advanced search

Username:    Password:   

Elections    Goto page Previous  1, 2
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LS-ultimate.com Forum Index -> Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Michael



Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 510
Location: None

PostPosted: Thu, 11.06.08 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Evan you're not the first person I've heard of that was confused and thought that voting for the amendment would allow unmarried couples to adopt. They said they might look into the results because a poll done a few days for the election showed the exact opposite results, that people opposed the amendment 55-45. I can't imagine how someone could yap about promoting adoption as a safe and preferable alternative to abortion while simultaneously limiting the number of people who can adopt. It's bizarre.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Elvin



Joined: 17 Apr 2008
Posts: 1246
Location: The Science Department's big Oppenheimer Pinata Party

PostPosted: Thu, 11.06.08 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RE-VOTE!!!
_________________
It's hard to get a table for one at Chucky Cheese when you look like I do....Oh, you're out of that? Then just give me Vice President of Ultimate Frisbee.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
rcheek



Joined: 06 Apr 2003
Posts: 537
Location: Helena, AR

PostPosted: Thu, 11.06.08 11:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fluffy wrote:
I'm guessing that many people misinterpreted the adoption vote. A lady at work did, seems Elvin did, I think Evil did .... so that's probably a 30% "wrong intention" in the votes cast.
Part of the problem seems to be that there WAS a DHS mandate restricting the fostering/adoption by unmarrieds & gays, but that was overturned and abandoned by DHS, and THEN the "make our families righteous and religious" groups got all upset and got the signatures to put the issue on the ballot, thus confusing some that thought the vote was to "overturn" the "non-existing" law, rather than to impose the restriction by law Crying or Very sad


My brother David did too...I don't know where you pulled 30%, but I think that there is something to be said the fact that the wording was a little bit complicated for a substantial number of people to handle. I too am disappointed in the outcome.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
brown



Joined: 15 Oct 2003
Posts: 1688
Location: UNM

PostPosted: Thu, 11.06.08 11:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You know you can look at the ballot on the internet before you even go to cast your vote. So that way you can be sure of what you're doing, but that would take some forethought and extra time and I guess not everyone has internet access.
Shit's weak. Confused
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
RBill



Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 1572
Location: home

PostPosted: Thu, 11.06.08 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Urge to kill falling ... falling ... RISING! ... falling ... falling ... gone.
_________________
Homey don't play that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ultra Liz



Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 128
Location: gasping for air at 5,782 ft.

PostPosted: Sun, 11.09.08 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/obama_win_causes_obsessive

Watch out, the supporters are out there!
_________________
"'Cause I's wicked,--I is. I's mighty wicked, anyhow, I can't help it." - Harriet Elizabeth Beecher Stowe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LS-ultimate.com Forum Index -> Forum GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Designed by: Powered by: © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group