TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

AngelusNox Warder of the damned from The guard of the gates of oblivion Since: Dec, 2014 Relationship Status: Married to the job
Warder of the damned
#98551: Aug 13th 2015 at 11:40:42 AM

Well they did defeat the Iraqi military and brought Saddam down. That they accomplished but nation building on the other hand was not since the civilian administration on the US thought that, Democracy, uh, finds a way and tried to leave as that without paying attention to all the conflicting groups in Iraq.

edited 13th Aug '15 11:41:42 AM by AngelusNox

Inter arma enim silent leges
Morgikit Mikon :3 from War Drobe, Spare Oom Since: Jul, 2012 Relationship Status: What's love got to do with it?
Mikon :3
#98552: Aug 13th 2015 at 11:46:19 AM

The point I was trying to make is that people seem to think the fight is over. It very much isn't.

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#98553: Aug 13th 2015 at 11:53:55 AM

@Rationalinsanity: Yeah, but the courts have no power to enforce anything. It's quite possible that this particular clerk will keep his job even if he continues to flat refuse the court order.

Remember, we had stuff like Mississippi-was it?- passing a state law that federal agents who came in to enforce some law or another would be arrested.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#98554: Aug 13th 2015 at 11:54:34 AM

Courts may command the executive branch (law enforcement) to arrest and prosecute those who defy its orders.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Canid117 Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Hello, I love you
#98555: Aug 13th 2015 at 11:58:19 AM

[up][up]Such a law is so laughably going to end in the federal government's favor that any attempt to enforce it would probably end in the state Governor being led out of his mansion in FBI cuffs.

"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#98556: Aug 13th 2015 at 12:01:13 PM

Implicit in the separation of powers in our Constitution is the fact that the judicial branch cannot enforce its rulings without action by the executive branch. If legislators and executives combine to reject judicial decisions, then the only remedy is intervention at the federal level. If the refusal occurs at the federal level, then the Court's decision is irrelevant, but this could lead to very bad things and so is almost never done.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Ogodei Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers from The front lines Since: Jan, 2011
Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers
#98557: Aug 13th 2015 at 12:15:24 PM

Andrew Jackson actually did it. When the courts objected to the Indian Removal Act, he told them something to the effect of "come here and make me do something about it."

FFShinra Since: Jan, 2001
#98558: Aug 13th 2015 at 12:17:37 PM

Been a stain on the US ever since.

Morgikit Mikon :3 from War Drobe, Spare Oom Since: Jul, 2012 Relationship Status: What's love got to do with it?
Mikon :3
#98559: Aug 13th 2015 at 12:25:53 PM

My big concern right now is that the Alabama legislature is considering a bill that will abolish marriage licenses altogether. Instead, couples will have to obtain "contracts" from the same officials who are refusing same-sex couples now. This is what they're planning instead of working on a desperately needed budget that will allow the state to function.

It's okay if you don't believe it, as it is incredibly stupid. I'll add a link when I find the article. And here it is.

edited 13th Aug '15 12:28:16 PM by Morgikit

Canid117 Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Hello, I love you
#98560: Aug 13th 2015 at 12:38:09 PM

It's like literacy tests but for gay people!

"War without fire is like sausages without mustard." - Jean Juvénal des Ursins
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#98561: Aug 13th 2015 at 12:39:54 PM

It is not clear that attempting to abolish marriage as a whole is unconstitutional per se, but the Full Faith and Credit clause mandates that Alabama recognize marriages granted by other states even if they won't marry people in theirs.

Plus, if they create an institution analogous to marriage that happens to exclude gays, then it's still unequal treatment no matter what they call it.

Edit: That article does not make it seem as if they're trying to abolish marriage, but rather to remove the license-granting portion of the process.

edited 13th Aug '15 12:41:38 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Ogodei Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers from The front lines Since: Jan, 2011
Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers
#98562: Aug 13th 2015 at 1:02:20 PM

Basically. Which is fair (albeit childish), as long as it includes same sex couples. I don't see the inherent discrimination here (the actual discrimination, yes, but not the theoretical part).

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#98563: Aug 13th 2015 at 1:41:23 PM

What matters, I suppose, is that the tangible fact of having a "marriage license" entitles one to the benefits of the institution whether or not a civil or religious ceremony is undertaken or a contract signed; ergo, Alabama may be setting its citizens up to be unable to receive the benefits of marriage from other states and/or the federal government.

That this makes no sense is patent, but the anti-gay-marriage movement never did to begin with, so...

What they seem to be focusing on now is preventing individuals with "sincere objections" from being forced to grant legal rights to gay couples.

edited 13th Aug '15 1:43:33 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
JackOLantern1337 Shameful Display from The Most Miserable Province in the Russian Empir Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Shameful Display
#98564: Aug 13th 2015 at 1:43:09 PM

They do realize that this shit is likely to do far more harm to the institution of marriage than allowing Gays to wed ever could, namely any harm. I mean look what happened to France. In order to stave off allowing Gays to marry they created "civl unions." now, not only are the gays using it, but over half of straight couples are.

I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#98565: Aug 13th 2015 at 1:50:57 PM

The idea of civil unions was floated to allow LGBT couples to have the same legal rights as married straight couples, but without calling it marriage, to appease the zealots. It was killed in the courts because of the "separate but equal" implications. No matter what you call it, you cannot have a "right" that implicitly discriminates against or leaves out a class of people.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Morgikit Mikon :3 from War Drobe, Spare Oom Since: Jul, 2012 Relationship Status: What's love got to do with it?
Mikon :3
#98566: Aug 13th 2015 at 2:07:46 PM

Alabama has no civil unions, domestic partnerships, etc. Homophobia is so intrenched here they didn't bother trying to appease us with "marriage lite".

JackOLantern1337 Shameful Display from The Most Miserable Province in the Russian Empir Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Shameful Display
#98567: Aug 13th 2015 at 2:20:21 PM

[up][up] Yeah my uncle supported something like that, I did too for a time, because men getting married was "weird." Of course when I got older I realized how stupid this belief was.

I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#98568: Aug 13th 2015 at 2:21:35 PM

I actually think we should do the opposite. Make the legal term Civil Union for everyone with marriage as a religious or colloquial term.

Memers Since: Aug, 2013
#98569: Aug 13th 2015 at 2:43:38 PM

Eliminate marriage in general so that the hardcore freaks cant breed anymore? I would be all for it at this point, let Darwin take over.

Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#98570: Aug 13th 2015 at 2:44:27 PM

How on Earth would you eliminate marriage? More importantly why would you want to? It's not just a religious ceremony.

Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#98571: Aug 13th 2015 at 3:17:39 PM

Oh god do anything you want with marriage but dont take away my porn

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
JackOLantern1337 Shameful Display from The Most Miserable Province in the Russian Empir Since: Aug, 2014 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
Shameful Display
#98572: Aug 13th 2015 at 3:37:26 PM

[up][up] Easy, make preforming a marriage ceremony or entering into any kind of religious union a crime. Of course that would be unconstitutional, but I'm sure most people who would seriously pass such a law consider it to be an old rag that should be thrown out to make room for a more enlightened form of government.

I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#98573: Aug 13th 2015 at 3:48:31 PM

So you're saying that the First Amendment shouldn't apply if you want to piss off conservative Christians?

"Yup. That tasted purple."
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#98574: Aug 13th 2015 at 3:51:17 PM

[up][up]That would never hold up in court. Even if it did there's no practical reason to get rid of it. In fact getting rid of it would probably damage the economy a lot.

kkhohoho (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#98575: Aug 13th 2015 at 4:28:56 PM

[up][up][up]That still doesn't explain why you would do it, rather than how you would do it.


Total posts: 417,856
Top