newtrier
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 39 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Karen, the mayors of SF and New Paltz, and "Green world - 2007/01/09 18:37
I hadn't paid attention to the political affiliation of the young doofus mayor of New Paltz, NY, but I just read that he's a Green Party member. Aha. That made me remember something.
Karen recently objected to statements about her support of authoritarian and intrusive government goals, saying that she embraces the Green Party's "values."
She recently described Green politics thusly:
...[O]ne of the major elements of the Green worldview is LOCAL CONSENSUS politics: that things should be decided by all the people affected at the lowest possible level of organization.
http://snipurl.com/4wue
Consider that the policy of granting marriage licenses in San Francisco was made solely by that city's mayor -- not through any consensus of the city council or the electorate. The fact that many in SF accept the policy is beside the point given the legality and the fact that it was a one-man decision. It was not democratic, it was tyrannical from the highest level of government in SF.
Consider, too, the actions of the young doofus Green Party mayor in New Paltz,
NY, population 12,000. Did he seek out the consensus of his community? No. Did he seek out a consensus of his peers in city government? No. The young putzy
has in SF. His little village is divided, with younger college students (who make up a sizable part of the population) more supportive and other village residents less supportive -- if not ready to recall the mayor. The NY Times has an interesting article on the backlash in New Paltz. It is linked below.
http://snipurl.com/4wu7
Karen doesn't seem to understand consensus or democracy. She thinks the tide is in her favor, while polls show otherwise. In fact, there is more consensus in this nation now to amend the Constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman than there was prior to these unilateral, undemocratic actions of young mayors. Karen is right to note that they will fight it out at the courthouse, because there is no consensus in the nation to support her radical agenda. Consensus will rule the day, and the radicals and marginals will be denied any peculiar re-definitions of culturally-accepted terms. We will pass an amendment, and it will be ratified by the states. That is democracy -- the kind that puts an end to tyrannical judges and mayors.
Popular posts by newtrier
And So's Your Mom....
Stop running away from it, Karen...
Question for AR opponents
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
newtrier
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 39 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Karen, the mayors of SF and New Paltz, and "Green world - 2007/01/09 18:46
The latest Gallup Poll on the issue shows that a majority now favor amending the
Constitution to define marriage between one man and one woman. While the headline for the poll says there's not yet supermajority approval, it fails to note that 38 states have already passed a state Defense of Marriage law. IOW, all we need is 50% plus one vote in the legislatures of each of those states -- which I think is tenable.
If you're still elated by the fact that only 51% favor an amendment, consider that 2 out of every 3 Americans oppose homosexual marriage. BTW, please scroll down and pay attention to the racial breakdown. You'll learn the hard way that your view of "struggle" is not shared by blacks. Percentage-wise, blacks are more likely to favor an amendment and less likely to oppose it than whites.
http://www.gallup.com/content/default.asp?ci=10792
Then why did you snip everything instead of addressing any of it? 
Try again.
<RESTORE>
I hadn't paid attention to the political affiliation of the young doofus mayor of New Paltz, NY, but I just read that he's a Green Party member. Aha. That made me remember something.
Karen recently objected to statements about her support of authoritarian and intrusive government goals, saying that she embraces the Green Party's "values."
She recently described Green politics thusly:
...[O]ne of the major elements of the Green worldview is LOCAL CONSENSUS politics: that things should be decided by all the people affected at the lowest possible level of organization.
http://snipurl.com/4wue
Consider that the policy of granting marriage licenses in San Francisco was made solely by that city's mayor -- not through any consensus of the city council or the electorate. The fact that many in SF accept the policy is beside the point given the legality and the fact that it was a one-man decision. It was not democratic, it was tyrannical from the highest level of government in SF.
Consider, too, the actions of the young doofus Green Party mayor in New Paltz,
NY, population 12,000. Did he seek out the consensus of his community? No. Did he seek out a consensus of his peers in city government? No. The young putzy
has in SF. His little village is divided, with younger college students (who make up a sizable part of the population) more supportive and other village residents less supportive -- if not ready to recall the mayor. The NY Times has an interesting article on the backlash in New Paltz. It is linked below.
http://snipurl.com/4wu7
Karen doesn't seem to understand consensus or democracy. She thinks the tide is in her favor, while polls show otherwise. In fact, there is more consensus in this nation now to amend the Constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman than there was prior to these unilateral, undemocratic actions of young mayors. Karen is right to note that they will fight it out at the courthouse, because there is no consensus in the nation to support her radical agenda. Consensus will rule the day, and the radicals and marginals will be denied any peculiar re-definitions of culturally-accepted terms. We will pass an amendment, and it will be ratified by the states. That is democracy -- the kind that puts an end to tyrannical judges and mayors.
<END RESTORE>
Have a nice weekend.
Popular posts by newtrier
And So's Your Mom....
Stop running away from it, Karen...
Question for AR opponents
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
punkerbruhaha
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 43 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Karen, the mayors of SF and New Paltz, and "Green world - 2007/01/09 19:24
Yes. Green Party people at least understand the issue and have the backbone to stand up for what is moral and principled. Our time will come. You can't bar us from equality forever. God is not mocked, and justice will prevail.
Remember that the early Christians were thrown to the lions because they defied the law that said they had to burn incense to an image of the emperor. Were they wrong? I don't think so. You evidently do. They should have quietly obeyed the law -- after all, the vast majority of Roman citizens had no problem with offering symbolic sacrifice to the Divine Emperor. Right?
Popular posts by punkerbruhaha
Anyone Have Information ?
Low self-esteem and envy
The "navel-gazing" Social...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
newtrier
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 39 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Karen, the mayors of SF and New Paltz, and "Green world - 2007/01/09 22:10
You don't understand the issue at hand. The actions of the Green Party mayor of
New Putz, NY, prove the very point Jonathan and I made to you earlier this week: that Greens are statist elites who have no regard for democracy except when it suits their agenda. Were your claim that "...[O]ne of the major elements of the
Green worldview is LOCAL CONSENSUS politics: that things should be decided by all the people affected at the lowest possible level of organization" accurate, the putzy little mayor would've sought to build a consensus. Instead, he made a unilateral decision based on his personal radical and elitist views -- one which is contrary to that of his constituency and has alienated at least half his village.
If the putzy mayor has backbone, why is he postponing this weekend's round of sham marriages? Why is he only engaging in this debacle on weekends anyway if it's moral and principled? BTW, when will you answer my question about the
"principles" of Ms Dunlaps' decision to offer sham marriage licenses in Sandoval
County. Is fear of possible litigation the same as acting on principle?
You're equal. You can marry whomever you want, so long as that person is of the age of consent, opposite sex, and not closely related to you.
I agree: we will pass a constitutional amendment.
<snip gratuitous comparison; you are NO martyr, Karen>
Popular posts by newtrier
And So's Your Mom....
Stop running away from it, Karen...
Question for AR opponents
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
punkerbruhaha
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 43 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Karen, the mayors of SF and New Paltz, and "Green world - 2007/01/09 23:15
The last dying gasp of the oppressors
<snip>
Popular posts by punkerbruhaha
Anyone Have Information ?
Low self-esteem and envy
The "navel-gazing" Social...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
|
post new topic