 |
|
|
|
 |
jerZ07002
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Dec 2006
Location:
|
|
|
our due process case law has trended in the direction of expansive rights. i imagine gay marriage will be protected as soon as there is a liberal majority on the court. unfortunately the liberals are the old bunch on the bench. Ginsburg and stevens are probably out during obama's term, but it wouldn't be a bad thing if all the liberal justices retired so that obama could insert some liberal youth. it's unfotunate that alito, roberts, and thomas are the youngest on the bench; each is likely to have another 20 years. scalia and kennedy are both 72 years old, which means they likely have about 10 years. i only hope a democrat is in office when they retire.
as for marijuana, it doesn't make sense to criminalize its personal consumption. i think we should legalize its use, like liquor, and tax the shit out of it, on the production and consumption sides. it's really a no-brainer. just imagine the reduction in cost of production if it could be produced on a mass scale. the reduction in its cost could be filled by taxes. My guess is that in excess of 75% of the cost of marijuana results from three things: 1) the risk associated with producing it, 2) the cost of covertly transporting the drug, and 3) an increase in price to recover the confiscation of other supplies. All three of those drivers would be eliminated and could be filled by tax costs.
Last edited by jerZ07002 on Nov-06-2008 at 02:41
|
|
Nov-06-2008 02:33
|
|
|
 |
 |
jerZ07002
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Dec 2006
Location:
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Clearly, gays have a right to be married if they want. |
stop quoting the declaration of independence; it has no legal significance.
EDIT: it's also not that clear, if it was, this wouldn't be an issue.
Last edited by jerZ07002 on Nov-06-2008 at 02:48
|
|
Nov-06-2008 02:41
|
|
|
 |
 |
jerZ07002
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Dec 2006
Location:
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
No I won't. Gays don't have a legal right to marry. They have a NATURAL RIGHT to marry. The law should reflect that. The legal right to marry is what they are fighting for. |
i don't disagree, however, quoting the declaration of independence isn't a strong argument considering 1) the declaration of independence isn't a legally significant document, 2) it was signed prior to the US becoming a nation, 3) the constitution determines these matters, and 4) its purpose was to declare independence from britian, not to give rights to people of a yet to be formed country. try the equal protection clause or the due process clause for stronger arguments (the due process clause has been used historically to expand civil rights).
you appear clueless when you quote the declaration of independence.
|
|
Nov-06-2008 03:00
|
|
|
 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:37.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|