Voting our conscience

[Wingnut]

Here is a good example of who you want to vote for vs. reality, in cake form

Cake Wrecks - Home - Marital*Miss

The second-to-last one looks a little melted. It reminds me of the first attempt at a birthday cake in Sleeping Beauty. Which in turn makes me think of this:

[volgadon]

Are we really so scared of getting attacked as a religious zealot if we vote what we believe is good for society because we learned it from religion?

No, which is why I'm a socialist.

[annewandering]

I guess I have no problem with "trying to impose my religious beliefs on the majority".

Minority votes do not impose anything. They lose. Just a bit of clarification.

[Guest]

Minority votes do not impose anything. They lose. Just a bit of clarification.

Actually they do. Roe vs. Wade is one example.

[jerome1232]

Actually they do. Roe vs. Wade is one example.

Technically that's not a vote, that's a supreme court ruling.

[Guest]

Technically that's not a vote, that's a supreme court ruling.

Technically, it started as a vote in Texas. It lost. But the minority voter did not want to live under majority ruling, so she took her case up to the Texas Courts. Lost. So her lawyers, without her, took it up to the Supreme Court... and came the landmark ruling of Roe vs. Wade effectively nullifying the long-standing majority vote in Texas and every other State in the Union.

So yes, a minority vote can impose its will on the majority. Even if they lose.

Edited November 15, 2012 by anatess

[annewandering]

It started as a vote in Texas. It lost. So they took it up to the Texas Courts. Lost again. So they took it up to the Supreme Court...

Are we discussing judicial decisions or public votes? Either way the majority is who won. Judicial decisions are not in favor of the fewer judges in favor. It is strictly the majority.

[Guest]

Are we discussing judicial decisions or public votes? Either way the majority is who won. Judicial decisions are not in favor of the fewer judges in favor. It is strictly the majority.

Public votes. A minority vote can rule over the majority, even if they lost, by invoking the power of judicial creativity.

[jerome1232]

Technically, it started as a vote in Texas. It lost. But the minority voter did not want to live under majority ruling, so she took her case up to the Texas Courts. Lost. So her lawyers, without her, took it up to the Supreme Court... and came the landmark ruling of Roe vs. Wade effectively nullifying the long-standing majority vote in Texas and every other State in the Union.

So yes, a minority vote can impose its will on the majority. Even if they lose.

I was just being nit picky. I can't find anything to pick on in this one.

[prisonchaplain]

Abortion has become the Holy Grail for the Democratic Party and SS marriage will one day be the law of the land...

America will resemble Europe economically and socially....devoid of sacred beliefs except shrines to archaic beliefs. (I intentionally shortened the quote)

First, I agree. Prophecy suggests to me that we will continue to degenerate. The questions is how fast, and when will we go the way of Sodom & Gomorrah? Not yet. Those ancient cities were destroyed because there were not 10 righteous souls in them. So, until we are that lost I will continue to be salt and light...if my efforts, combined with others, purchase us an extended generation, that's countless souls that might be redeemed. So, it's worth it. Even one soul is worth it.

[Vort]

Doesn't a woman's body have ways of shutting that down?

Not sure what this means, unless it is supposed to be a reference to someone's ill-advised expression of an ignorant belief that forcible rape cannot result in conception. But, unsurprisingly, it still studiously avoids answering the question.

[Backroads]

Minority votes do not impose anything. They lose. Just a bit of clarification.

But the fact that you voted means you were interested in imposing your beliefs, regardless of whether or not you win.

[Sicily510]

I totally feel what you're stating "Anatess", times is getting rough and our government is falling short. I mean I'm sure you know of the G. Patreaus issues. We as members of the LDS faith can only implement so much in society as role models. However, our priority is our families and those we've introduced into the gospel and encouraging them to become people who are worthy to stand in holy places. When I heard the roast that Romney gave, I was pretty stunned and enjoyed it. It didn't seem like him though to enjoy that type of environment but when you become a politician you have to convey the whole memoir of a politician. I'm very grateful that Romney isn't the President because I truly believe that Heavenly Father wouldn't jeopardize a valuable son of his to a corrupted organization. The political organization is the abominable church that is falling further away from acknowledging "God" in our Declaration of independence and reforming legislatures to accomodate to the human natures of inclinations. I see things like politicians coming out of the closet about their bi-sexuality and the General that's resigning due to having an affair. The time is nigh, I'm happily helping family and friends in making a difference with the light of Christ that I love to shine. Take care...

[RMGuy]

This last election I almost did not vote for either of the two main candidates because I felt there was a better choice. In 2008 I did not for for either the R or D candidate. This year I went Romney because I thought it might be close and I felt he was the better of the two candidates that might have a chance of being electable. I wasn't necessarily happy about it, but it was what I felt was best in that particular circumstance.

-rm

[mirkwood]

Perfect examples. I am against abortion, but I deliberately vote pro-choice.

I am deliberately leaving rape etc. out of this question as it is a completely different set of circumstances.

Wasn't the choice made at the time sex occured without birth control? I don't understand LDS democrats who use this line of thinking. Perhaps you can clear it up for me.

[Wingnut]

Wasn't the choice made at the time sex occured without birth control? I don't understand LDS democrats who use this line of thinking. Perhaps you can clear it up for me.

I'm pro-choice, not pro-abortion, and I don't believe that one choice precludes another.

[mirkwood]

So to you the choice was NOT made at the time of unprotected/non birth control intercourse.

[Guest]

I'm pro-choice, not pro-abortion, and I don't believe that one choice precludes another.

This all circles back to when the law recognizes life. When does choice end and life begin? What is the condition for it? Right now life is recognized when the baby is out of the womb. The father, for example, has no say in the matter until the baby leaves the womb - then he has no choice but to pay for the child. He sure didn't have any choice in the matter since the baby was conceived. He's on the hook - subservient to the woman's decision. If he wants to abort the baby because he doesn't want to pay child support - too bad. He can't do it... because, according to common thought, his choice was having sex.

And then, if a woman who is pregnant is murdered... is it just one murder or two? When does it start to be two?

There are just too many crazy things about this that is so inconsistent.

[Traveler]

I'm splintering this off from MOE and I's discussion on another thread.

Opening question:

Are we really so scared of getting attacked as a religious zealot if we vote what we believe is good for society because we learned it from religion?

I'm trying to understand why someone would vote against what they believe is good for society because they feel others don't believe the same way.... well, isn't that why we vote? To see if we can get a majority to improve society?

Thou Shalt Not Kill... when that became the law of the democratic land, did the people vote that in because they learned that outside of their religion?

My thought on the matter... people today have become wimps. They can't vote their conscience because they might offend somebody.

Voting; why stop there? All laws created by man are nothing more than one segment of the population trying to force their morals on another segment of the population. Without morals - there would be no religion or law. Without law there cannot be a society.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

I'm pro-choice, not pro-abortion, and I don't believe that one choice precludes another.

It most certainly does when one choice ends the life of another that has no choice.

The Traveler

[Wingnut]

It most certainly does when one choice ends the life of another that has no choice.

The Traveler

And that's where we differ in our views.

[Vort]

I'm pro-choice, not pro-abortion, and I don't believe that one choice precludes another.

But that avoids the question. Was the choice not made when sex was agreed to? If not, then why not allow post-natal abortion?

[Backroads]

So to you the choice was NOT made at the time of unprotected/non birth control intercourse.

Which I personally consider to be a time of choice. To purposefully choose to not protect oneself against pregnancy is to accept any consequences that come.

Do people really get surprised when they purposefully avoid birth control measures and then get pregnant?

[Just_A_Guy]

And then, if a woman who is pregnant is murdered... is it just one murder or two?

Two.

When does it start to be two?

Pretty much anytime, I think.

Yes, the American judiciary is aware of how this contradicts viability analyses under Roe and its progeny; and it has magnificently buried its head in the sand on this issue.

[Just_A_Guy]

But that avoids the question. Was the choice not made when sex was agreed to?

I think Wingnut's presumptions here are

1) A girl can change her mind; and

2) It's not life yet.

Though I think Anatess raises a good point about why a female, after intercourse, can re-consider her "choice" to assume parental obligations; while a male cannot. It would be fun to see some unwed father challenge the whole notion of child support on 13th Amendment grounds.

Edited November 15, 2012 by Just_A_Guy