57 replies to this topic

[bloodyminded]

First to join the 13 colonies. First to constitutionally ban slavery. First for public education. First for gay marriage.

Now, the first to institute universal health care.


http://www.truthdig....irsts_20110524/

[Michael Hardner]

First to join the 13 colonies. First to constitutionally ban slavery. First for public education. First for gay marriage.

Now, the first to institute universal health care.

Good for them. Providing healthcare is the minimum a wealthy country can do for its people.

[scouterjim]

First to join the 13 colonies. First to constitutionally ban slavery. First for public education. First for gay marriage.

Now, the first to institute universal health care.


http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/vermont_the_land_of_healthy_firsts_20110524/

Every Republican politician in the US just had heart failure.

[bush_cheney2004]

First to join the 13 colonies. First to constitutionally ban slavery. First for public education. First for gay marriage.

Somebody is playing fast and loose with the facts. The first US state that legalized so called "same sex" marriage was Massachusetts, not Vermont. Vermont was first for civil unions, and was the fifth state to legalize "same sex" marriage.

Now, the first to institute universal health care.

Nope...not even close. Hawaii did it in 1974 - 1975, and the program was subsequently terminated.

Edited by bush_cheney2004, 26 May 2011 - 04:00 PM.

[Moonlight Graham]

this will probably make Vermont healthier, so i'm happy for them. May start a bit of a domino effect ala Saskatchewan as Goodman states.

[punked]

Somebody is playing fast and loose with the facts. The first US state that legalized so called "same sex" marriage was Massachusetts, not Vermont. Vermont was first for civil unions, and was the fifth state to legalize "same sex" marriage.

Somebody is playing fast and loose with the facts here. Vermont was the first state to make Same Sex marriage legal through a law passed in a state legislature. Massachusetts as well as Connecticut and Iowa were were all made legal through a court ruling. So Vermont would be the first to legislate Same sex Marriage.

[bush_cheney2004]

Somebody is playing fast and loose with the facts here. Vermont was the first state to make Same Sex marriage legal through a law passed in a state legislature. Massachusetts as well as Connecticut and Iowa were were all made legal through a court ruling. So Vermont would be the first to legislate Same sex Marriage.

Wrong again...the courts are part of state government and legal system. Care to point out the "legislation" making same sex marriage legal in Canada? LOL!

[punked]

Wrong again...the courts are part of state government and legal system. Care to point out the "legislation" making same sex marriage legal in Canada? LOL!

I think it was the Civil Marriage Act.

[bush_cheney2004]

I think it was the Civil Marriage Act.

Which was preceded by a court ruling that legalized same sex marriage in most provinces.

[punked]

Which was preceded by a court ruling that legalized same sex marriage in most provinces.

But not all provinces I think Alberta, and PEI it was still not legal so the Legislation made it legal across the country.

[bush_cheney2004]

But not all provinces I think Alberta, and PEI it was still not legal so the Legislation made it legal across the country.

That's what the word "most" means. Vermont was not the first state to make it legal.

[bloodyminded]

Somebody is playing fast and loose with the facts. The first US state that legalized so called "same sex" marriage was Massachusetts, not Vermont. Vermont was first for civil unions, and was the fifth state to legalize "same sex" marriage.




Nope...not even close. Hawaii did it in 1974 - 1975, and the program was subsequently terminated.

Jesus, a bit of a smackdown. Mea culpa.

[bush_cheney2004]

Jesus, a bit of a smackdown. Mea culpa.

Well, to be fair, I think you were led astray by the author...that was the somebody in my uncertain assessment.

No harm...no foul.

[bloodyminded]

Well, to be fair, I think you were led astray by the author...that was the somebody in my uncertain assessment.

No harm...no foul.

Oh, it was definitely the fault of the piece's author.

But at this stage ("young at being old," as they say, 44 yrs), I might remember not to believe everything I read. (And triple that for anything whiffing of political opinion.)

[August1991]

Oh, it was definitely the fault of the piece's author.

But at this stage ("young at being old," as they say, 44 yrs), I might remember not to believe everything I read. (And triple that for anything whiffing of political opinion.)

Right, wrong, who's counting. I've been wrong enough on this forum to merit several smackdowns.

-----

The interesting point is that these initiatives occurred at the state level. I think large "countries" run into trouble when they attempt to enforce such policies everywhere.

Education, health care, family law (to name a few) are issues of local jurisdictions.