Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Meh, not too happy about the same-sex marriage decision, but I do appreciate that this decision is being made at the state level instead of the national level. I too am proud to be a Washington native in this election, but mostly because of the public charter school system.

Being a fiscal conservative, the national election, however, did not go as I had hoped. Seeing stocks drop like that was not the best news to wake up to.



"not too happy about the same-sex marriage decision ... Being a fiscal conservative"

Not to argue with your beliefs, but why call yourself a "fiscal conservative" if you're also a social conservative?

Generally people make the distinction only in the case that they do not apply religious mores to politics.


Because there are other reasons to be against same-sex marriage laws. I am an advocate of a general marriage law, allowing two consenting adults to marry whatever their gender, race, age, and so on. However, I don't think it is a good idea to have two different laws for the same thing, marriage, as it makes the law-system more messy, difficult to maintain, opening up all possibilities of treatment differences, and so on. I prefer to have the law system as simple and clear as possible and amending laws or adding laws to cover all kinds of exceptions is detrimental to that.


How are they "two different laws"? The amended law IS the law.

"I don't think it is a good idea to have two different laws for the same thing, marriage, as it makes the law-system more messy, difficult to maintain, opening up all possibilities of treatment differences, and so on. I prefer to have the law system as simple and clear as possible and amending laws or adding laws to cover all kinds of exceptions is detrimental to that."

The "law system" is meant to be adaptable. Simplicity is not to be prized over human rights. This seems to be an internalized moral argument masquerading as some sort of strange appeal.

Which, again, is your personal opinion, but it is unnecessary to suggest that it is in the interest of society to avoid all "legal complications". The law can adapt to any complexities of reality.


>Seeing stocks drop like that was not the best news to wake up to

This has always confused me. Are you day trading or holding positions where short term moves massively impact you? Or do you believe the entire market will actually explode? As someone with investments I honestly pay little attention to short term moves as I am investing on far longer time horizons. Or maybe I am just missing how the market going up or down after random event X impacts my life in any meaningful way or portends really anything. I do see how both sides like to claim the market is validating whatever they are currently trying to "sell", I think these people massively over-simplify "the market" and its moves, for obvious reasons.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: