Quote:
Originally Posted by BoLevi
Most western democracies have constitutions to ensure the sanctity of the individual over the tyranny of the majority.
|
That "tyranny of the majority" BS is really just made-up nonsense. So I reject the premise of what you're saying here.
Quote:
|
This is why same sex marriage was determined by the SC, in an analysis of the constitution.
|
It was ratified in 2005. What about the years 1867-2004? Funny how your "we conservatives don't want to restrict anyone's rights" policy didn't seem to apply then.
Quote:
|
Furthermore, anyone who is a true liberal would understand that sitting on either side of that morality divide should not result in punishment for anyone, but rather a discussion about the merits of the competing ideas.
|
There are no merits to the idea that same-sex marriages are immoral. There literally is no case to be made for it. And no, saying "because my invisible friend in the sky said so" is not a case.
Quote:
|
This perspective is what the left has lost, instead pursuing a more kangaroo court and witchhunt approach to disagreement.
|
Nope. It's just that we see situations were harm is being done, and we take steps to minimize that harm. Sometimes it means calling out people who have views that are rooted in a time when certain groups were viciously oppressed.