The sky doesn’t fall in a day

Townhall.com ^ | September 30, 2005 | Alan Sears

[gpapa]

In the arena of political discourse, a “straw man” is often a weak or extreme argument one side in a debate falsely attributes to their opponents.  It’s an age-old tactic that presents a nice-sounding argument that is, in reality, easily refuted or “knocked down.”

That is the tactic now being used to defend the court-ordered legalization of same-sex “marriage” in Massachusetts last year.

[ThirstyMan]

You see, this debate is really not about “equal rights,” as the proponents of homosexual behavior like to frame it, but about redefining marriage, family, and, yes, American culture.

A small group of activist judges shouldn't be given sole power to redefine and alter our cultural mores to their own notions of the way things should be...especially when they're overriding the people's expressed will.

[EGPWS]

A small group of activist judges shouldn't be given sole power to redefine and alter our cultural mores to their own notions of the way things should be...especially when they're overriding the people's expressed will.

No they shouldn't.

Politicians who promote such a redefinition by appointing such judges should be voted out of office by their constituents.

Why aren't they?

[ThirstyMan]

Why aren't they?

I know why.
Here in MA the state senate president through legislative tabling dismissed a petition brought by the people to put gay marriage on the ballot for a vote.
Had gay marriage appeared on the ballot when it was supposed to, we wouldn't be having gay marriage now. Again the top dogs think they know best and they attempt to rule (overrule) by judicial decree or when possible, legislative slight of hand.

[EGPWS]

Here in MA the state senate president through legislative tabling dismissed a petition brought by the people to put gay marriage on the ballot for a vote.

How does the state Senate President in MA achieve his position?

[ThirstyMan]

"How does the state Senate President in MA achieve his position?"

First he's elected as a State Senator and then he campaigns for Senate president to be elected from among his peers. At least I think that's true.

I'll ping LB to make sure.

[Little Bill]

The Senate President is elected by the members present. The rats put up a candidate and the pubbies do the same. The candidate's are those with seniority, party leaders, and in the rat case have promised a pay off to their Major supporters with, Committee Chairmanships and Vice Chairmanships which pay more money, on top of the outragious amount the receive as salary.

These posts are held at the whim of the President and are used to keep the toadies in line. There is a certain amount of graft and patronage involved, this a rat state after all.

Most Presidents hold their office until indictment or they piss of enough of the toadies that another faction forms and exiles them to a basement office and the cycle starts again.

[EGPWS]

First he's elected as a State Senator and then he campaigns for Senate president to be elected from among his peers. At least I think that's true.

Thats what I was curious about.

If he's elected initially, then the demise of poor judgment in voting is a factor.

If he is appointed by elected officials, then the demise in poor judgment in voting is a factor....again.

Vote wisely while the option to vote is still there. : )

[ThirstyMan]

We have a one party rule here in MA.
That explains how rules are broken without consequence. Seriously!
We elect Republican governors consistently and yet only occasionally do we elect a representative from the elephant party. Lots of work ahead to turn this embarrassing cess pool around.

[EGPWS]

Lots of work ahead to turn this embarrassing cess pool around.

Yep, and the biggest hurdle to jump is making it a "swing state" to entice political action to make it conservative.

As it stands, it is looked at as a lost cause to efforts in this area.