How many of you are voting Tuesday?

[DynoTom]

I was just wondering how many members here will be voting on Tuesday?


I really don't think we should make this a political post at all so, lets just see how many of you are going to vote...


I vote in every election...


I have a feeling that this poll will show more members not voting than ones that will vote.....I could be wrong though.....

[DynoTom]

I messed up and forgot to check the poll check box to ad the poll to this post....


Oh well, I guess you can just reply and give your answer.....


If you are not old enough to vote yet let us know if you will vote once you reach voting age....

[fireguyrick]

I will be voting. Fairly republican overall, however, I will be voting NO to the Marriage Amendmant.

Rick

[DynoTom]

Rick, I heard they have the Marriage Amendmant thing worded kind of tricky on the ballot???.....What means yes and what means no?????

[DynoTom]

Death Penalty will be on the ballot too !

[Yooformula]

Yes, means you want it changed so that *&#s can can not use the loophole for marriage.

The loophole does not specify MAN & WOMAN but merely husband and wife and some are claiming that its not gender specific so they can qualify.

[sidewayzbimmer]

Im voting to keep the same. Marriage is between a guy and a woman.. Not looking to argue. let the flames begin

[Yooformula]

Im voting to keep the same. Marriage is between a guy and a woman.. Not looking to argue. let the flames begin
keep the same means it can be interpreted. voting yes, means it get changed to state MAN and WOMAN only.


poll added btw.

[fireguyrick]

Regardless of what I think of homosexuality, it just is not an area that government has a place "regulating." The whole marriage is a man and woman thing is overwhelmingly a religous belief. Hence, I feel that government has no reason to get involved because of seperation of church and state.

Death penalty is on this time? Well, guess that is another item I will vote against. Just entirely to costly to execute someone in this day and age. Ends up costing more then life in prison overall.

Rick

[Flicktitty]

yessur i will be voting, actually i think this is my first time for doing this part.

[SSDude]

Regardless of what I think of homosexuality, it just is not an area that government has a place "regulating." The whole marriage is a man and woman thing is overwhelmingly a religous belief. Hence, I feel that government has no reason to get involved because of seperation of church and state.

Regardless of your feelings on homo's the government not the church sets the legal rules for marriage and what benifits married couples qualify for. The origin of these values comes from our founding fathers and their christian beliefs.

Once we have abandoned the concept of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, we will have no principled basis for rejecting polygamy - or any form of sexual involvement.

Whats next, Jimbob will marry his dog Skippy so he can save on taxes?

[QUOTE]"Seperation of Church and State"
In modern debate regarding church/state issues, the “Separation of Church & State” clause has become the prevailing gospel preached by politicians and pundits alike, all of whom seem oblivious to the historical context of its origin.

This misuse of the phrase is unfortunate as the historical record shows that the 1st Ammendment was written to PROTECT religious expression from government, not to separate them. In fact, the House of Representatives called for a national day of prayer and thanksgiving on September 24, 1789 - the same day that it passed the First Amendment.
Rather than ensure government doesnt establish a state-sponsored religion, the 1st Ammendment is being used to marginalize religious thought in the public arena. This is a clear violation of original intent and a history lesson on "separation of church & state" is in order.

Traditionally, the Church of England, as supported by the Royal Crown, held legal priority over all other demoninations. King James I had established the Anglican Church as the Church of England, and openly persecuted seperatists. Many of these seperatists fled to Holland, including those who settled in Leiden, to later become the Pilgrims of Plymouth Rock in 1620. When other seperatists groups followed, the Pilgrims drafted the Baptist Confession of 1612 to distinguish themselves. In this document, we find the first public claim for religious liberty.

Article 84: "That the magistrate is not by virtue of his office to meddle with religion, or matters of conscience, to force or compel men to this or that form of religion, or doctrine: but to leave the Christian religion free, to every man’s conscience, and to handle only civil transgressions (Rom. xiii), injuries and wrongs of man against man, in murder, adultery, theft, etc., for Christ only is the king, and lawgiver of the church and conscience."
Notice that this declaration doesnt call for any 'separation' of religion from the public realm, but specifies that public officers shall not meddle in religious affairs.

http://www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/004244.html[QUOTE]

[SSDude]

Vote "Yes" to stop activist judges from trying to legislate from the bench.

[Waver]

I am voting....

as far as the whole gay marrage thing, I dont think it should be called a marrage for two people of the same sex...It should be a union, and that they should get the same benifits as married people....I think it should fall under the whole common law thing.....

[SSDude]

Once we have abandoned the concept of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, we will have no principled basis for rejecting polygamy - or any form of sexual involvement.

Whats next, JimBob will marry his dog Skippy so he can save on taxes?

[Rocket Power]

Yep I will be voting.:banana
http://usera.imagecave.com/vista461/wallpapergreen_thumb.jpg

[Firefighter Z]

Meh. I don't vote anymore.

There all crooks, they never did anything for me anyways that I would benifit off of. I'm talking about both parties. So I don't bother wasting my time anymore.

[deciuss]

Yes, means you want it changed so that *&#s can can not use the loophole for marriage.

The loophole does not specify MAN & WOMAN but merely husband and wife and some are claiming that its not gender specific so they can qualify.

That is not the only thing that it will affect though. People need to read the whole changes not just that one part. It does not just affect people who are living together who are same sex but also people who are straight living with there significant others. The second part of the amendment deals with hospital visitation rights, rights to make medical decisions in life threatening situations and health care benefits. Last year I ran into a situation where I had to rush my fiancé to the hospital and she was there for a long time something like these changes would affect how I was treated as not being related or married.

To me its sad that one issue is in the spotlight and others are ignored/not mentioned like finding out that the death penalty is on there and that’s another huge issue.

But any ways im not saying you need to vote one way or another just more to inform you that there is more to that bill. Just get out and vote, in this country we have less then 45% of the population that actually gets out and votes.

[Holeshot]

Regardless of what I think of homosexuality, it just is not an area that government has a place "regulating." The whole marriage is a man and woman thing is overwhelmingly a religous belief. Hence, I feel that government has no reason to get involved because of seperation of church and state.

Death penalty is on this time? Well, guess that is another item I will vote against. Just entirely to costly to execute someone in this day and age. Ends up costing more then life in prison overall.

Rick
Agreed on both parts!!! I would rather see someone spend life in prison. Death is the easyway out. JMHO

[DynoTom]

Here is a sample ballot for the election...



They also have a Iraq question on there........


http://www.city.milwaukee.gov/display/displayFile.aspx?docid=1&filename=/Groups/electionAuthors/SampleBallots/sampleBallot110706.pdf

[ProjectCamaro]

I'll be voting

[Korndogg]

ill be voting also

[Yooformula]

That is not the only thing that it will affect though. People need to read the whole changes not just that one part. It does not just affect people who are living together who are same sex but also people who are straight living with there significant others. The second part of the amendment deals with hospital visitation rights, rights to make medical decisions in life threatening situations and health care benefits. Last year I ran into a situation where I had to rush my fiancé to the hospital and she was there for a long time something like these changes would affect how I was treated as not being related or married.

To me its sad that one issue is in the spotlight and others are ignored/not mentioned like finding out that the death penalty is on there and that’s another huge issue.

So what you are saying is that a boyfriend, girlfriend or anyone for that matter should be able to dictate what happens to someone in the hospital? How are you supposed to know the person's relationship to them if there is no official documents that support it? I was a fiance once too and until we got married I shouldnt be giving orders on her medical attention. A responsible er staff should make considerations if a person's parent isnt available but I dont feel that anyone besides blood relative or husband/wife should be in a room or making descisions. If it means that much to ya, get married then otherwise the commitment isnt there IMO.

It may be sad that 1 topic is being focused on BUT that 1 topic is what the majority of the cases will be about.

[fireguyrick]

So what you are saying is that a boyfriend, girlfriend or anyone for that matter should be able to dictate what happens to someone in the hospital? How are you supposed to know the person's relationship to them if there is no official documents that support it? I was a fiance once too and until we got married I shouldnt be giving orders on her medical attention. A responsible er staff should make considerations if a person's parent isnt available but I dont feel that anyone besides blood relative or husband/wife should be in a room or making descisions. If it means that much to ya, get married then otherwise the commitment isnt there IMO.

It may be sad that 1 topic is being focused on BUT that 1 topic is what the majority of the cases will be about.

Not sure what Deciuss thought would change. As it stands HIPAA can prevent blood relatives from alot. As a fiance' you currently have ZERO rights, and that is how is SHOULD be. Heck, when you get admitted to the hospital they ask if there is anyone that they can talk to. So untill you say it is ok the staff will tell everyone that calls about you they do not have anyone on their floor by that name. In addition, permission has to be given to keep FAMILY members informed about status. As it sits now even you as a patient do not have the legal ability to see your chart without first filling out a release form.

That being said, I think SSDude's comment about Jimbo marrying his dog Skippy is ridiculous. Skippy cannot speak nor can skippy apply any sort of knowledge. Skippy is a creature of classical and operant conditioning, and also of instinct. The fact is that we are a nation were all men are suppose to be created equal. Therefore, homosexuals should have the SAME rights as heterosexuals. You can make the claim that it is a choice, however, I can make the claim that it is genetics. Both cannot be accuratly supported at the moment, but if we can say that obesity is a genetic disorder to some extent, then why not homosexuality.

Rick

[RyanM]

Yes I will be.

[SlowStee]

Yes Ill be voting yes.

[Larrygto]

You can count my vote!

[88Nightmare]

vote dirk diggler for president!

[deciuss]

So what you are saying is that a boyfriend, girlfriend or anyone for that matter should be able to dictate what happens to someone in the hospital? How are you supposed to know the person's relationship to them if there is no official documents that support it? I was a fiance once too and until we got married I shouldnt be giving orders on her medical attention. A responsible er staff should make considerations if a person's parent isnt available but I dont feel that anyone besides blood relative or husband/wife should be in a room or making descisions. If it means that much to ya, get married then otherwise the commitment isnt there IMO.

It may be sad that 1 topic is being focused on BUT that 1 topic is what the majority of the cases will be about.


i was just saying what it will change not what i belive. personaly on the changes i dont like that i could have been told no to see her. please dont put words in my mouth this is what i said "how I was treated as not being related or married." i said nothing else.

[deciuss]

vote dirk diggler for president!
aaaaaaaaaaaaaa bad memories of the last part of that movie.

[Prince Valiant]

I always vote...never miss an election.

[Flicktitty]

hey does anyone know of a site that lists what each person is for/against? sorry if it's a dumb question i'd just like to over look some of the things before tomarrow. thanks

[deciuss]

not off the top of my head, i know the better half does thow so when she comes home i will post it up if no one else does first.

[GRAMPS SS]

hell yes i'll be voting.....need some changes....just my opinion

[SSDude]

you might as well go to each candidates website and see what they support. Most any site that compares they candidates will make their favorite look better. This includes the liberal Milwaukee Urinal.

[deciuss]

^^^^^ ya she looked at me like i was nuts when i asked so i must have heard wrong.

i guess you will have to go to each persons website

[Yooformula]

7-8am for me tomorrow!

[GRAMPS SS]

just did my duty and voted...who else did already.........i feel changes in the wind........................

[WilliamZ]

I just got back from voting. It was great.

[Silver350]

I am going to be voting and I am going right after work.

[GRAMPS SS]

hell they had a bake sale where i voted...over by yooos house,,,my 600th post...do i get a free beer

[Bart H]

Voted Republican
YES on the death penalty
YES on the gay marriage

[DynoTom]

I just got back from voting.....


It took no longer than 5 minutes "in and out"....


I guess I must have hit the polls at a good time as I would bet later today they will be much more crowded...

[Yooformula]

I had to reregister with my new address but I spent no more than 10 minutes. All repub except for Clarke and yes, yes and no!

[srt4eh]

spent like 5 minutes...No Yes No

[77thor]

I did.....

[pnad]

I just voted in this thread so yes, I did vote today.