I can make up stuff too to show my side too.

 

Way to dodge the question.

The majority doesn't get to determine which groups are afforded rights and which ones aren't. It's never been that way in the history of the country and it's part of what makes this country so great.

Way to dodge the question.

 

I didnt dodge anything, but who cant make up something to prove their own point.

 

Answer this then. Should we vote for a President or let a judge decide who is best? A ballot is a ballot.

^ So are you in favor of amending the constitution to expressly prohibit judicial review?

Why do we vote? Can anyone answer this? Does our vote count?

^ If you can't answer that for yourself, then no one is going to be able to give you an answer that will satisfy you.

As noted above, there are restrictions on what voters can bring about. Judicial system is part of the checks and balances to help determine if something voted on is legal.

If it is illegal to begin with, how in the world does it make it all of the way to get voted on by the people? Shouldnt it have been stopped by then by the so called judges and checks/balance police.

We vote because we live in a democracy. This is one of the fundamental issues this country was founded on. In November, there will be no less than four issues (see below) on the ballot for citizens of the city of Cincinnati to vote on. They got there by folks who felt so strongly about these issues that they collected 2,000 signatures and submitted them to the Board of Elections for validation. If these 2K signatures are validated, then each group representing each issue will have until August to garner 10K signatures to get these referendums put on the November ballot for the people to decide, not appointed judges or politicians who represent special interest. The People, as well it should be.

 

1. Stopping any construction on a Cincinnati streetcar.

 

2. Preventing any merger of Cincinnati police with the Hamilton County Sheriff's Office.

 

3. Adding a recall provision for the Mayor.

 

4. Banning any new fees for trash collection.

^ If you can't answer that for yourself, then no one is going to be able to give you an answer that will satisfy you.

 

I thought we got to vote to determine something.

 

I thought our vote counted, not got taken away by 1 person who dont like how I voted.

We vote because we live in a democracy. This is one of the fundamental issues this country was founded on. In November, there will be no less than four issues (see below) on the ballot for citizens of the city of Cincinnati to vote on. They got there by folks who felt so strongly about these issues that they collected 2,000 signatures and submitted them to the Board of Elections for validation. If these 2K signatures are validated, then each group representing each issue will have until August to garner 10K signatures to get these referendums put on the November ballot for the people to decide, not appointed judges or politicians who represent special interest. The People, as well it should be.

 

1. Stopping any construction on a Cincinnati streetcar.

 

2. Preventing any merger of Cincinnati police with the Hamilton County Sheriff's Office.

 

3. Adding a recall provision for the Mayor.

 

4. Banning any new fees for trash collection.

 

So if all 4 pass and a Judge who has a friend that picks up trash and wants to make more money dont feel it is right to not raise prices so his friend can get a raise. Will the judge be allowed to disbar the vote by the people because he has special interest in it and feels the people made a bad decision

I meant if #4 passed.

I would certainly hope not.

I feel like this judge is in a huge catch-22. If he rules against gay marriage, the gay community would be terribly upset with him. If he rules for gay marriage, many in the heterosexual community claim what mountain ref is. The best would be to remove himself from the case, but then the gay community would probably be upset with him for not using his position to do what they view as "right".

I feel like this judge is in a huge catch-22. If he rules against gay marriage, the gay community would be terribly upset with him. If he rules for gay marriage, many in the heterosexual community claim what mountain ref is. The best would be to remove himself from the case, but then the gay community would probably be upset with him for not using his position to do what they view as "right".

 

Why should this judge be ruling at all? I could careless what his sexual orientation is.......the people have spoken across this country. Gay marriage has been defeated in every state in which the issue has been placed on a ballot. Who is this judge to overturn what the majority has spoken on? If the masses wanted this to be law, it would be law, but clearly they do not. Sometimes I am in favor of referendums when they get passed or defeated and sometimes I am not. Regardless of how I feel on any particular issue, one cannot ignore the will of the people.