ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags !MOD BOX WARNING! , Wisconsin politics

Reply
Old Today, 12:24 PM   #121
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,862
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
The election made them the arbiters of the will of the people until the last minute of the last day of the last year of their term.
If you think about it real hard, you may be able to figure out what the Nov. election told them.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:42 PM   #122
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,937
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
If you think about it real hard, you may be able to figure out what the Nov. election told them.
It tells them nothing. They get to be the representatives and have that mandate until it is over.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:52 PM   #123
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 5,862
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
It tells them nothing. They get to be the representatives and have that mandate until it is over.
I'll say this before falling victim to the Black Hole that this would become: What is legal and what is ethical are not always the same. This is one of those times. You either can't/won't see that or simply want to disagree for disagreement's sake.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:54 PM   #124
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,937
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I'll say this before falling victim to the Black Hole that this would become: What is legal and what is ethical are not always the same. This is one of those times. You either can't/won't see that or simply want to disagree for disagreement's sake.
Im saying it seems highly unethical to arbitrarily stop doing your job you were elected to do. And the best representation of that job is the length of term.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:45 PM   #125
phunk
Illuminator
 
phunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,856
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Im saying it seems highly unethical to arbitrarily stop doing your job you were elected to do. And the best representation of that job is the length of term.
And I'm saying it's even more unethical to redefine the responsibilities of an office in between someone being elected and them taking office. The voters voted them into that job as it was defined prior to the election.
phunk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 03:09 PM   #126
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,364
Originally Posted by phunk View Post
And I'm saying it's even more unethical to redefine the responsibilities of an office in between someone being elected and them taking office. The voters voted them into that job as it was defined prior to the election.
But that logic works even after they take office: they were still voted into office with certain defined powers, that doesn't change after they are in office. This argument doesn't actually admit any time for it to be OK to change the powers of an elected office.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.