texas more conservative.

I do understand the problems with this - imo they would be watering down banning something. Like if you couldnt have an abortion in texas they would just go to Louisianna. Or if you couldnt buy a semi automatic rifle in Cali just go to Arizona or something like that.

My problem is that I have a hard time with the courts deciding these decisions for me. And these courts are not impartial these judges are basically extensions of the parties that nominated them. Now I'm not saying all judges, but im pretty sure that if you looked at rulings by judges and compared them to party lines and who nominated them you would see paterns.

As far as these issues being unimportant. lol. Two of the three issues have giant impacts on which party the canidate belongs to (for the most part)-(gun control/abortion) and the support/votes they get. If you believe very strongly for abortion and were for gun control and gay marriage would you vote for a canidate who was against all those things, but were in favor of the issues you listed?

I probably wouldnt enact this system even if i could, but i do wish more power would be given to individual states. I believe the beliefs and convictions are so different in different areas of the country that it is hard for some of us to even comprehend how some ppl could believe the way they do. How many times have you read ppls replies on here and thought how could they be so stupid. This is how they feel and who are we to say the blue states are so freaking stupid, i wish they would go live in cuba. Or the red states are so damn dumb, I wish buba and every one of em would just move to iraq and they could have it.

Anyway as you can tell I am republican for the most part, but i do truly try to understand most of the arguments presented, and respect any well argumented point. (which i have a hard time doing

But one thing i have such a hard time with is the idea that the government knows best. And there are some ppl in politics that do believe that you cant let ppl have a say in alot of this stuff because they dont actually know what is best for them.

Anyway thanks all of you for all the different view points and reasoning.

emptypepsi · 09-23-2007, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bradgriff

OK, my intial problem is that people who are not gay, should have no input on the issue of gay marriage being legal or not, it doesn't affect them. If you live in a state like Ohio that according to Ohio farmers has no illegal Immigrant population, you should have no input on illegal immigration because it doesn't affect you. If you're not the mother or father of a fetus that's being aborted or not it doesn't affect you and you should have no input. Immigration aside. If tens of millions of people are trying to meddle by letting what the bible says dictate what laws we make regarding matters concerning gays and a woman's decision about what to do with her own body.....those people are doing nothing but forcing thier religious and or moral views onto others in what is supposed to be country that embraces religious freedom and should finally NOT be discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.

Just because 10 million ummmmm people want something that isn't right, doesn't mean they should have it becasue they can't resist judging and meddling

Okay, so people who don't do drugs should have no input on voting as to whether drugs stay legal or not, as drugs have no effect on them? Men should not have a say in the abortion issue since it doesn't directly affect them? That is what it sounds like your argument is saying. I believe everyone has a say. We're all Americans. Just because there isn't a huge illegal immigrant population in Ohio doesn't automatically mean that they are all unaware and uninformed on the issue.

Your final sentence does not count as part of the argument, in my opinion, as the illegal immigrants are not citizens and certainly should not have a say in the voting or decision making process. American citizens, regardless of state, should have a say.

By the way, by allowing the Fed to say "This state can vote on this issue while this one can not", you are still allowing the Federal government to dictate things. If you truly wanted states to be more free and get the Fed out, you should just let states decide what they want to change or not change.

iTaliAN_ICe · 09-23-2007, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bradgriff

OK, my intial problem is that people who are not gay, should have no input on the issue of gay marriage being legal or not, it doesn't affect them. If you live in a state like Ohio that according to Ohio farmers has no illegal Immigrant population, you should have no input on illegal immigration because it doesn't affect you. If you're not the mother or father of a fetus that's being aborted or not it doesn't affect you and you should have no input. Immigration aside. If tens of millions of people are trying to meddle by letting what the bible says dictate what laws we make regarding matters concerning gays and a woman's decision about what to do with her own body.....those people are doing nothing but forcing thier religious and or moral views onto others in what is supposed to be country that embraces religious freedom and should finally NOT be discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.

Just because 10 million ummmmm people want something that isn't right, doesn't mean they should have it becasue they can't resist judging and meddling

I see your point.

I guess it depends mostly on how you see our country: as a union of separate, sovereign states, or as one nation. I tend to see it as the latter, and believe we should vote on such things as a nation, not as individual states.

Bradgriff · 09-23-2007, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emptypepsi

.By the way, by allowing the Fed to say "This state can vote on this issue while this one can not", you are still allowing the Federal government to dictate things. If you truly wanted states to be more free and get the Fed out, you should just let states decide what they want to change or not change.

State, Fed, allowing, whu bu who????Those are not my words. My post was not as high brow as that.

My post was a veiled jab a christians who want to control the bodies and decisions of young citizens of this country as they try to introduce thier own religious beliefs into law concerning abortion. I also know of NOT one truly non racist person who is fired up mad about illegal immigration like so many other types of people. And people who try to outlaw marriage for our fellow human beings based on sexual orientation.....well. I don't think that's very christian, I mean christians eat pork, Bible says they shouldn't, I'm not trying to outlaw that...

Laws should not be made against abortion, eating of Pork, and gay marriage.
Immigration.......do whatever you want. 12 million of them are here already, and have been here. They probably washed your dishes the last time you went to a restaurant. So Moah, Empty Pepsi, if you're not gay, and you're not aborting a fetus, none of that is your business.

Immigration, that's another story. But what we really ALL need is to have $2.00 gallon gas, and better jobs, and healthcare that doesn't bankrupt people. But that's just MO