Amendments that will be on the ballot

[TrickyNicky]

Just caught on to that and was coming back to mention so, youre quick tonight :cheers:

[Oh Shoot]

Just caught on to that and was coming back to mention so, youre quick tonight :cheers:

 

Coincidence. Old farts can be spry, but not really quick. ;)

 

- OS

[Sam1]

So on the #4 one I don't quiet understand it/  These organizations can have raffles for things, I'm not sure what the difference is in the legal definition of a lottery and a raffle other than one is for goods and one is for money.

[Oh Shoot]

So on the #4 one I don't quiet understand it/  These organizations can have raffles for things, I'm not sure what the difference is in the legal definition of a lottery and a raffle other than one is for goods and one is for money.

 

Raffles pay off in goods, lotteries pay off in money, I believe.

 

I have read that the finer point of the amendment allows veteran groups to have lotteries, which apparently they can't right now.

 

http://www.theleafchronicle.com/story/news/politics/elections/tennessee/2014/10/07/veterans-groups-hold-lotteries-amendment/16887017/

 

http://nashvillepublicradio.org/blog/2014/10/23/takes-constitutional-amendment-tennessee-veterans-hold-raffles/
 

 

- OS

Edited October 28, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[Mike.357]

Guns when we are talking abortions?  Really!  If you want to know what I really believe about abortions in general, here you go:

 

There are decisions folks make everyday of their lives that they have to pay for financially, emotionally, and spiritually if you adhere to God's way of living your life.  Abortion should not be a form of birth control either!  The decision to have sex or not to have sex was the point at which the woman's right to control her body ended, and the right of the unborn baby that gets conceived started.  In the case of rape, that individual should be given the opportunity to let the baby be adopted instead of two wrongs trying to make a right.  The baby should be protected also if you happen to believe that the Bible is truly God's word.  Psalms 139: 13-16 describe when we were counted as being an individual in God's eyes.  Proverbs 6: 16-19 tells me that certain things that we are all capable of doing make God sick to his stomach to the point of vomiting.  Everyone will be judged for the decisions we make here in this life by the very words of the One that created life.  I will answer for what I have done, as will everyone else whether we want to or not---Jesus is the Judge!

 

Guns:  I say the U.S. Constitution gives every law abiding citizen the right to carry whatever gun they want, when they want, where ever they want.  No permit needed.

 

 

So from reading the last line it seems you hold fast with some parts of the constitution.   But from reading the rest it seems you do not hold fast with all.

 

Or that whooshing sound I hear is your point flying way over my head

[Dustbuster]

had an old lady friend advise me: men should shut the fuck up when it comes to abortion. last time i checked men were not capable of carrying an unborn child. its a womans choice.
made sense to me and i never brought it up again....
now about this vote....
never give an elected official the ability to fill a jury box or appoint friends to a vital office without a check and balance.
one of the reasons its so hard to get rid of lame diatrict attorneys is because of only 1 way to get them out of office.
davidson county has over 220000 registered voters. Less than 10 percent came out and voted last election, the one for judges and da's. I dont think a fair vote will happen cause people wont come out and vote.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk, Hell yeah it ate my spelling!!! again!!

[stillstanding669]

Mike.357, the fact that we are even mentioning thoughts about guns in this thread is wrong!  There isn't a Amendment to be voted on this election cycle that even gets close to guns.  It is my opinion only, and a response to the extremes being used to make conversations about the Amend 1 on the ballots this year.  Now what really makes me wonder is why you would question that opinion?  Maybe it would be better answered or followed in a new thread after the elections!  Whether the US Constitution gives or recognizes that the citizens of this country have the right to bear arms has no bearing on the decision of a woman to end the life of a baby in the womb.

 

You know, one of the reasons many folks that used to be on this forum have moved on to better things is that there are folks making light of every remark made just to hear themselves write / talk!  I thought I had something intelligent to write to help some of the normal folks understand what is at hand during this election.  I'll think elsewhere in the future.  Sorry to vent, but if you guys cared about what is happening to our country you'd be better off keeping your snide criticism to yourselves!  Thanks to some of you guys that have done business with me in the past.  God bless --- if you believe He is, and He is rewarder of those that diligently seek Him!

[Sam1]

Raffles pay off in goods, lotteries pay off in money, I believe.

 

I have read that the finer point of the amendment allows veteran groups to have lotteries, which apparently they can't right now.

 

http://www.theleafchronicle.com/story/news/politics/elections/tennessee/2014/10/07/veterans-groups-hold-lotteries-amendment/16887017/

 

http://nashvillepublicradio.org/blog/2014/10/23/takes-constitutional-amendment-tennessee-veterans-hold-raffles/
 

 

- OS

 

 

I'm for it either way & actually think there should be unrestricted gambling, lottery, raffles or whatever.  State needs to start getting with the times.

[Steelharp]

Maybe THIS will help clarify why a NO vote on two is a good idea. Note the permanent language change to Article VI, Section 3 that will FOREVER REMOVE our voice in these matters.

 

http://ballotpedia.org/Tennessee_Judicial_Selection,_Amendment_2_%282014%29

[btq96r]

I early voted today, go me.   I voted for the amendments as I outlined here, but ended up voting no for wine in food stores. 

 

I know the free market leaning folk will chime in about it, but I had a revelation on this.  There are very few pure wine stores.  There are predominately stores that sell wine and liquor under the same roof.  So, every dollar in wine sales lost to Walmart, Kroger, Publix, has to be made up for somewhere.  Their expenses aren't going down, they will probably go up as time goes on, because that's what happens with rent, utilities and shipping costs.  So how will they keep themselves from going under? 

 

They will raise the price on what they have left, liquor.  So, for me, this came down to personal greed.

 

I don't want the cost of business passed onto every bottle of rum, vodka, tequila or whiskey I buy.  If they come back and ask if we want all types of alcohol to be allowed for sale in food stores like we have beer, I'll probably get behind it.  But to piecemeal it just adds cost on one type, and I don't like that.

[Oh Shoot]

Maybe THIS will help clarify why a NO vote on two is a good idea. Note the permanent language change to Article VI, Section 3 that will FOREVER REMOVE our voice in these matters.

 

http://ballotpedia.org/Tennessee_Judicial_Selection,_Amendment_2_%282014%29

 

And I'll repeat that the Founding Fathers of the United States set it up as a yes vote would achieve, with even less verification required from Congress, and no retention vote either. Which I see as a good thing. I'd say you'd agree if TN were blue instead of red (for now).

 

Again, I'd point to the repercussions if our federal SCOTUS were nationally elected instead of appointed right now, or even if there were only retention elections  -- I'd posit that it would now be so far left that Kagan and Sotomayor would seem like conservatives.

 

- OS

Edited October 30, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[macville]

And I'll repeat that the Founding Fathers of the United States set it up as a yes vote would achieve, with even less verification required from Congress, and no retention vote either. Which I see as a good thing. I'd say you'd agree if TN were blue instead of red (for now).

 

Again, I'd point to the repercussions if our federal SCOTUS were nationally elected instead of appointed right now, or even if there were only retention elections  -- I'd posit that it would now be so far left that Kagan and Sotomayor would seem like conservatives.

 

- OS

 

 I would beg to differ because I don't think the libs could get enough people out to vote often enough. Obama is the first time they've really gotten out the vote and the second time he won because the republicans ran such a bad candidate that the base didn't come out and vote. They also probably would be by popular vote and that could help/hurt conservatives. Honestly, what does it matter? Even the conservative judges, when you read their opinion, don't seem to plainly read the constitution. They were trained how to be lawyers instead of how to read english plainly.

[Oh Shoot]

 I would beg to differ because I don't think the libs could get enough people out to vote often enough. Obama is the first time they've really gotten out the vote and the second time he won because the republicans ran such a bad candidate that the base didn't come out and vote. They also probably would be by popular vote and that could help/hurt conservatives. Honestly, what does it matter? Even the conservative judges, when you read their opinion, don't seem to plainly read the constitution. They were trained how to be lawyers instead of how to read english plainly.

 

Well, we can debate a hypothetical, but the fact remains that the Founders didn't think it was wise for the people to elect federal Supreme Court or Appellate judges, and neither do it. I also extend that opinion to their state level counterparts.

 

They also did not want the US Senate elected by the people either, but that got changed, and that has worked out so well and all. So maybe we'll be electing federal judges some day too.

 

- OS

[Steelharp]

And I'll repeat that the Founding Fathers of the United States set it up as a yes vote would achieve, with even less verification required from Congress, and no retention vote either. Which I see as a good thing. I'd say you'd agree if TN were blue instead of red (for now).

 

Again, I'd point to the repercussions if our federal SCOTUS were nationally elected instead of appointed right now, or even if there were only retention elections  -- I'd posit that it would now be so far left that Kagan and Sotomayor would seem like conservatives.

 

- OS

With all due respect, we are talking about the TN State Constitution, NOT the Constitution of the United States. Obviously, on the local level, our founders thought this was best for the state. As you continue to defer to the founders of the Union, I shall defer to the fathers of our state.

[Oh Shoot]

With all due respect, we are talking about the TN State Constitution, NOT the Constitution of the United States. Obviously, on the local level, our founders thought this was best for the state. As you continue to defer to the founders of the Union, I shall defer to the fathers of our state.

 

As if the legislature paid any attention to it. We haven't elected judges in over 40 years, and no reason to think that will change if the amendment fails.

 

- OS

Edited October 31, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[runco]

Channel 10 in Knoxville just reported Yes on 1 passed.  PTL!

[cjohnson44546]

all 4 passed with a Yes

[Someotherguy]

Channel 10 in Knoxville just reported Yes on 1 passed.  PTL!

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

[E4 No More]

I love it when people pick and choose portions of the Bible to persuade others that they speak for God...NOT!