I don't understand how this cartoon starts a gun control debate. But, the U.S. Constitution is not the only constitution to address the right to arms.
The Tennessee Constitution, on the right to arms says:
"26. Weapons; right to bear arms
That the citizens of this State have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime."
Many states have similarly worded articles in their constitutions. Article 2 of the Bill of Rights was meant to prohibit the newly formed federal government from infringing on the right to arms, not the separate states.
Also, to keep things in perspective, it should be pointed out that Tennessee, initially, had the good sense to ban ministers from the state's legislature, as well:
"Whereas Ministers of the Gospel are by their profession, dedicated to God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the great duties of their functions; therefore, no Minister of the Gospel, or priest of any denomination whatever, shall be eligible to a seat in either House of the Legislature."
"Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society." Oliver Wendell Holmes
What has the General Assembly accomplished so far?
It has declared that a person can carry a firearm onto another person's property, against the property owner's will, if the person carrying the firearm keeps it in their car.
It has decided that these same people (who are responsible enough to carry firearms wherever they please) are not responsible enough to buy wine in grocery stores (where beer is already sold).
And, it is currently giving serious consideration to a bill that suggests we can improve the academic performance of impoverished children by starving them.
I had hoped that, when the Republican Party managed to wrest control from the Democratic Party, for the first time since Reconstruction, it would eliminate the cronyism and corruption which was so rampant under democratic control, and that the GOP would make good on all their talk of fiscal responsibility.
My hopes were in vain. The cronyism and corruption continues, and the stupidity has grown to such proportions that a small-minded, drunken bigot like Stacey Campfield is taken seriously.
The quicker we get out of this session, and on to the next election, the better.
If anyone needed an example of bigotry, the need look no further than this thread. It is permeated with comments from small-minded bigots, trying to force the Old Testament version of their religion, using the force of law, on to others. When faced with reasonable arguments asserting that all people, including those with whom they disagree, should enjoy equal protection under the law, they respond by equating homosexuality with bestiality & pedophilia, and by accusing those who believe in equal protection under the law of engaging in homosexual relations, as if that somehow, on its own, advances their argument. Furthermore, they blame HIV/AIDS on homosexuals. No well-reasoned argument against same-sex marriage has even been offered. Is this what passes for intelligent debate in Chattanooga?
"The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it, the more it will contract." OWH
Seems some folks need to read up on "civil rights".
Obamists? That's a laugh. President Obama is a late-comer when it comes to marriage equality. Until recently, he opposed it.
The ballot is relevant only in the role it plays in our republic. The ballot cannot be used to deprive an individual, or a group, of their rights, civil or other.
If enough Muslims moved to Soddy-Daisy to have a majority vote in municipal elections, should they be allowed to force the Christians (who find themselves in the minority) to face Mecca and pray 5 times daily? Of course not.
If P.E.T.A. convinces a majority of Chattanoogans to become vegans, would a ballot initiative to ban the eating of meat be OK? Again, no.
One of the main purposes of our government is to protect the rights of the minority (majority rights don't need protection) from the tyranny of the majority.
"And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you"
According to the Bible, shellfish & catfish also fall into the "abomination" category. I don't see states refusing fishing licenses to those that fish for catfish or shrimp.
As for 52% of California voters being bigots, popular acceptance of bigotry makes it no less wrong, and no less bigotry.
States license marriage, and state governments (as does the federal government) bestow special benefits upon married couples. As long as marriage is regulated by law, the law must be applied equally.
I offer you Amendments 9, 10, and 14 Section 1:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
14th Amendment, Section 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Gay couples have the right to love one another. They have the right to freely associate. They have the right to contract.
Though, in my opinion, it would be better if government got out of the marriage business, altogether, if governments are issuing licenses to enter into the marriage contract, and if couples benefit from these licenses, then the law must be applied equally. There must be equal protection.
Religious oppression is wrong whether it is committed by the Taliban in Afghanistan, or committed by fundamentalist Christians in the Bible Belt. Bigotry in Christ's name is no better than bigotry in the name of Allah. None are free until all are free.