06-26-2018, 05:11 PM
(06-26-2018, 04:44 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The only way the compromise you propose works is if government calls all legal marriages civil unions. If the government were to continue calling straight unions marriages and create a special class, then we get into the "separate but equal" territory which was shot down previously in a different context.
As for the EC, why? If the POTUS is elected by the whole eligible population, then why should it matter the distribution of the votes if the populous as a whole voted and that was the outcome? I do think switching to RCV should happen for it, though.
I'm for the RCV, been following it TWICE in Maine, and once in SD. If the two parties are against it, you can bet it's probably a good thing. Politics in major metro areas are much different than they are in middle America. There is a more dense populace in said metro areas, so if you move away from the EC, or something like it, you represent an urban population while abandoning a rural one. At least that's how I see it.
I don't think it's separate, but equal. That said, it seems we're cool with offending and disenfranchising one sect of the people for the wants of another. Marriage is, in fact, a civil union in the eyes of the law......just call it that, and leave the term "marriage" to the Judeo Christian beliefs that implemented it and their ceremonies. Coming from a moderate centrist......you look for ways to appease the majority of folks, I think that works. There will be some on the extremes of either view that still wouldn't be happy, but to them I would say "tough shit". Probably why I would never make it in politics....lol. Take the emotion out, and look for compromise and common sense.
"Better send those refunds..."
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)