Brexit - Page 8 - Talk About Marriage
Politics This is the place to discuss politics

User Tag List
Deejo

 80Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #106 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-16-2019, 03:45 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 11,217
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by NextTimeAround View Post
<<<sigh>>>
Women and blacks who owned land could vote in NJ in 1776....

Approximately half the states had already allowed women to vote by the time the 19th Amendment passed in 1920.

I can't easily quote your embedded responses. Women indeed were represented by elected officials prior to getting the vote because they were citizens. Are minor children afforded representation? Yes, in a generalized way they are, because the official swears to uphold and defend the Constitution. And so women were represented from the standpoint their interests as humans were supposedly being considered by officials. Slaves on the other hand had zero representation officially because elected officials had no basis on which to provide protections or benefits.

The Constitution itself did not prevent any group of people from voting. Voting rights were the responsibility of the states to determine.

And yes, a person who derives their income from any entity will be biased towards protecting that entity out of selfishness. So a government employee would be predisposed to vote for the candidate who promised to protect their job and/or enrich their compensation. This is not to disparage public employees, just an honest assessment of human nature. If I could vote for my employer to get whatever he wanted (bigger bonus maybe) and in return I could get a better compensation package, yes I would vote for him rather than vote for someone else who maybe wanted to cut our workforce even if that other person would be better for the overall society.

Thor is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #107 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-16-2019, 04:08 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,792
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
Women and blacks who owned land could vote in NJ in 1776....

Approximately half the states had already allowed women to vote by the time the 19th Amendment passed in 1920. But not at the federal level. Which half of the states? States like Wyoming that were desperate for population. It takes a minimum population to become a state. See the northwest Ordinance. I wonder if it was necessary to keep that minimum for a while to remain a state.

I can't easily quote your embedded responses. Women indeed were represented by elected officials prior to getting the vote because they were citizens. Are minor children afforded representation? Yes, in a generalized way they are, because the official swears to uphold and defend the Constitution. And so women were represented from the standpoint their interests as humans were supposedly being considered by officials. Slaves on the other hand had zero representation officially because elected officials had no basis on which to provide protections or benefits. that is so offensive.

The Constitution itself did not prevent any group of people from voting. Voting rights were the responsibility of the states to determine. You have show me that or explain more. You have to be a citizen to be able to vote. So it started with the 15th amendment saying that everyone born in the US is a US citizen. That was to give citizenship to the former slaves. If you had read that link that I provided then you would see that slaves were no longer imported to the US by the early 1800s since the US had perfected its own slave growing farms. If you don't have US citizenship, you don't have the right to vote.

And yes, a person who derives their income from any entity will be biased towards protecting that entity out of selfishness. So a government employee would be predisposed to vote for the candidate who promised to protect their job and/or enrich their compensation. This is not to disparage public employees, just an honest assessment of human nature. If I could vote for my employer to get whatever he wanted (bigger bonus maybe) and in return I could get a better compensation package, yes I would vote for him rather than vote for someone else who maybe wanted to cut our workforce even if that other person would be better for the overall society. Trump has promoted the mining industry which has laid off many employees and has now declared bankruptcy. If you were a miner would you continue to vote for Trump. Right now I see ad on the TV from UMWA who are asking Congress to do the right thing regarding their pension. why would thier union have to spend so much money on ads when Trump was such a champion for mining?
NextTimeAround is offline  
post #108 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-16-2019, 04:15 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: California
Posts: 3,404
Re: Brexit

Brexit threads are boring enough in their own right, without being hijacked.
Mr The Other is offline  
 
post #109 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-16-2019, 05:06 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Not in the USA
Posts: 926
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr The Other View Post
...but, it does matter.

The argument is often made that the UK is not independent. That is not true clearly.

We arrange laws regarding trade with others, as they need agreement because it is trade. We agree standards generally as it works better that way

It is one thing for UK people to make stuff up, but it is unfair to Americans.
I can't see any way in which that relates to what I posted. I'm not sure what the "it" is in your first sentence.
Laurentium is online now  
post #110 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-16-2019, 05:11 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: California
Posts: 3,404
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laurentium View Post
I can't see any way in which that relates to what I posted. I'm not sure what the "it" is in your first sentence.
The EU makes no huge difference to how the UK is Governed. It does affect trade with other nations and standards, but that is pretty much by definition. We are one of the big three.

You are saying that leaving is a good idea, but have yet to define what you want, what you object to or how leaving will be better.
Leaving the EU can take three forms. To keep it simple, you can choose two from the following three:
- Leave the SM and customs union
- Preserve the Good Friday Agreement and so maintain peace and international relations
- Preserve Northern Ireland as intergral to the UK

I say keep the second two, that has the best democratic mandate.

Do not accuse me of didging questions if you cannot answer the most basic points.
Mr The Other is offline  
post #111 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-16-2019, 05:44 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Not in the USA
Posts: 926
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr The Other View Post
You are saying that leaving is a good idea
You are insane. I said no such thing. I am a remainer.

Quote:
Do not accuse me of didging questions if you cannot answer the most basic points.
I don't think I accused you of dodging questions. Indeed, I don't think I asked you any questions. Have you got me confused with someone else?
Laurentium is online now  
post #112 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-16-2019, 06:58 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 11,217
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by NextTimeAround View Post
...
It is really impossible to respond to your specific comments when you embed your replies inside a quote.

The Constitution itself does not define voting rights. Prior to the 15th Amendment the only mention in the Constitution of voting qualification was that if a state allowed a person to vote for their most numerous branch of state government then they must allow them to vote for the federal House of Representatives. At that time, Senators were elected by each state's government not by direct citizen votes. So, to distill it down, the Constitution did not prohibit the vote to anyone. It deferred to each state to set their voting qualifications.

Thus if a state allowed a certain group to vote, they could vote. If a state did not allow a specific group to vote, they couldn't vote.

Contrary to your earlier assertion, in fact yes women could vote for federal offices prior to the 15th Amendment, and in some states free blacks had the vote well before any Constitutional amendments.

As to women being represented prior to getting the vote, you can choose to be offended if you like but it is how things worked back then. It was assumed a wife had an interest in the healthy functioning of society, so her vote was redundant to her husband's. By today's standards we believe married women should have voting rights, and they are indeed not dependent on having a husband, but things were quite different 100+ years ago. As far as slaves, they had no representation in government. Nobody had a mandate to look after slaves' best interests. But government officials did have a mandate to look out for the interests of non-slaves even if they didn't vote.

I don't know where you're going with the whole issue of miners. I assume they vote for what they think best for themselves, but with unions supporting Democrats overwhelmingly, I have no idea if miners support Trump or not.
Thor is offline  
post #113 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-17-2019, 02:26 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: California
Posts: 3,404
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laurentium View Post
You are insane. I said no such thing. I am a remainer.


I don't think I accused you of dodging questions. Indeed, I don't think I asked you any questions. Have you got me confused with someone else?
Fair enough! Sorry! Being here is not great for the mind!

I always thing that our views on creationism, climate change, and Brexit are largely shaped by our circumstance and psychology. The number of people who have great insight and can make a reasoned judgement is very small.

Being percieved as a very working class man was a hinderence to my career early on. I moved abroad and worked in the USA and UK, was fairly successful and am know a middle aged man who benefitted from the modern world and leaving old ideas behind me.

Of course I am pro-EU. I would be.

If Brexit turned out to be well-defined, well reasoned with clear objectives and implementation, I would have to realise that I had been ruled by my psychology and circumstance and admit I was wrong.

My world outlook is one that would lean towards believing in climate change, I see things as interconnected. If someone could publish a paper refuting AGW, I would have to accept I was fooled and reconsider.

On the other hand, I have done actual scientific reseach in molecular biology (as in completed my PhD reserch and did more then). I actually can be pretty certain on evolution being a good model and that creationism is silly, but initially I was right through good luck.

It seems more people in the debate are also relying on psychology and their circumstances, but are convinced they are being very logical and rational.

Most people on both side are firmly convinced that they are rational and the other is bonkers.
Mr The Other is offline  
post #114 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-17-2019, 05:08 AM
Member
 
In Absentia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 2,382
Re: Brexit

We'll see when the Union disintegrates... won't take long, though...
In Absentia is offline  
post #115 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-17-2019, 05:36 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: California
Posts: 3,404
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by In Absentia View Post
We'll see when the Union disintegrates... won't take long, though...
I am surprised by how sturdy it has been.

Mr The Other is offline  
post #116 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-17-2019, 05:49 AM
Member
 
In Absentia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 2,382
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr The Other View Post
I am surprised by how sturdy it has been.
I meant the union of the United Kingdom...
In Absentia is offline  
post #117 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-17-2019, 06:17 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: California
Posts: 3,404
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by In Absentia View Post
I meant the union of the United Kingdom...
Ah, yes!
That could surprise us yet.
Mr The Other is offline  
post #118 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-17-2019, 06:20 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 7,259
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by In Absentia View Post
I meant the union of the United Kingdom...
Scotland, NI or Wales would be mad to make any attempt to be independent. They are given far greater sums of money per person than we are in England from the govt, and in the main they don't have enough income from other sources to make independence in anyway viable. I for one would be more than happy for Scotland to be independent, maybe the English would actually have some of that money for us instead so that we can have the things that they have at present such as free care for the elderly.
We live very near the borders of wales and we have been there many times. Their main sources of income are farming and tourism, that's it. The condition of the roads where we live are very bad, once you go into wales they are excellent even in very rural areas, as I said they get far more money than we do.
Diana7 is offline  
post #119 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-17-2019, 10:41 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: California
Posts: 3,404
Re: Brexit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana7 View Post
Scotland, NI or Wales would be mad to make any attempt to be independent. They are given far greater sums of money per person than we are in England from the govt, and in the main they don't have enough income from other sources to make independence in anyway viable. I for one would be more than happy for Scotland to be independent, maybe the English would actually have some of that money for us instead so that we can have the things that they have at present such as free care for the elderly.
We live very near the borders of wales and we have been there many times. Their main sources of income are farming and tourism, that's it. The condition of the roads where we live are very bad, once you go into wales they are excellent even in very rural areas, as I said they get far more money than we do.
Scotland is considerably poorer that other Northern European nations of a similar size, such as Ireland, Denmark, Finland etc.

I am not sure being in the UK is helping that much.
Mr The Other is offline  
post #120 of 162 (permalink) Old 12-17-2019, 02:38 PM
Member
 
Cletus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 6,162
Re: Brexit

Saw on Reddit today:

Sexual Position of the Day - The Brexit. You promise to pull out but you don't.
Cletus is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome