start

Done. 2 guesses.

drwho wrote: "Okay, fairness is an interesting notion. It is used to justify lots of immoral ideas that liberals have." It has been said that a budget is a moral document. We have a politcal party who backed an accused pedophile, because they needed that vote to pass their tax plan and budget. Now we can argue all day about whether a progressive tax system is "fair" but I think there can be no argument that it is egregiously immoral to support a child molester in order to ensure a tax cut.

It has been 3 years and 2 days since the Sandy Hook massacre. Has enough time gone by now to introduce stricter gun control measures that 73% of the American people support? Or is that an immoral liberal idea too?

drwho, i think Trump is not only a disaster on Twitter, his policies are alienating almost everybody. I also agree Clinton should not have been the person going against him. We are a little more fortunate here in that most of the public vote on policies and people who can explain them properly. As a consequence both major parties are pretty centralist without too many on the extremes. There is a party that would appeal to a few Trump supporters, but they are despised by almost everyone. One thing it does highlight is the need to spend more money on education. Typically their supporters don't get out enough and mix with people of other backgrounds. Those that do, soon realise we are really all the same underneath.

start

done, fourth guess

We are fortunate in Australia to have such a fantastic example of multiculturalism and treating people equally is seen as "Give them a fair go" It's ingrained in our society. Highlighted recently with a fantastic voluntary vote where almost two thirds voted to allow same sex couples to marry. We have a history of slowly righting the wrongs of the past and making sure it doesn't happen again. Fairness is pretty much ingrained in the public. The other trait I like is the fantastic generosity of giving to those in need and offering practical help to those that find themselves in a less fortunate position. Still got a long way to go on the first Australian peoples recognition, but I do have confidence we'll get there. That also highlights the need for education.

done

Go

Done, Three guesses

EZ-- no guesses required

two time coloring ng

Tuco, the morality of supporting Roy Moore depends on whether or not you believe the accusations. I think a lot of people, myself included, have serious doubts about the credibility of witnesses who were silent for 38 years and then came forward (actually were dredged up by the Washington Post) 3 weeks before the election.

One might also question the morality of supporting a baby killer.

Of course the truly principled person would have voted for a write in candidate. But that is just tilting at windmills in my opinion.

Phil, I am not sure Trump's policies are alienating anyone. The people who don't like Trump's policies are generally those who hated him before he became President.

Ionibelle, clearly the federal government may pass laws regulating the manner in which states hold elections. I am not willing to expand that to mean the manner in which candidates conduct their campaign.

But you would like to take a more expansive interpretation. Philosophically, I think that is dangerous. The Constitution was written as an explicit grant of power to the government. This limits what the government can do for us or as I would put it, to us. It is part of how our Constitution guarantees our freedom. Every time you allow an expansive interpretation of the enumerated powers you undermine our freedom.

I don't get the connect between Gore v. Bush and my arguments. Perhaps you are referring to fact that judicial review of state laws by the federal courts is not a power explicitly granted in the Constitution?

Gore v. Bush did not involve a state law (no Florida law was overturned). It involved rectifying a violation of the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. At least that is how the court ruled, you can disagree.

B.T.W. I am not sure, but I may have expressed the opinion here that the Supreme Court should have stayed out of the Florida election. In any case I can see some good argument for that position.

I think the state law in Florida allowed a recount to be petitioned, which it was. The court inserted itslelf. I actually think it was justified, even though I didn't like the result. and I think judicial review has been around since Marbury vs. Madison and the 14th amendment has extended that to states. And I agree with you that we have to be careful in interpreting the Constitution to preserve freedom. But I also think many conservatives put freedom way ahead of the common good. And I think we have a Constitution to protect the common interest just as much as we have it to protect individual freedoms. I always tell my kids in class that the really tough moral choices always involve two good values or two bad ones.

done