― aimurchie (aimurchie), Tuesday, 2 January 2007 23:35 (seventeen years ago) link
Any new law gets argued about, but unlike yr average water rights bill, yeah, it's a fucking ridiculously touchy national issue and of course everyone's going to try and IMPORT their own 'democracy' to Massacusetts or anywhere else that touches the issue with some dignity. Sorry they're shaking up your backyard for no reason.
― Abbott (Abbott), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 00:58 (seventeen years ago) link
― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 05:40 (seventeen years ago) link
― step hen faps (Curt1s Stephens), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 05:52 (seventeen years ago) link
― aimurchie (aimurchie), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 06:16 (seventeen years ago) link
Is this sentence entirely fucked? What crazy system requires a (more or less) 25% vote to move an amendment forward?
― Casuistry (casuistry), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 06:17 (seventeen years ago) link
― friday on the porch (lfam), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 06:46 (seventeen years ago) link
― friday on the porch (lfam), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 06:48 (seventeen years ago) link
Um..gosh. it's a state by state decision. So..if this amendment gets any farther than the posing, rhetoric based place it is in, I guess it could be challenged in the state supreme court.
I think I get your point - it's a huge leap from legislation to practical applications of the law. it's a civil rights issue, I suppose.
― aimurchie (aimurchie), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 06:58 (seventeen years ago) link
BOSTON (AP) -- Lawmakers in Massachusetts, the only state where gay marriage is legal, voted Tuesday to allow a proposed constitutional amendment to move forward that would effectively ban it.
PARSE THE SENTENCE!
Follow the verbs.
― aimurchie (aimurchie), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 07:07 (seventeen years ago) link
― aimurchie (aimurchie), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 07:38 (seventeen years ago) link
― aimurchie (aimurchie), Wednesday, 3 January 2007 16:46 (seventeen years ago) link