The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Current Events

Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-17-2014, 10:22 AM   #46
henry quirk
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
"the voters will create pressure to make the arbitration to work according to the community standards"

The voters 'could' (not 'will').

The voters ‘could’ also move to amend the Federal Constitution and bring back slavery.

Would you support such a thing?


I'm wondering how many contracts between folks today (properties, services, etc.) are overtly blunted or directed by the voters?

#

And: this "this marital contract is valid even though it is between a 40-year-old man and a 9-year-old girl" is not possible (as discussed up-thread) for reasons that have nuthin' to do with voters.
henry quirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 10:27 AM   #47
henry quirk
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
I suggest using a notary in my first post.

Recognition/witnessing (for legal purposes) is not the same as licensing or promotion.

Notarizing is simply the formal declaration that 'this' is agreed upon by those involved and such agreement occurred on this date.

Again: not the same as licensing or promotion.
henry quirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 10:33 AM   #48
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry quirk View Post
I suggest using a notary in my first post.

Recognition/witnessing (for legal purposes) is not the same as licensing or promotion.

Notarizing is simply the formal declaration that 'this' is agreed upon by those involved and such agreement occurred on this date.

Again: not the same as licensing or promotion.
It's nothing but scrap paper if the law changes.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 10:34 AM   #49
henry quirk
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
True, as with any contract today.

Not seein' your point.
henry quirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 10:45 AM   #50
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
Quote:
The voters ‘could’ also move to amend the Federal Constitution and bring back slavery.

Would you support such a thing?
"This is true even if the voters are wrong." (eight posts ago)

If the voters want to bring back slavery, for some insane reason, then slavery will have to be brought back, or the government will not be representational. A just government derives its power from the will of the governed. If the people demand slavery in enough numbers, and their current government doesn't agree, the government will be overthrown to achieve it.

Community standards are almost certainly wrong about other things right now. We may be wrong about things we don't know about. Who knows what will seem like overarching government in 50 years, 100 years? Many things that seemed like very obvious truths back then, seem ridiculous, even horrible now.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 10:49 AM   #51
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
Quote:
I suggest using a notary in my first post.
I was stating an example, not advocating an approach. Come on, man!

Quote:
Not seein' your point.
Read harder, it's been the same throughout the thread. Anyone else seein' my point now that I've made it several times?
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 10:52 AM   #52
henry quirk
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
Mostly, though, it's recognized that contracts between or among those capable of consent lead to stable transactions and therefore can contribute to relatively stable economies.

Yes, contracts can be heavily monitored but this is not the baseline.

And most contracts between individuals occur with minimal government involvement (except in the case of dispute).

I suggest that a neat way to bypass all the piecemeal, patchwork, struggle to secure marriage rights for gays is to simply move the impetus into contract law wherein A and B (and C and D, if we're talkin' about polygamy) can bestow by way of contract most of the rights and responsibilities that can now be found in government sponsored marriage.

Still not seein' why this suggestion is unworkable or so offensive to so many.

I can only conclude that the endeavor to secure government sponsored and licensed marriage for gays folks has less to do 'rights' and more to do with 'forcing approval'.

I work hard to minimize the involvement of folks in my business while, at the same time, a whole whack of others work just as hard to maximize involvement of other folks in their business.

*shrug*

If that’s what (other, you) folks want: most assuredly their/your wish will be granted.

‘nuff said.
henry quirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 10:54 AM   #53
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry quirk View Post
True, as with any contract today.

Not seein' your point.
Of course you don't, because you feel you can handle your life without government involvement. Want to form a partnership with someone, just make a simple contract.

But when the partnership goes sour, the enforcement or dissolution of the contract is up to the government to mediate... make that dictate. Any changes in the law after the contract was made, could void all or part of that contract.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 10:54 AM   #54
henry quirk
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
"If the people demand slavery in enough numbers, and their current government doesn't agree, the government will be overthrown to achieve it."

Might makes the right: glad to see we agree.
henry quirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 10:56 AM   #55
henry quirk
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
Again: I suggest that a neat way to bypass all the piecemeal, patchwork, struggle to secure marriage rights for gays is to simply move the impetus into contract law wherein A and B (and C and D, if we're talkin' about polygamy) can bestow by way of contract most of the rights and responsibilities that can now be found in government sponsored marriage.

Still not seein' why this suggestion is unworkable or so offensive to so many.
henry quirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 11:01 AM   #56
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Offensive I can't answer, but you can't write any contract with anyone that dictates law or policy to the IRS, SS or any other government agency. You'd have a hard time dictating policy to private companies like hospitals too.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 12:06 PM   #57
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry quirk View Post
Might makes the right: glad to see we agree.
"This is true even if the voters are wrong."
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 12:25 PM   #58
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
Quote:
Still not seein'
Yeah, well, that's on you now. When you decide to be intellectually honest with yourself, you will re-read the thread for comprehension.

~ and you will be shocked at your own slippery-slope, straw man, weasel arguments ~
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 01:09 PM   #59
henry quirk
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
Someone, following this thread, sent me the following:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/26/op...ontz.html?_r=0
henry quirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2014, 01:09 PM   #60
henry quirk
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
Now, gonna read the thread, as suggested.
henry quirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:35 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.