The Problems with Trans-ideology

#576
#576
hog88 said:
If the people of Vermont want this stopped they should vote accordingly. Otherwise it’s nobody’s problem but theirs.
Click to expand...

I agree, but lets not pretend the govt isnt pushing, promoting, incentivizing this ideology....as some claim they are not. This isnt organic.
 
#578
#578
hog88 said:
If the people of Vermont want this stopped they should vote accordingly. Otherwise it’s nobody’s problem but theirs.
Click to expand...
This is where I need clarification from you. So if people of say Florida wanted certain chnages or laws they would expect a governor who supports them....if so then why is it overreach for said elected governor to make laws that those whom got him elected want...wouldn't that be small governing by the state instead of a fed level...
 
#579
#579
volgr said:
I agree, but lets not pretend the govt isnt pushing, promoting, incentivizing this ideology....as some claim they are not. This isnt organic.
Click to expand...

Yes, it’s the government they voted for doing the pushing and incentivizing.
 
#580
#580
whodeycin85 said:
This is where I need clarification from you. So if people of say Florida wanted certain chnages or laws they would expect a governor who supports them....if so then why is it overreach for said elected governor to make laws that those whom got him elected want...wouldn't that be small governing by the state instead of a fed level...
Click to expand...

Government should pass no laws that violate the BORs, be damned what the people want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83, 825VOL, 85SugarVol and 1 other person
#581
#581
hog88 said:
Government should pass no laws that violate the BORs, be damned what the people want.
Click to expand...
They have been passing laws like that for a long time... because they were voted in...and allowed to do so...with that being said. How do you see changing the way things are enforced with already people entrenched whom won't enforce current laws? And I don't mean in next election cycle, I mean short term
 
#582
#582
whodeycin85 said:
They have been passing laws like that for a long time... because they were voted in...and allowed to do so...with that being said. How do you see changing the way things are enforced with already people entrenched whom won't enforce current laws? And I don't mean in next election cycle, I mean short term
Click to expand...

I don't think you/we can.
 
#583
#583
whodeycin85 said:
This is where I need clarification from you. So if people of say Florida wanted certain chnages or laws they would expect a governor who supports them....if so then why is it overreach for said elected governor to make laws that those whom got him elected want...wouldn't that be small governing by the state instead of a fed level...
Click to expand...
I think State and Local governments should be given tremendous latitude. That would include DC letting carjackers go.

Hog already hit on the greatest Top 10 of all time and the hard stop/no that represents.
 
#584
#584
hog88 said:
I don't think you/we can.
Click to expand...
Do you believe that each level of government ( town, to county, to state, to fed) should exist to oversee the 1 below it? And if so shouldn't that overseeing level be able to address the one below for not enforcing what thier voters want..
 
#585
#585
whodeycin85 said:
Do you believe that each level of government ( town, to county, to state, to fed) should exist to oversee the 1 below it? And if so shouldn't that overseeing level be able to address the one below for not enforcing what thier voters want..
Click to expand...

No, I do not believe each level should be overseeing the levels below them. Each has it's own purpose and responsibilities. Yes, the federal government has supremeacy over state governments and same for state over locals but the reason we have so many problems now is because the federal government has grown so large and encompassing it interferes in local matters.

The only thing the state or federal government should override (oversee) is when local or state governments violate the BORs. The absolute number 1 thing government at every level should be concerned about about watch like a hawk is individual rights/liberty. Everything else is secondary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HammondB3Vol, volinsd and 825VOL
#586
#586
hog88 said:
No, I do not believe each level should be overseeing the levels below them. Each has it's own purpose and responsibilities. Yes, the federal government has supremeacy over state governments and same for state over locals but the reason we have so many problems now is because the federal government has grown so large and encompassing it interferes in local matters.

The only thing the state or federal government should override (oversee) is when local or state governments violate the BORs. The absolute number 1 thing government at every level should be concerned about about watch like a hawk is individual rights/liberty. Everything else is secondary.
Click to expand...
We will only reach Nirvana when the feds are in charge of trash collection. My local municipality has already done a fine job, by publishing a 2 page flyer explaining how trash is to be disposed of in the municipal garbage can, but also where it is to be placed in front of my house and the penalties for placing it too early and removing it too late. I think the feds can take that to an entirely new level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and SpaceCoastVol
#587
#587
VolStrom said:
We will only reach Nirvana when the feds are in charge of trash collection. My local municipality has already done a fine job, by publishing a 2 page flyer explaining how trash is to be disposed of in the municipal garbage can, but also where it is to be placed in front of my house and the penalties for placing it too early and removing it too late. I think the feds can take that to an entirely new level.
Click to expand...
That's why I will never live in a neighborhood. 15 acres absolute minimum when I come back to E Tenn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, hog88 and VolStrom
#588
#588
hog88 said:
No, I do not believe each level should be overseeing the levels below them. Each has it's own purpose and responsibilities. Yes, the federal government has supremeacy over state governments and same for state over locals but the reason we have so many problems now is because the federal government has grown so large and encompassing it interferes in local matters.

The only thing the state or federal government should override (oversee) is when local or state governments violate the BORs. The absolute number 1 thing government at every level should be concerned about about watch like a hawk is individual rights/liberty. Everything else is secondary.
Click to expand...
What BOR did DeSantis over reach on then?
 
#592
#592
hog88 said:
1st amendment
Click to expand...
The bill says people couldn't host adult drag shows (it doesn't say all) in places where kids are or might be.. public places like parks....so where does that violate the 1st amendment....they can still express themselves just not sexually in front kids...much likeout current laws...perverts using that as a shield can no longer...this is jo different then requiring 18 to a tittie bar
 
#594
#594
whodeycin85 said:
The bill says people couldn't host adult drag shows (it doesn't say all) in places where kids are or might be.. public places like parks....so where does that violate the 1st amendment....they can't still express themselves just not sexually in front kids...much likeout current laws...perverts using that as a shield can no longer...this is jo different then requiring 18 to a tittie bar
Click to expand...

It's violating the property owners freedom of speech.

I feel the same about all the rules/laws about titty bars.
 
#595
#595
hog88 said:
It's violating the property owners freedom of speech.

I feel the same about all the rules/laws about titty bars.
Click to expand...
So if a property/business owner has a business or property where kids can go view people having sex, or other sexual depravity, your fine as long as the parent say so???
 
#596
#596
whodeycin85 said:
So if a property/business owner has a business or property where kids can go view people having sex, or other sexual depravity, your fine as long as the parent say so???
Click to expand...
He is, he's a libertarian and claims to be against any government control on anything depravity related, but his wife would absolutely kick his ass if the grand babies were exposed to that depravity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#597
#597
whodeycin85 said:
So if a property/business owner has a business or property where kids can go view people having sex, or other sexual depravity, your fine as long as the parent say so???
Click to expand...

Nope, not "fine" with it at all. It's disgusting.
 
#598
#598
VolStrom said:
He is, he's a libertarian and claims to be against any government control on anything depravity related, but his wife would absolutely kick his ass if the grand babies were exposed to that depravity.
Click to expand...

Yep and I would never expose them to any of that.
 
#600
#600
VolStrom said:
So why support it?
Click to expand...

I don't know how many times I have to tell you but once again, I don't support it. I support their right to have their shows. I don't support grown men wearing skinny jeans but I support their right to do so.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top