Election Thread 2016

[Fe 26]

What, you think house wives should vote? Sexist.

[Yoshi]

Wait, what the fuck? You do realize there are large swaths of the country where you wouldn't be able to vote (not to mention a lot of other small dignities we all take for granted) right now if people had agreed with you on that a few decades ago, right? Jesus Fucking Christ. This epic-level idiocy was already up for a day and a half, how has no-one else called him out on it yet?

Watch him resort yet again to his baffling bizarro-world tactic of calling me a bigot for being against bigotry.

Everyone else can probably read, as I already said I meant new issues. Even Obama figured out that gay marriage should be a state issue, for example. Go back to playing bad games. I recommend Reader Rabbit.

[Fe 26]

But it shouldn't be a state's issue.

It is no more a state's issue than interracial marriage.

And it will probably play out the same way. Half the country will ban it only for it to be deemed unconstitutional 50 years later by the Supreme Court.

[Yoshi]

Almost everything should be a state issue. The fact that we've lost sight of that is one of the reasons the feds are out of control.

[Yoshi]

From I fucking love science on Facebook:

[Frogacuda]

Almost everything should be a state issue. The fact that we've lost sight of that is one of the reasons the feds are out of control.

I understand the argument for more state's rights; that there are particular needs to each state and than these things are better handled by the state... I get that argument.

But you are full of shit if you think marriage is one of them; that the needs of marriage are different in Alabama than in Connecticut. That's just bullshit. Marriage is one of those things that should be recognized equally everywhere. The same way if I have a driver's license in NJ then I can drive in Ohio.

People say that should be a state's rights issue as a means to stall and combat it, but no one really believes that for reasons other than opposing gay marriage. To such an extent that I've never even heard anyone elaborate on WHY it should be a state's issue.

[GohanX]

Like

*edit*

Yoshi's pic

[Yoshi]

I understand the argument for more state's rights; that there are particular needs to each state and than these things are better handled by the state... I get that argument.

But you are full of shit if you think marriage is one of them. That the needs of marriage are different in Alabama than in Connecticut. That's just bullshit. Marriage is one of those things that should be recognized equally everywhere. The same way if I have a driver's license in NJ then I can drive in Ohio.

People say that should be a state's rights issue as a means to stall and combat it, but no one really believes that for reasons other than opposing gay marriage. To such an extent that I've never even heard anyone elaborate on WHY it should be a state's issue.

For one thing, there are tax implications that would impact other states should people choose to move.

It's not just about particular needs. It's about the freedom to not have an overbearing federal government telling everyone what they can do no matter where they live. Handling things at a state level gives people the freedom to move if they don't like the state's policies. That's significantly more difficult at a federal level.

[Frogacuda]

For one thing, there are tax implications that would impact other states should people choose to move.

And Alabama depends on the taxation of gay couples more than Vermont? I don't understand your argument.

[Yoshi]

I have no idea, and it doesn't matter. The point is that these changes aren't made in a vacuum and have impacts that local governments understand better than we do or especially Washington does.