Economic vs. Social issues which means more to you

[WMS]

There is no need to dawdle by lobbying legislators who are bound by public opinion, when we could take our grievances before life-tenured judges who have no one to answer to about what they rule.

Wow, the Authoritarian Left rears its ugly head. This is so anti-democratic it is beyond words. And I note that all you Democrats and leftists on this board have said nothing against this statement - in fact, BRTD and nclib support it!

WMS, though I do partially agree with migrendel's statement, I was wondering where had I explicitly indicated that...

My apology - NickG said it, not you.

[WMS]

There is no need to dawdle by lobbying legislators who are bound by public opinion, when we could take our grievances before life-tenured judges who have no one to answer to about what they rule.

Wow, the Authoritarian Left rears its ugly head. This is so anti-democratic it is beyond words. And I note that all you Democrats and leftists on this board have said nothing against this statement - in fact, BRTD and nclib support it!

How unbelievably arrogant is the left - you 'know better' than the rest of us, therefore there is no need to go through the people or their elected representatives, as long as you can use the court system to shove your viewpoint on everybody else. And how ironic that you are the ones who scream the loudest about the 'religious right' ostensibly doing the same thing!

I knew you were a left-wing extremist, migrendel, but I didn't know you supported tyranny.

And I'm a federalist on social issues, hoss, so don't accuse me of restricting your rights - if Massachusetts, or Cambridge for that matter, wants to legislate leftist social laws, then that's their right. But don't assume that everyone must live according to what YOU deem to be right.

Bloody leftists...

Democracy is very dangerous to individual freedoms - I think migrendel is right on this one.  The Constitution should be a protectoin of individual rights against majority rule.

Perhaps I should also add "bloody rightists"? And let me again note that I'm a federalist in the Libertarian vein...

[ilikeverin]

The #1 option would be to go through the legislature, but we shouldn't hesitate to 'go judicial'.

That being said, I'd much prefer it if it was passed by the legislature

[WMS]

I would just like to apologize for the harsh tone of my earlier post. While my opposition to the use of the judiciary in the fashion remarked upon by others remains, there are better ways to express such statements. So, sorry about that.
-WMS

[migrendel]

The fact, WMS, is that there are some things that are just right, right within the sense of the Constitution, of liberty, of fairness, that just don't have the support to make it through the legislature. A good example is desegregation, but there have been plenty throughout our history. If we waited for the legislature to desegregate, it could have taken years. But the Supreme Court did what was mandated by the highest law of our country, even if more Americans opposed it than not. I believe that history has vindicated them. Today, we have several issues that cry out for justice, that will meet public scorn when remedied, just as my state's highest court has in recent months, and will one day be accepted as how the law must work in a fair and free society.

I also see no arrogance in allowing legal questions to be decided by those with legal training. I see far more arrogance in the presumptuous manner of those members of the hoi polloi who believe their heat of the moment passions should replace the prudent and corroborated judgments of those who have devoted their lifetimes to the law.

[The Dowager Mod]

#5

[Lunar]

Independent (left-leaning) and social issues.

Less government regulation of my personal life is pretty important to me.

[Bono]

4th as well. Except for FCC censorship, the rest of the social issues don't really bother me.

[Brambila]

Society is definately developing socially, but unfortunately to pro-abortion and homosexual activists, not in their favor. Several studies show that the youth is actually more socially conservative than it was 20 or 30 years ago. According to a UC Berkeley study, while 57% of adults aged 27-59 want school prayer in schools, almost 70% of teenagers want it. 34% of adults want government restrictions on abortion, while 44% of teenagers do. In addition, according to a gallup poll, 70% of teenagers think abortion is wrong. 32% of teenagers want abortion always illegal, while only 17% of adults agree with this proposal. Further, teen sex rates have gone down around 10%-15% since 1990. This is not surprising. I live in San Francisco, which usually votes 80-90% liberal, but a much lower population of my peers support liberalism, specifically socially. They're still a majority, but I'd say it's closer to 60%-70%.

The reason for this change is on account of a number of factors- what I believe is a huge factor is how the youth are sickened by the sexual revolution's lies and ways. Secondly, the growing number of socially conservative hispanics gives a siginicant segment of the young population morals. Also, social-liberals are killing themselves off. The only people having children are conservatives- I just came back from a Catholic vacation where family sizes ranged from 5-10, and they spoke of a family with 15 children.

[Gustaf]

I'm not really a Democrat who happens to prioritize social issues...I'm a Democrat b/c I care more about social issues.

I have to agree with Migrendel, for once. Certain individual rights should be sacred and are not to be tampered with by whatever majority.

On the out-look of young people, I think there are signs in more than one direction. But social progressivism in terms of increased tolerance for different peoples and their life-styles I think that is definitely occuring.

However, social progressivism or social liberalism is often confused with some sort of social leftism, which isn't the same thing. Many young people don't want left-winged social policies, such as AA or gun control. But most are accepting of other people, such as gays.

[Lunar]

Brambila, did that study ask any questions relating to homosexuality?  I had the impression that while the youth was shifting rightward on things like abortion, and exception was towards gay marriage.

[Brambila]

Nope, it didn't. Some statistics I have read show that students are more tolerant of homosexuals (in that they don't use verbal, physical, or any sorts of attacks on them). But that doesn't mean much, since I'm tolerant towards homosexuals... after all, my uncle is homosexual, as are several of my friends.