I don't know if they will publish it, but I'll let y'alls see it and tell me what you think.
I have heard a lot of discussion recently about SJR13 (the proposal to amend the state constitution to remove the restriction on marriage equality). I am proud to say that I am strongly in favor of it, but I am still open to honest debate and discussion, and there is one argument that just doesn't make sense to me. Many people have said "the people have already spoken on this" and treat it as if that is the end of the discussion. Democracy doesn't work like that though, we don't vote once and have the outcomes of that vote become set in stone for eternity. If that were the case slavery would still be legal and blacks would be counted as three fifths of a person. Nevadans spoke before, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't speak again. I wonder what those who oppose it for that reason are afraid of, that maybe this time people will say something different?
Comment