Economic vs. Social issues which means more to you

[WMS]

Well, looks like I'm a one man minority.

Nah, I agree with you. I guess I have always been more passionate about social issues; as someone who loves order I like to have some order and security in my world.

Add an Independent who cares more about social issues to the list! In fact, the next-to-last line in BRTD's post displays exactly the attitude that helped drive me away from the Democratic Party...

[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 NickG 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...

[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...

[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