Shocking...
Ya know, I don't understand why people would make a blatantly political post, and then lock it out when they discover people are arguing over politics.
*sigh*
I continue to be surprised by people on my friends list.
And it continues to not be the good kind of surprise...
*sigh*
I continue to be surprised by people on my friends list.
And it continues to not be the good kind of surprise...
"But does that amendment in any way mention civil unions?
Just because the term "marriage" is off the table does in no way mean that civil unions are off the table.
"Marriage" is not a right. If it were, I could demand a court grant me a wife. I can't, and thus it isn't a right.
Gov. Palin acted in Alaska to follow the law, setting aside her beliefs to do what she felt was right under the law.
Frankly, I wish more Governors acted like that. Illinois's Gov., for example..."
Well, here's a verbatim read of it.
"SECTION 1. Article I, Texas Constitution, is amended by adding Section 32 to read as follows:
Sec. 32. (a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.
SECTION 2. This state recognizes that through the designation of guardians, the appointment of agents, and the use of private contracts, persons may adequately and properly appoint guardians and arrange rights relating to hospital visitation, property, and the entitlement to proceeds of life insurance policies without the existence of any legal status identical or similar to marriage."
So, it doesn't allow for marriage or civil unions, but it does allow for a contract that permits a gay couple to split property and see each other in the hospital if they have a legal contract. While I am in favor of gay marriage, I think civil unions would be the next step, and that has been prohibited in Texas. I certainly don't think that marriage is a right, but I do think that a couple above the age of consent (or group) for that matter should be able to marry either through a civil ceremony or religious service (and yes that means that most gay couples would not be able to marry in a Christian church, but they'd still have a civil option). After all, why shouldn't gay couples get legally screwed by the IRS just like hetero couples?
I commend Governor Palin for doing her executive duty as governor. That is a mark in her favor in my opinion.
Oh, and feel free to post the replies you got to my post here, so I'll get them.
Reply
If you're in the minority side of an opinion, you're SOL.
Reply
Reply
When you disagree with the majority, you call them a "mob". When you agree then the minority are just ignorant boobs who can't see their way right to be on the "correct" side of the issue.
The issue becomes "Why can't you be the ignorant boob?". The only alternative is a dictatorship, where the minority rules the majority.
Majority Rule is the only way to insure that the will of the people (not merely the people with power) is heard and obeyed.
When you find yourself in the minority, you have three options:
Since I am forever hearing "If so-and-so wins I'm leaving the country" yet see darn few actually leave, and since I suspect you don't have a VERY large army for an attempted overthrow, all that is left to you is to try and convince others.
The problem is that the left (and I know that I lump in the good with the bad in this) tends towards insults in their attempts to convince. The articles saying that those who disagree must be doing so because they are poorly educated, the talking heads that fling insult after insult without any fact, the politician that says that those who don't support him are fearful, gun-toting religious zelout racists...
All of these things do little but solidify the base of the opposition.
You then add in a media that almost to the station leans left, distorting the other side's statements and views in a horrible parody of journalism that would be funny if not so frightening. I mean, think about it... ABC actively doctored the Gibson interview of Palin so that what aired bore little resemblance to what the transcript shows, cutting and editing until it seemed... Well, it wasn't a fine display of integrety.
And yet, the left claims that the Fairness Doctrine is needed, to protect The People from lies and distortions from the right.
The Right has a number of talk-radio hosts, and Fox News. That's it. The Left effectively runs ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and MSNBC, not to mention NPR and PBS (more centrist, but still trends left).
Now, that all being said...
What issues/concerns do you have about Gov. Palin? I will do my best to lay to rest the ideas formed based upon what is likely distortion and/or outright lie. :)
Reply
I totally agree with you about media bias to the left. The only major news station that tries to reflect multiple viewpoints is Fox News and the left paints it as a bastion of conservatism (I will say it has a right bias, but not nearly the sort of bias that the other big stations have, let alone the farcical attitude of MSNBC).
Most of my concerns with Governor Palin are simply some of her socially conservative values. Those values I don't expect to change, and I just have to grin and bear it. I'm going to be voting McCain/Palin in November, so you don't really have to work on convincing. Besides my husband who is a neo-conservative Republican has pretty much cleared up any misconceptions I've heard about. I'm what would best be described as a social liberal and everything else conservative or moderate. I actually think that Palin's outsider status is a plus, her charisma in the long term would benefit the administration if the ticket gets elected, and that it is about time the Reps put a woman forward on the presidential ticket.
Reply
Leave a comment