It is apparently the belief that the government should stay out of people's lives except to enforce conservative social values.
The result is that people (and I dis/encourage you to/from check/ing out Lew Rockwell's facebook page for baffling examples) come up with really bizarre mental gymnastics to explain how the supreme court striking down an existing law constitutes the government laying claim to a social concept.
It's like Larouchies.
---
Willis, it seems like every other time you post, I need to look up a word that's in the OED or Urban Dictionary but not both.
-Mimir
That sounds like the perfect complement to my own political views.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complement_%28set_theory%29 )
---
PWWTHaSaaAaCDLAIEoTaTMaMNtNDTTA - Proud Member
http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1566
Tangentially related: For an early (but not intro) political science class, a friend of mine was tasked with studying a group with a relatively narrow special interest and then writing a paper analyzing their potential political influence, tactics, etc. Not being one to do any task halfway, she decided to analyze the Larouche PAC, including pretending to be interested in their messages and even going to one or two of their meetings.
Apparently she told her professor after she was about halfway done with her 'analysis' before being told to stop immediately out of endangering her own life, since apparently the LaRouchies even volunteered to "pick her up in their van" once or twice.
---
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v129/ukealii50/kylo.jpg - Thanks uke!
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/829/07kyloforce.png - Thanks Diyosa!
You're going to have define the superset that your complement comes from, otherwise I'll just assume that you want government to enforce everything EXCEPT conservative social values.
---
"I always wanted to be somebody, but now I realize I should have been more specific."
That is indeed what I meant.
---
PWWTHaSaaAaCDLAIEoTaTMaMNtNDTTA - Proud Member
http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1566
They're preserving their claim to a social concept. Marriage the religious state is not the same as the contract between two people and their consequent rights of kinship, transferability, etc. They should be ruling, ideally, that it is unconstitutional for the government (state or federal) to make laws concerning this. They went halfway -- they struck it down federally.
But what about the roads?
---
Willis, it seems like every other time you post, I need to look up a word that's in the OED or Urban Dictionary but not both.
-Mimir
Where we're going, we don't need roads.
---
Let NOTHING stand in your way.
Jakob wins the topic.
---
PWWTHaSaaAaCDLAIEoTaTMaMNtNDTTA - Proud Member
http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=1566
I kind of hope that people routinely troll the What About the Roads guy with that, but I also hope no one ever does, so one of us can do it for the first time.
---
Willis, it seems like every other time you post, I need to look up a word that's in the OED or Urban Dictionary but not both.
-Mimir