Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

Proposed CA ballot initive.

Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.
My work here is, finally, done.
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:11:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:11:05 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.
My work here is, finally, done.
mishapqueen
Posts: 3,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:35:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:11:05 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

In California, it's also illegal to drink beer outside while lying on a refrigerator.
You cannot choose whether or not you will live by rules, but you can choose which rules you will live by. --Me

"I was wrong. Squirrels are objectively superior to bunnies in every conceivable dimension."
--Joey

"Silence is golden, duct tape is silver" --PetersSmith

Nunc aut Numquam
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:36:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:15 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

But taxpayers will shoulder the cost of litigation as these laws are challenged in the courts.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:36:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:35:15 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:11:05 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

In California, it's also illegal to drink beer outside while lying on a refrigerator.
Best $200 ever spent!!!
My work here is, finally, done.
mishapqueen
Posts: 3,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:37:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:36:47 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:35:15 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:11:05 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

In California, it's also illegal to drink beer outside while lying on a refrigerator.
Best $200 ever spent!!!
Yeah, that law is quite major.
You cannot choose whether or not you will live by rules, but you can choose which rules you will live by. --Me

"I was wrong. Squirrels are objectively superior to bunnies in every conceivable dimension."
--Joey

"Silence is golden, duct tape is silver" --PetersSmith

Nunc aut Numquam
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:39:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:36:33 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:15 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

But taxpayers will shoulder the cost of litigation as these laws are challenged in the courts.

So should legislators, governors, and presidents. Your point?
If they don't care, why should the taxpayer? ESPECIALLY, since the taxpayer (i.e. voter) is pandered to using their selfishness (e.g. we'll give you welfare, or keep jobs here, or pass this law or repeal that one). This is the fundamental flaw of democracy.
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:41:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:37:51 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:36:47 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:35:15 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:11:05 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

In California, it's also illegal to drink beer outside while lying on a refrigerator.
Best $200 ever spent!!!
Yeah, that law is quite major.
oops, I thought you said you could.
As it is, it is often illegal to be drinking in public, although, I don't know why the refrigerator is mentioned.
My work here is, finally, done.
mishapqueen
Posts: 3,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:45:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:41:40 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:37:51 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:36:47 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:35:15 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:11:05 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

In California, it's also illegal to drink beer outside while lying on a refrigerator.
Best $200 ever spent!!!
Yeah, that law is quite major.
oops, I thought you said you could.
As it is, it is often illegal to be drinking in public, although, I don't know why the refrigerator is mentioned.

It didn't say in public. It could be talking about your back yard, lol.

I thought it was pretty funny.
You cannot choose whether or not you will live by rules, but you can choose which rules you will live by. --Me

"I was wrong. Squirrels are objectively superior to bunnies in every conceivable dimension."
--Joey

"Silence is golden, duct tape is silver" --PetersSmith

Nunc aut Numquam
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:49:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:45:26 PM, mishapqueen wrote:

It didn't say in public. It could be talking about your back yard, lol.

I thought it was pretty funny.

"in public" can still be on private property. I can't pose nude in my house in front of windows, either, and that is even more "private" than your back yard.
My work here is, finally, done.
mishapqueen
Posts: 3,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:50:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:49:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:45:26 PM, mishapqueen wrote:

It didn't say in public. It could be talking about your back yard, lol.

I thought it was pretty funny.

"in public" can still be on private property. I can't pose nude in my house in front of windows, either, and that is even more "private" than your back yard.

Interesting. Well, I don't keep up with laws like that since I would never do that and I don't drink.
You cannot choose whether or not you will live by rules, but you can choose which rules you will live by. --Me

"I was wrong. Squirrels are objectively superior to bunnies in every conceivable dimension."
--Joey

"Silence is golden, duct tape is silver" --PetersSmith

Nunc aut Numquam
Fly
Posts: 2,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:52:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:36:33 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:15 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

But taxpayers will shoulder the cost of litigation as these laws are challenged in the courts.

You are pretty far afield on this one. Did you read the article past the headline? Do you know what a Ballot Measure is?

To sum up: he has his legit petition now. Then he has to get 365,000 CA residents to sign it. THEN it is put up for a vote at the next election, and then a majority of CA voters have to vote yes on it. Only then would it be a truly big deal that must be addressed by the courts.

Much ado about nothing, really. But it does show that there are honest to goodness loonies out there who feel very strongly about their delusions...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:53:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:50:40 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:49:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:45:26 PM, mishapqueen wrote:

It didn't say in public. It could be talking about your back yard, lol.

I thought it was pretty funny.

"in public" can still be on private property. I can't pose nude in my house in front of windows, either, and that is even more "private" than your back yard.

Interesting. Well, I don't keep up with laws like that since I would never do that and I don't drink.

Public nuisance laws are tricky.
The music in your home is so loud that it prevent me from sleeping in mine. Not public, but it affects the public. Same idea.
I am not sure how much I agree with drinking in public laws. I can see both sides.
My work here is, finally, done.
mishapqueen
Posts: 3,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:55:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:53:05 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:50:40 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:49:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:45:26 PM, mishapqueen wrote:

It didn't say in public. It could be talking about your back yard, lol.

I thought it was pretty funny.

"in public" can still be on private property. I can't pose nude in my house in front of windows, either, and that is even more "private" than your back yard.

Interesting. Well, I don't keep up with laws like that since I would never do that and I don't drink.

Public nuisance laws are tricky.
The music in your home is so loud that it prevent me from sleeping in mine. Not public, but it affects the public. Same idea.
I am not sure how much I agree with drinking in public laws. I can see both sides.
Yeah though I'm more of the opinion I don't want to run into drunk men if I can possibly help it, especially if there are kids with me or something.
You cannot choose whether or not you will live by rules, but you can choose which rules you will live by. --Me

"I was wrong. Squirrels are objectively superior to bunnies in every conceivable dimension."
--Joey

"Silence is golden, duct tape is silver" --PetersSmith

Nunc aut Numquam
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 12:59:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:55:19 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:53:05 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:50:40 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:49:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:45:26 PM, mishapqueen wrote:

It didn't say in public. It could be talking about your back yard, lol.

I thought it was pretty funny.

"in public" can still be on private property. I can't pose nude in my house in front of windows, either, and that is even more "private" than your back yard.

Interesting. Well, I don't keep up with laws like that since I would never do that and I don't drink.

Public nuisance laws are tricky.
The music in your home is so loud that it prevent me from sleeping in mine. Not public, but it affects the public. Same idea.
I am not sure how much I agree with drinking in public laws. I can see both sides.
Yeah though I'm more of the opinion I don't want to run into drunk men if I can possibly help it, especially if there are kids with me or something.

Just so you are aware, there is a difference between drinking in public, and being drunk in public. Isn't the law fun? (I love all the nuances!!!)
My work here is, finally, done.
mishapqueen
Posts: 3,995
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 1:05:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:59:52 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:55:19 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:53:05 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:50:40 PM, mishapqueen wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:49:20 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:45:26 PM, mishapqueen wrote:

It didn't say in public. It could be talking about your back yard, lol.

I thought it was pretty funny.

"in public" can still be on private property. I can't pose nude in my house in front of windows, either, and that is even more "private" than your back yard.

Interesting. Well, I don't keep up with laws like that since I would never do that and I don't drink.

Public nuisance laws are tricky.
The music in your home is so loud that it prevent me from sleeping in mine. Not public, but it affects the public. Same idea.
I am not sure how much I agree with drinking in public laws. I can see both sides.
Yeah though I'm more of the opinion I don't want to run into drunk men if I can possibly help it, especially if there are kids with me or something.

Just so you are aware, there is a difference between drinking in public, and being drunk in public. Isn't the law fun? (I love all the nuances!!!)

True, but I hear it's easy to go too far once you start. I don't mind it if they're discreet, but the smell of alcohol makes me feel sick, lol.
You cannot choose whether or not you will live by rules, but you can choose which rules you will live by. --Me

"I was wrong. Squirrels are objectively superior to bunnies in every conceivable dimension."
--Joey

"Silence is golden, duct tape is silver" --PetersSmith

Nunc aut Numquam
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 3:09:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
wsmunit7
Posts: 1,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 7:28:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 12:52:24 PM, Fly wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:36:33 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:15 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

But taxpayers will shoulder the cost of litigation as these laws are challenged in the courts.

You are pretty far afield on this one. Did you read the article past the headline? Do you know what a Ballot Measure is?

To sum up: he has his legit petition now. Then he has to get 365,000 CA residents to sign it. THEN it is put up for a vote at the next election, and then a majority of CA voters have to vote yes on it. Only then would it be a truly big deal that must be addressed by the courts.

Much ado about nothing, really. But it does show that there are honest to goodness loonies out there who feel very strongly about their delusions...

Yes, I know what it is. I downloaded the PDF file from the CA AG office and read the whole thing.

It doesn't stand a snowballs chance in Hades of passing
But if by some chance it would, it would immediately be challenged and found unconstitutional.

But some of the proposed legislation in state legislatures probably will. They will all be challenged. And all struck down. At a cost to the taxpayers.

My question is, why even propose legislation that is blatantly unconstitutional? What's their point? Are they that stupid? Or just doing it for harassments sake?

Childish behavior.
Fly
Posts: 2,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2015 7:57:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/3/2015 7:28:30 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:52:24 PM, Fly wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:36:33 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:22:18 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 12:15 PM, wsmunit7 wrote:
At 3/3/2015 10:09:34 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2015 9:43:04 AM, wsmunit7 wrote:
I think this crosses the line of bigotry.


http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com...

AHAHAHA!!!
Oh, democracy, the things you do.

What I can't understand is why this animus legislation keeps being proposed when it is blatantly unconstitutional. What are they trying to prove?

That they have money to burn.
This is by a citizen, right? Not a politician? And all it takes to pass a law in California is $200. No wonder it's so messed up.

But taxpayers will shoulder the cost of litigation as these laws are challenged in the courts.

You are pretty far afield on this one. Did you read the article past the headline? Do you know what a Ballot Measure is?

To sum up: he has his legit petition now. Then he has to get 365,000 CA residents to sign it. THEN it is put up for a vote at the next election, and then a majority of CA voters have to vote yes on it. Only then would it be a truly big deal that must be addressed by the courts.

Much ado about nothing, really. But it does show that there are honest to goodness loonies out there who feel very strongly about their delusions...

Yes, I know what it is. I downloaded the PDF file from the CA AG office and read the whole thing.

It doesn't stand a snowballs chance in Hades of passing
But if by some chance it would, it would immediately be challenged and found unconstitutional.

But some of the proposed legislation in state legislatures probably will. They will all be challenged. And all struck down. At a cost to the taxpayers.

My question is, why even propose legislation that is blatantly unconstitutional? What's their point? Are they that stupid? Or just doing it for harassments sake?

Well, it is constitutional for a person to apply for a ballot measure petition. And, hey, that's $200 in revenue for CA government, isn't it?

As for the petitioner, yes, he IS that stupid...

Childish behavior.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz