- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Respect for Marriage Act passes House (258 to 169) - now heads to Biden's desk
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:43 pm to SoonerK
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:43 pm to SoonerK
quote:
Please show your reputable polling companies that show a significant deviation from what Galllup has registered over 25+ years.
That’s a rather odd and specific request that would seem to have little utility. Indeed, the timing and location seem out of whack
We are only a few years removed from most all pollsters blowing election polling. Nate Tantium only gave Gallup a B+ recently
The Washington Post attacked Gallup when they showed polling numbers of resistance towards vaccination
Polling accuracy in todays age of hesitancy on response is an area of active research Wharton
1
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:43 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Not under the RMA, which addresses only SSM and miscegenation.
So it's your contention that no Judge ever has extrapolated a biased Judgement to fit their worldview using "restricted" or narrow legal language like you just posted?
You seriously telling us that no Judge in History has abused their authority in that manner or divined some nonexistent precedent by falsely framing the words of a written Law or simply pulling it out of their arse while incorrectly citing a Law that isn't remotely related?
This post was edited on 12/9/22 at 12:46 pm
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:45 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
will whine and bitch about the name or background of the researcher, or the methodology or the sample size or the color of the paper regarding any poll or study that produces a result he does not like.
So those aren’t legitimate means of complaint? If he can show flaws, he should keep quiet and not discuss because you googled up something to support your opinion?
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:46 pm to oogabooga68
Hank won't disparage his trash institution by directly answering that.
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:46 pm to dukkbill
quote:
That’s a rather odd and specific request that would seem to have little utility
Especially when I told this idiot what Gallups bullshite methodology consisted of.
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:47 pm to armsdealer
quote:
We should all be against having to get a government license to get married...
Seriously, government sponsored marriage is the tip of the nanny state.
I have no problem with gay unions or marriages or whatever. IDGAF who you want to be with, I just think the government shouldn't be involved.
This.
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:53 pm to oogabooga68
quote:Sure, it has happened on occasion. But you could make the same argument regarding a jaywalking law or a local lawnmowing ordinance. Very literally, any conceivable piece of legislation.
So it's your contention that no Judge ever has extrapolated a biased Judgement to fit their worldview using "restricted" or narrow legal language like you just posted?
You either trust the judiciary to do its job (or for appellate courts to fix the errors of lower courts) or you do not. Without some degree of faith in the system from the bulk of the population, any society will collapse.
You have no faith in the system. Nothing I can say will change that.
This post was edited on 12/9/22 at 12:54 pm
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:58 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
You have no faith in the system
And that is the fault of the system for refusing to clean its own house, not mine or the millions of other people who are being asked to ignore our lying eyes in favor of the word of criminals.
Posted on 12/9/22 at 12:59 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
You have no faith in the system.
And you have blind faith in the system because of confirmation bias.
A creepy, slavish devotion where the system is always right because AggieHank (supposedly) is part of that system....more likely you're just a groupie, but whatever....
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:01 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
(or for appellate courts to fix the errors of lower courts)
That is not enough.
Judges need to be removed, Lawyers need to start being disbarred, Politicians need to be tarred and feathered.
If the "System" wants the respect of "We the People", then the system needs to commence with the rat killin' as it were.
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:05 pm to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
It's not a marriage.
Man and women. Period.
That's never gonna change.
The gay marriage argument will seem quaint in 100 years when we will be debating marriage between humans and artificial intelligence.
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:05 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
ou either trust the judiciary to do its job (or for appellate courts to fix the errors of lower courts) or you do not. Without some degree of faith in the system from the bulk of the population, any society will collapse.
Nonsense. Without oversight of the system by the populace it will grow to be corrupt and out of touch with the governed
No one should Trust the System any more than they should Trust Sessions.
They should constantly strive to ensure the system works as intended
quote:
m. Nothing I can say will change that.
Probably, because you spend most of your time insulting people and feigning intellectual superiority
However, there might be lots of things that different people could say to help others work together in a system, or use their efforts to improve our system
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:07 pm to oogabooga68
quote:
That’s a rather odd and specific request that would seem to have little utility
Especially when I told this idiot what Gallups bull shite methodology consisted of.
Idiot? You are one of the biggest brain dead posters on this site and that is really saying something. 1. It said a minimum of 1000 were polled. Even using 1000 as your polling size, 1000 has a low MoE. The Gallup results also line up with numerous other polls showing the same results. Still waiting on your polls showing significant devation from the Gallup results.
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:08 pm to ThuperThumpin
quote:
The gay marriage argument will seem quaint in 100 years when we will be debating marriage between humans and artificial intelligence.
You are off by about 98 years I'm afraid...
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:09 pm to SoonerK
quote:
Still waiting on your polls showing significant devation from the Gallup results.
I will put my assistant, Hank on that and he will get back to you ......Hank?
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:09 pm to SoonerK
quote:
You are one of the biggest brain dead posters on this site and that is really saying something.
Considering the source, I wear this as a badge of honor...THANK YOU SIR
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:13 pm to ThuperThumpin
quote:
The gay marriage argument will seem quaint in 100 years when we will be debating marriage between humans and artificial intelligence.
Oh thats coming. The only thing about that statement I don't agree with is it taking 100 years. But before that, animals and minors. That's not even meant to to be laughed it. And then you will have people defending it...until they are directly affected. Then their tunes change. That's usually how it works in our country.
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:16 pm to mtopdawg421
quote:
Oh thats coming. The only thing about that statement I don't agree with is it taking 100 years. But before that, animals and minors. That's not even meant to to be laughed it. And then you will have people defending it...until they are directly affected. Then their tunes change. That's usually how it works in our country.
You sound like Democrats arguing for gun control when you make points like this.
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:17 pm to oogabooga68
quote:
You are off by about 98 years I'm afraid...
Instinctively, would you have a moral objection to it?
Posted on 12/9/22 at 1:19 pm to ThuperThumpin
quote:
Instinctively, would you have a moral objection to it?
Having seen the decline of American women as a monolith, HELL NO!!!
Just kidding.
Yes, it's a complete mockery and a sad commentary on the people who would even entertain such a notion. IMO.
Page 19 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News