10-03-2013, 03:54 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-03-2013, 04:54 AM by FireIceTalon.)
(10-03-2013, 01:28 AM)Taem Wrote: @FIT
Like medical marijuana laws? You're a real tool sometimes fit. I'm personally glad states have separate laws for some things, else gay marriage would never have happened had other states no started the change by making it legal first allowing the federal law to be overturned. Another thing is my wife wouldn't have the necessary medical marijuana she uses with low doses of thc so she hardly feels a head trip, but it takes her pain away, etc. Yeah, on some level, I do think the states should have more power, and more rights. Rather this would be a good thing or a bad thing, I have not really sat down to ponder to full ramifications, but for you to compare what individual states have done with their rights versus comparing state rights to discrimination, racism, and sexism, I have to disagree that not everything is an evil ploy thought up by some bizarre evil entity hell-bent on control, be it big or small government.
EDIT: Made this from my phone so now that I'm back at home, going to fix it up a bit.
I have sat down to ponder its full ramifications. I am all for legalizing marijuana (both for medical and recreational use) and gay marriage, but through devolution isn't the way to do it. The benefits would be outweighed by the consequences.
To know why 'states rights' is inherently a bad thing is to know your history, and what the term itself, historically means and implies by those who advocate it. Since you do not seem to know, I will break it down for you.
It was through the Civil Rights Movement that the right to vote and general civil rights were granted to 'people of color' who lived in the south, by the federal government. Minorities who lived in these states were subject to Jim Crow Laws that were state mandated as a way of maintaining white hegemony in that region of the country. This is where the term 'states rights' come from. Conservatives of various stripes, who are the general proponent of 'states rights', want to rollback these policies that were extended to minorities because they are a threat to white supremacy. Historically, their agenda was to keep minorities (especially blacks) as an economically repressed, uneducated, and socially stratified class to protect white privilege intact in that region. The term 'states rights' is just a code phrase used by those who wish to rollback the progress and civil liberties that were granted to minorities, and they resent the fact that they do not have that power anymore. The Tea Party fascists/racists are the prime example of this today, which is why you always see them hollering about states rights in their little rallies. But tea parties are for little girls with imaginary friends.
In short, fuck 'states rights'. Anyone who supports that crap is a sociopath, nuff' said.
And I'm a tool? LOL, yea ok buddy.
https://www.youtube.com/user/FireIceTalon
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)