| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
morrisonhotel
Joined: 18 Jul 2009
Location: Gyeonggi-do
|
 Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 4:55 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| NovaKart wrote: |
| What makes you so sure he was guilty. |
He paid up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apparently, Kobe Bryant is almost as controversial as abortion...
Sorry, but I don't care about Kobe Bryant except for the fact that I am being bombarded with Sportscenter crap telling me I should care...
Although he makes a great point here...
| Quote: |
| And I dislike people who praise the US justice system when the outcome of a case is in their favorable opinion but condemn it when they disagree with the verdict... |
That's why you go with state's rights. Take it out of the courts, more people are happy because each community gets to decide their own standards. 100% of all communities would have a majority of people being satisfied, rather than our 51% satisfaction rate now with everything being decided at the Federal level. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| morrisonhotel wrote: |
| NovaKart wrote: |
| What makes you so sure he was guilty. |
He paid up. |
And he cheated on his wife. And made up for it with some million dollar diamond ring. Lame. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
Although he makes a great point here...
| Quote: |
| And I dislike people who praise the US justice system when the outcome of a case is in their favorable opinion but condemn it when they disagree with the verdict... |
That's why you go with state's rights. Take it out of the courts, more people are happy because each community gets to decide their own standards. 100% of all communities would have a majority of people being satisfied, rather than our 51% satisfaction rate now with everything being decided at the Federal level. |
Justice isn't something that should be based on the satisfaction of the majority. What you just described is exactly the problem with state's rights.
Oh, that reminds me about something I hate about America: state's rights. State's being able to do things like enact institutionalized discrimination or put people to death is ridiculous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
Oh, that reminds me about something I hate about America: state's rights. State's being able to do things like enact institutionalized discrimination or put people to death is ridiculous. |
Eventually all the liberals would live in their own states, and the conservatives would in theirs, and they wouldn't be bickering so much. Sounds pretty ideal to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Koveras wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
Oh, that reminds me about something I hate about America: state's rights. State's being able to do things like enact institutionalized discrimination or put people to death is ridiculous. |
Eventually all the liberals would live in their own states, and the conservatives would in theirs, and they wouldn't be bickering so much. Sounds pretty ideal to me. |
Sounds like a pretty ideal way to lend disproportionate political power to extremists and take moderates out of the process entirely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Oh, that reminds me about something I hate about America: state's rights. State's being able to do things like enact institutionalized discrimination or put people to death is ridiculous. |
Ahhh but state's rights also allowed women to gain the right to vote before it became federal law. It allows some states to not have capital punishment even though there is a Federal Death Penalty.
Some laws the states come up with are good, some are bad.
Some laws the federal government comes up with are good, some are bad.
Where would you rather have the decision being made? I say the more local, the better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
Where would you rather have the decision being made? I say the more local, the better.
|
I'm not particularly comfortable with local decision making at all, at least about truly important matters. Things like zoning ordinances or curfews, sure, have your local decisions. Things like the death penalty? No way. Sure, it's easier to get the death penalty abolished in one state than getting it abolished at a federal level would be, but it's harder to get it independently abolished in all 50 states than it would be to get it abolished at a federal level. My goal isn't just to have my state be free of unethical executions, but rather my entire country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
Where would you rather have the decision being made? I say the more local, the better.
|
I feel like generally the push for states rights comes from people who know the policies they want would either never be tolerated by the entire nation, or would only be tolerated for a limited timespan. For those people, sure, it's better to have a pocket of what you want than none at all. For moderates, though, states rights only pushes you further from what you want, by creating pockets of extremity, which in turn polarize the federal government. I mentioned this a briefly in response to Koveras' reply.
I want a moderate government and a reasonably distributed population from a political point of view. Excessive states rights work against that goal. As such, I want them to be reasonably limited. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NovaKart
Joined: 18 Nov 2009
Location: Iraq
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| A lot of times politicians just want to leave something up to state laws just because they don't want to have to deal with something controversial. This is happening with gay marriage now because the Obama administration is afraid of upsetting the religious right. It doesn't really mean much if you say your marriage is only recognized in Iowa or Vermont. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Sounds like a pretty ideal way to lend disproportionate political power to extremists and take moderates out of the process entirely. |
Hyperbole |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Koveras wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Sounds like a pretty ideal way to lend disproportionate political power to extremists and take moderates out of the process entirely. |
Hyperbole |
It all ready happens to an extent in the real world, though, even with the comparatively limited states rights we have now. Concentrations of liberals in some states, concentrations of conservatives in others, accordingly extreme representatives being elected, and a total mess in Congress due to that extremism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fox brings up an interesting point- States Rights-Federalism & Moderation-Extremism.
It would seem that with our present Federal system an argument could be made that it both moderates and promotes extremism. One need only look at the primary system and the ideological battles in the Courts to think that it may promote extremism. On the other hand one needs only look at the gridlock, watering-down, and dithering to think that it promotes moderation.
Similarly with State's Rights, one could see extremism cropping up in places with a high concentration of far-x types. At the same time things might be more moderate nationally because people are able to have their own say on most issues locally, while agreeing to a limited number of common principles nationally.
Regardless, I prefer either a strong local system or a weak federal one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Koveras wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Sounds like a pretty ideal way to lend disproportionate political power to extremists and take moderates out of the process entirely. |
Hyperbole |
It all ready happens to an extent in the real world, though, even with the comparatively limited states rights we have now. Concentrations of liberals in some states, concentrations of conservatives in others, accordingly extreme representatives being elected, and a total mess in Congress due to that extremism. |
I support segregation and substantial diversity. That being so, chaos in congress is just collateral damage. Then ideally Americans would rubbish the system and have an emperor or something cool. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
UrbanStyle
Joined: 23 Jul 2009
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
