I did not say that. Someone once said that the strength of a society is
measured in the way it treats its weakest members. The majority should rule --
but with compassion and consideration for the minority.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Fw: [QUAD-L] election
So because you appear to disagree with the outcome
of the election America is not a democracy?
Since the votes are still
being counted, as of 11/4/2004 12:14 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/president.htm
Bush
got 59,417,374 votes, won 30 states
Kerry got 55,892,789 votes, won 20
states
Take a look at the county map
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm
At
05:18 PM 11/4/2004, William Willis wrote:
Democracy indeed. The "majority"
ruled in Germany in 1940. They expressed their opinions and the minority lived
with the results. Democracy indeed.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Lubin
To: William
Willis ; hey-guys
Sent: Thursday,
November 04, 2004 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: [QUAD-L]
election
Try democracy. The people voiced their opinion by voting. The
minority live with the results.
I live in a "blue" state. The most of
the people I voted for didn't get in. Some of the propositions I voted "no" on
passed. I can either live with it or move to an area where more people share
my views and values.
At 01:33 PM 11/4/2004, William Willis
wrote:
There is a phrase for it: Tyranny
of the majority.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Lubin
To: QuadPirate ; Lori
Michaelson ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
Thursday, November 04, 2004 3:45 PM
Subject: Re: [QUAD-L]
election
At 11:39 AM 11/4/2004, QuadPirate wrote:
I think River is very upset
because the country just slapped her in the face because of her
lifestyle.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong it's just
different.
If the country said the disabled were limited to only marry
another disabled person you guys might see it different because we're
outcast as much as anyone.
I've seen people damn near run into walls
fearing to actually come in contact with me.
I see nothing
wrong with defining that a "marriage" is a union between one man and one
woman. I do agree that the measure in Ohio went too far because it bans any
"legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to
approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage." But
people thought it should be left to the individual states to decide and
that's how the people in the state of Ohio voted.
----
Jim
Lubin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bothell, WA, USA
http://makoa.org/jim
disAbility Resources: http://www.makoa.org
Transverse Myelitis Association:
http://www.myelitis.org/HowToHelp
|
