What's wrong with Wisconsin?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2011 5:52 AM GMT
    Madison - Gov. Scott Walker believes a new law that gives gay couples hospital visitation rights violates the state constitution and has asked a judge to allow the state to stop defending it.

    Democrats who controlled the Legislature in 2009 changed the law so that same-sex couples could sign up for domestic partnership registries with county clerks to secure some - but not all - of the rights afforded married couples.

    Wisconsin Family Action sued last year in Dane County circuit court, arguing that the registries violated a 2006 amendment to the state constitution that bans gay marriage and any arrangement that is substantially similar.



    Read more: http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/121956273.html

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2011 1:35 PM GMT
    DOMA's defeat will slam walker's shit right into his face.
    Walker is a first rate asshole. and a bigot like several members on this site as well!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2011 1:39 PM GMT
    Well once you're done with the unions, you go for the gays. Next up: single mothers, illegal immigrants, abortion clinics and nonprofits oriented towards minorities.

    It's predictable and pathetic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2011 1:39 PM GMT
    Well, Mock voted for this guy. I imagine being denied visitation rights if his lover goes in hospital is not important to him, the economy being more important and all.



  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    May 18, 2011 2:21 PM GMT
    i suspect the "what's wrong....." question was asked by many non-Americans as the watched us elect and re-elect bush as our President.



    icon_rolleyes.gif



    icon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2011 5:26 PM GMT
    I don't see this as a "hot button" issue for several reasons:

    1) The WI Supreme court has not been asked to rule yet as to whether or not the actions of Doyle, and the Democratic legislature in 2009, were in conflict with the 2006 ban on gay marriage and what that all entails as far as restrictions or rights for registered domestic partners.

    2) Wisconsin has yet to pass any law, since the very vague law in 2009, clarifying any rights / rules that pertain to domestic partnerships - so much remains to be debated in the courts.

    3) It is Walker and Van Hollen's opinion that the defense of the domestic partnership law is unconstitutional, and thus they have the right to do what they see is fit to uphold items that are constitutional or not... just as Obama views the defense of marriage act at the federal level to be unconstitutional and has decided (with eric holder) to avoid defense of the law. But of course, it is quite clear that liberals will (hypocritically) only hold republicans accountable for identical actions taken by members of both parties

    4) This issue will be solved by the courts within the next year or two, so whatever action or inaction taken now is ultimately going to be decided soon enough - without legislative action.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2011 8:25 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidI don't see this as a "hot button" issue for several reasons:

    1) The WI Supreme court has not been asked to rule yet as to whether or not the actions of Doyle, and the Democratic legislature in 2009, were in conflict with the 2006 ban on gay marriage and what that all entails as far as restrictions or rights for registered domestic partners.

    2) Wisconsin has yet to pass any law, since the very vague law in 2009, clarifying any rights / rules that pertain to domestic partnerships - so much remains to be debated in the courts.

    3) It is Walker and Van Hollen's opinion that the defense of the domestic partnership law is unconstitutional, and thus they have the right to do what they see is fit to uphold items that are constitutional or not... just as Obama views the defense of marriage act at the federal level to be unconstitutional and has decided (with eric holder) to avoid defense of the law. But of course, it is quite clear that liberals will (hypocritically) only hold republicans accountable for identical actions taken by members of both parties

    4) This issue will be solved by the courts within the next year or two, so whatever action or inaction taken now is ultimately going to be decided soon enough - without legislative action.
    I am going to ask you one simple question..

    Why do either you or I or any other person on this board have to deal with "debates" in court over My constitutional rights( or anyone else for that matter) as a US citizen?
    Answer that one without showing your idiocy.
    And you support or defend this asininity?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2011 9:27 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidWell once you're done with the unions, you go for the gays. Next up: single mothers, illegal immigrants, abortion clinics and nonprofits oriented towards minorities.

    It's predictable and pathetic.


    No illegal immigrants is a separate category all of it's own,and an issue that does need to be addressed, and not just in America. owe illegal immigrants are running riot.

    It's also an issue of National/ International Security.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2011 9:29 PM GMT
    rnch saidi suspect the "what's wrong....." question was asked by many non-Americans as the watched us elect and re-elect bush as our President.



    icon_rolleyes.gif



    icon_eek.gif


    One is watching with anticipation to see if America does it agin, and reelects Obama; now that will be a pisser, and give the comedians a wealth of jokes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 18, 2011 9:57 PM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    mocktwinkie saidI don't see this as a "hot button" issue for several reasons:

    1) The WI Supreme court has not been asked to rule yet as to whether or not the actions of Doyle, and the Democratic legislature in 2009, were in conflict with the 2006 ban on gay marriage and what that all entails as far as restrictions or rights for registered domestic partners.

    2) Wisconsin has yet to pass any law, since the very vague law in 2009, clarifying any rights / rules that pertain to domestic partnerships - so much remains to be debated in the courts.

    3) It is Walker and Van Hollen's opinion that the defense of the domestic partnership law is unconstitutional, and thus they have the right to do what they see is fit to uphold items that are constitutional or not... just as Obama views the defense of marriage act at the federal level to be unconstitutional and has decided (with eric holder) to avoid defense of the law. But of course, it is quite clear that liberals will (hypocritically) only hold republicans accountable for identical actions taken by members of both parties

    4) This issue will be solved by the courts within the next year or two, so whatever action or inaction taken now is ultimately going to be decided soon enough - without legislative action.
    I am going to ask you one simple question..

    Why do either you or I or any other person on this board have to deal with "debates" in court over My constitutional rights( or anyone else for that matter) as a US citizen?
    Answer that one without showing your idiocy.
    And you support or defend this asininity?


    We shouldn't but that's the way it's structured and if you can think of a viable way where everyone has full rights without courts interpreting the constitution or votes by the people then by all means share your utopian ideas! An 18yr old boy might think that we should lower the age of consent because he and some 15yr old girl claim to be in love, he might also say we shouldn't be voting on their rights even though we call it pedophilia, but there's no way around either a court interpreting or congress making the laws or the people voting.

    Whether you agree with the outcome or not, there is a process and it's really not easy to have one that deals perfect justice or pleases everyone.

    Your comprehension on these matters seems severely lacking, so don't lecture me on idiocy or asininity.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    May 18, 2011 10:13 PM GMT
    The stupid voters elected a Fascist Republican governor and legislature, giving them complete power to take away their rights, bust unions, and go after teachers, firemen, and cops.

    Hopefully, they'll have enough sense to throw the bums out, next time around.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 3:38 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie said

    Your comprehension on these matters seems severely lacking, so don't lecture me on idiocy or asininity.
    Oh trust me I will! YOU voted for this moron knowing full well his intentions and his standing on THIS specific issue.
    And your rather inept attempt on judging my comprehension is a poor tactic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 6:44 PM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    mocktwinkie said

    Your comprehension on these matters seems severely lacking, so don't lecture me on idiocy or asininity.
    Oh trust me I will! YOU voted for this moron knowing full well his intentions and his standing on THIS specific issue.
    And your rather inept attempt on judging my comprehension is a poor tactic.


    So please go on to elaborate on how you plan to fix our system and the structure of "rights" being "voted" upon? Oh wait, you don't have a response because your span of critical thinking is as narrow as it gets.

    And yes I voted for Walker, and you voted for Obama knowing very well his anti-gay marriage stance.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    May 19, 2011 8:01 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]mocktwinkie said...And yes I voted for Walker... [/quote]


    how could a man so young turn into a self-loathing gay man so quickly?


    one day in the future, mock, your support of the GOP party and it's anti-gay political platform WILL reach out and bite you on the ass.


    icon_exclaim.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 8:27 PM GMT
    rnch said[quote][cite]mocktwinkie said...And yes I voted for Walker...



    how could a man so young turn into a self-loathing gay man so quickly?


    one day in the future, mock, your support of the GOP party and it's anti-gay political platform WILL reach out and bite you on the ass.


    icon_exclaim.gif[/quote]

    But I don't loathe myself. Where did you get this impression?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 8:29 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said

    And yes I voted for Walker, (We all know, you stated it quite loudly) and you voted for Obama knowing very well his anti-gay marriage stance.
    And you know this how?????? Are you clairvoyant or something? icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 12:22 AM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    mocktwinkie said

    And yes I voted for Walker, (We all know, you stated it quite loudly) and you voted for Obama knowing very well his anti-gay marriage stance.
    And you know this how?????? Are you clairvoyant or something? icon_rolleyes.gif


    I just know! I'm that good!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 3:28 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    TropicalMark said
    mocktwinkie said

    And yes I voted for Walker, (We all know, you stated it quite loudly) and you voted for Obama knowing very well his anti-gay marriage stance.
    And you know this how?????? Are you clairvoyant or something? icon_rolleyes.gif


    I just know! I'm that good!
    Yep... I rest my case.
  • TrentGrad

    Posts: 1541

    May 20, 2011 5:19 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    TropicalMark said
    mocktwinkie said

    Your comprehension on these matters seems severely lacking, so don't lecture me on idiocy or asininity.
    Oh trust me I will! YOU voted for this moron knowing full well his intentions and his standing on THIS specific issue.
    And your rather inept attempt on judging my comprehension is a poor tactic.


    So please go on to elaborate on how you plan to fix our system and the structure of "rights" being "voted" upon? Oh wait, you don't have a response because your span of critical thinking is as narrow as it gets.

    And yes I voted for Walker, and you voted for Obama knowing very well his anti-gay marriage stance.


    That's actually kind of fascinating.

    You're right: Obama has in past affirmed his belief in the traditional definition of marriage...so on that level, he and Walker aren't all that different.

    EXCEPT that Obama's refusal to defend the DOMA any further implies that he is not being governed by his own moral leanings on the matter.

    Walker's stance on this is entirely related to his own moral leanings...and the fact that you, twinkie, can't bring yourself to openly criticize this douchebag...it's disappointing to say the least.

    It should be noted, Walker and his attorney general stopped supporting the registry not because the law around it invokes a contraversial statute or something: they are on record as suggesting that they believe it to be unconstitutional because it "mimics marriage."

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 20, 2011 2:15 PM GMT
    TrentGrad said
    mocktwinkie said
    TropicalMark said
    mocktwinkie said

    Your comprehension on these matters seems severely lacking, so don't lecture me on idiocy or asininity.
    Oh trust me I will! YOU voted for this moron knowing full well his intentions and his standing on THIS specific issue.
    And your rather inept attempt on judging my comprehension is a poor tactic.


    So please go on to elaborate on how you plan to fix our system and the structure of "rights" being "voted" upon? Oh wait, you don't have a response because your span of critical thinking is as narrow as it gets.

    And yes I voted for Walker, and you voted for Obama knowing very well his anti-gay marriage stance.


    That's actually kind of fascinating.

    You're right: Obama has in past affirmed his belief in the traditional definition of marriage...so on that level, he and Walker aren't all that different.

    EXCEPT that Obama's refusal to defend the DOMA any further implies that he is not being governed by his own moral leanings on the matter.

    Walker's stance on this is entirely related to his own moral leanings...and the fact that you, twinkie, can't bring yourself to openly criticize this douchebag...it's disappointing to say the least.

    It should be noted, Walker and his attorney general stopped supporting the registry not because the law around it invokes a contraversial statute or something: they are on record as suggesting that they believe it to be unconstitutional because it "mimics marriage."



    Both did what they did to pander to certain blocks of voters that they feel are important. Nothing more, nothing less.