Article View: sac.general
Article #216Re: Vote NO on Prop Eight
From: Bill Z.
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:19
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:19
26 lines
2880 bytes
2880 bytes
kujebak <kujebak@eudoramail.com> writes: > Bill Z. wrote: >> > Courts can be wrong. >> >> The California Supreme Court is far less likely to be wrong than >> random usenet posters. > > But it's less likely to be right than a majority of voters, as > in this particular case. Let's not forget forget this measure > would not have been necessary if the court had respected > the will of the people in the first place. Nope - the California Supreme Court is more likely to be right about it, where "it" was the question of "whether a domestic partnership conveys the same rights as marriage". Our system of goverment does not ensure that the voters make good decisions or wise decisions, and certainly not optimal decisions. Also, Proposition 8 was introduced well before the California Supreme Court decision, so your claim, "Let's not forget forget this measure would not have been necessary if the court had respected the will of the people in the first place," is completely bogus because it violates causality - a physical law. They had enough signatures to qualify for the ballot before the California Supreme Court ruled - those signatures were validated afterwards, but that is a mere formality.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<8763n9x55g.fsf@pacbell.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!news.astraweb.com!router1.astraweb.com!flpi089.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!flpi088.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.com!flpi107.ffdc.sbc.com!nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com.POSTED!79589bed!not-for-mailReferences:
<c0c5fef993b772586ad491e239a5debe@dizum.com> <ge88u2$75q$1@snarked.org> <871vy0mekt.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <geahc1$e50$2@snarked.org> <87iqrbt7xu.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <9f0fc340-a744-43d3-83c2-3392ace12879@u29g2000pro.googlegroups.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 10a89e,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Thread: f824f,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Thread: 10d50a,af9442ae69b6f64f X-Google-Attributes: gid10a89e,gidf824f,gid10d50a,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!news.astraweb.com!router1.astraweb.com!flpi089.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!flpi088.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.com!flpi107.ffdc.sbc.com!nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com.POSTED!79589bed!not-for-mail Newsgroups: sac.general,ba.general,ba.politics,la.general,scruz.general Subject: Re: Vote NO on Prop Eight References: <c0c5fef993b772586ad491e239a5debe@dizum.com> <ge88u2$75q$1@snarked.org> <871vy0mekt.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <geahc1$e50$2@snarked.org> <87iqrbt7xu.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net> <9f0fc340-a744-43d3-83c2-3392ace12879@u29g2000pro.googlegroups.com> From: nobody@nospam.pacbell.net (Bill Z.) Message-ID: <8763n9x55g.fsf@pacbell.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:6fcjTsEJgwi4c4CPiiK6Z6r4TyU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Lines: 27 NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.233.20.69 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com 1225394018 ST000 209.233.20.69 (Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:13:38 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:13:38 EDT Organization: at&t http://my.att.net/ X-UserInfo1: F[OGS^SGXJWOBFH[OZK@_TDAYZOZ@GXOXZYT]UEK@YUDUWYAKVUOPCW[ML\JXUCKVFDYZKBMSFX^OMSAFNTINTDDMVW[X\THOPXZRVOCJTUTPC\_JSBVX\KAOTBAJBVMZTYAKMNLDI_MFDSSOLXINH__FS^\WQGHGI^C@E[A_CF\AQLDQ\BTMPLDFNVUQ_VM Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:19:07 -0700