New study shows that nearly half of all Americans live where there is some legal recognition of same-sex couples

  • DCguy2001

    Posts: 314

    Mar 07, 2010 4:58 PM GMT
    http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/03/03/20758

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

    Mar 08, 2010 8:23 PM GMT
    I don't see why they don'y just move to Canada, if it means so much to them; it's only next door. Why expect the majority to change for a minority, thats not what being a democratic country is about; majority rules, better than a dictatorship, where the minority rules the majority.

    Now remember I am a pure homosexual allegerdly belong to a minority group, albeit, i've never seen myself as a minority, yet apart of a whole.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 08, 2010 8:28 PM GMT
    Of course you don't see why. You're obviously no student of american politics. Why not shut your piehole and read a book about it? Maybe read a couple hundred books and then come back and try to explain it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2010 1:34 AM GMT
    Yet again, a reminder of me being among the have nots. North Carolina does not have any legal recognition of same sex couples.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2010 2:20 AM GMT
    Pattison saidhats not what being a democratic country is about; majority rules, better than a dictatorship, where the minority rules the majority..


    But America isn't a democracy... and the “founding fathers” actually never conceived of democracy as the main or ultimate goal of their constitution. Many signatories of the Declaration of Independence and other architects of the recent nation were vehement opponents of democracy. One of them was John Adams, who in his laborious contribution warned that democratic systems of government had historically always ended in tyranny and chaos.

    The defect in the democratic system occurs when we confuse the procedure of democracy (effective to select our rulers), with the idea of democracy as a system of government. The Founders conceived the democratic system as merely a procedure to give themselves a Republic, which ensured their most precious value, freedom from the British and ability to seek their happiness.

    Socrates was a victim of democratic will; Another example is the historic trial of Jesus. Jesus was subjected to the will of the people and condemned by the majority.

    Many other highly intelligent people have been against democracy as a form of government:

    Thomas Jefferson: All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that through the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be oppression.

    John Witherspoon: Pure democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of state - it is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage.

    John Marshall: Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.

    Oscar Wilde: Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people.

    Winston Churchill: The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.

    Alan Coren: Democracy consists of choosing your dictators after they've told you what you think it is you want to hear.

    Karl Marx: Democracy is the road to socialism.

    So really, you should make sure you know what you're supporting before you do so icon_smile.gif
  • tennsjock

    Posts: 349

    Mar 10, 2010 7:57 AM GMT
    I'm surprised you didn't mention James Madison's Federalist Paper No. 10, or de Tocqueville's Democracy in America.