Ted Cruz and the Incredibly Shrinking Supreme Court

[Sargerasraider]

If Democrats win the Senate they will have several options open if they fail to reach the 60 vote filibuster-proof situation.

Hillary can make recess appointments, as Democrats will be able to control when the Senate goes into recess.

They have the Nuclear option and getting rid of the 60 vote requirement.

Democrats need 4 senate seats (assuming Hillary wins and Tim Kane can be VP tie breaker).

They'll likely pick up Illinois, New Hampshire, Indiana, Pennyslvania, Wisconsin and Missouri (While holding Nevada).

That will get them to ~52.

RCP polling average has the current projection at 52-48 Republican (pretty incredible given the current situation), going to be close!

[Garnier Fructis]

Theres only 1 definition of equality and gay marriage being illegal was not only illegal for gays

Equality depends on context and on the quality being considered. It's equal in the sense that everyone can marry someone of the opposite gender. It's wasn't equal in the sense that only some were able to marry the gender they were attracted to.

As an aside, since I can't resist: the idea that there's only one definition of equality is just absolutely hilarious as a mathematician. Even in the land of logic and numbers, we've got a zillion notions of equality.

[Sargerasraider]

It is pretty crazy that they might only lose 2 seats. I guess people are happy with nothing getting done in this country...

Was having a discussion in a previous thread - even with all of the whining about obstructionism, etc., Republicans have continued to win.

[fengosa]

Theres only 1 definition of equality and gay marriage being illegal was not only illegal for gays

This is like saying its OK to make black people sit at the back of the bus. The rules are being applied evenly because white people aren't black.

[satimy]

This is like saying its OK to make black people sit at the back of the bus. The rules are being applied evenly because white people aren't black.

No its not

- - - Updated - - -

Equality depends on context and on the quality being considered. It's equal in the sense that everyone can marry someone of the opposite gender. It's wasn't equal in the sense that only some were able to marry the gender they were attracted to.

As an aside, since I can't resist: the idea that there's only one definition of equality is just absolutely hilarious as a mathematician. Even in the land of logic and numbers, we've got a zillion notions of equality.

out of curiousity can you show me 2 different mathematical definitions of equality?

[Armakus]

"Progressives" are , in reality, regressives. Trying to undo all the good that came into society in the last 2000 years and return to hedonistic paganism.

- - - Updated - - -

No, marriage is not a Federal issue.

Yes, damn those progressives! Trying to find equality for women and minorities, and attempting to find fixes for the ever-growing wealth inequality. How dare they!

/end sarcasm

[Garnier Fructis]

out of curiousity can you show me 2 different mathematical definitions of equality?

Two sets are equal if they have the same elements. Two functions are equal if they take the same value for every input. In modular arithmetic, mod 4 we have 5 = 1.

Equality is highly context dependent.

.9999.... = 1 in real number system, but .9999.... =/= 1 in hyperreal number system.

[satimy]

Two sets are equal if they have the same elements. Two functions are equal if they take the same value for every input. In modular arithmetic, mod 4 we have 5 = 1.

Equality is highly context dependent.

.9999.... = 1 in real number system, but .9999.... =/= 1 in hyperreal number system.

but mod 4 5=1 the left and right side of the equal sign are still equal correct?

[Machismo]

Theres only 1 definition of equality and gay marriage being illegal was not only illegal for gays

Does that mean we would be justified in banning interracial marriage and not allowing people to marry Christians?

[Garnier Fructis]

but mod 4 5=1 the left and right side of the equal sign are still equal correct?

Yes. But whether or not two things are equal depends on the property you're interested in. If you're looking at numerical value, then 1 does not equal 5. But if you're looking at whether or not they have the same remainder after you've discarded multiples of 4, then 1 and 5 are equal.

And this gets back to my point about gay marriage. The notion they're talking about when they say they didn't have equality was that they couldn't marry someone they were attracted to. Your argument is talking about a different notion, namely whether or not two people can marry someone of the same gender.

Since people can be attracted to someone of the opposite gender, these are not the same notions of equality.

[Mormolyce]

If the GOP is serious about roadblocking the SCOTUS nomination sight unseen for no other reason than open partisan obstructionism, that could trigger an actual constitutional crisis. You might get some serious reform off the back of that to stop that kind of nonsense from happening in the future. And I should bloody well think so.

- - - Updated - - -

If you're looking at numerical value, then 1 does not equal 5. But if you're looking at whether or not they have the same remainder after you've discarded multiples of 4, then 1 and 5 are equal.

And this gets back to my point about gay marriage.

^

Internet forums result in some strange arguments.

[Garnier Fructis]

^

Internet forums result in some strange arguments.

I try my best.

[Mormolyce]

Equality is highly context dependent.

.9999.... = 1 in real number system, but .9999.... =/= 1 in hyperreal number system.

Er, how is that exactly? Aren't 0.999... = 1 both real numbers and therefore the same thing in *R?

[Pratt]

It is pretty crazy that they might only lose 2 seats. I guess people are happy with nothing getting done in this country...

Conservative guy I know said he'd rather see nothing happen for 8 more years than have dems "ruin the US." He didn't make a secret of it. He also thought Obama was going to turn the US into a filthy socialist backwater. This guy is smart enough to know better. Blows my mind.

[Garnier Fructis]

Er, how is that exactly? Aren't 0.999... = 1 both real numbers and therefore the same thing in *R?

Decimal expansions in the hyperreals don't play nice sometimes. The expansion basically gives you 1 - x < 1, where x is an infinitesimal.

[satimy]

Yes. But whether or not two things are equal depends on the property you're interested in. If you're looking at numerical value, then 1 does not equal 5. But if you're looking at whether or not they have the same remainder after you've discarded multiples of 4, then 1 and 5 are equal.

And this gets back to my point about gay marriage. The notion they're talking about when they say they didn't have equality was that they couldn't marry someone they were attracted to. Your argument is talking about a different notion, namely whether or not two people can marry someone of the same gender.

Since people can be attracted to someone of the opposite gender, these are not the same notions of equality.

But mod 4 5=1 isnt changing the fundamental definition of equality. Marriage as it was defined was applied equally, the gay marriage movement was about redefining what marriage was. Equality was never an issue, the definition of marriage was.

[Machismo]

But mod 4 5=1 isnt changing the fundamental definition of equality. Marriage as it was defined was applied equally, the gay marriage movement was about redefining what marriage was. Equality was never an issue, the definition of marriage was.

Does that mean people would be completely justified banning interracial marriage, or banning anyone from marrying a Christian?

[Garnier Fructis]

But mod 4 5=1 isnt changing the fundamental definition of equality. Marriage as it was defined was applied equally, the gay marriage movement was about redefining what marriage was. Equality was never an issue, the definition of marriage was.

There is no fundamental definition of equality. Equality is whatever we define it to be, in some sense. Like my other example with the infinite decimal above. It's 1 in one system and not 1 in another, and both are talking about numerical versions of equality.

[Chrysia]

No, marriage is not a Federal issue.

The 1,138 federal statutes that outline rights and responsibilities related to marriage vehemently disagree with you.

- - - Updated - - -

But mod 4 5=1 isnt changing the fundamental definition of equality. Marriage as it was defined was applied equally, the gay marriage movement was about redefining what marriage was. Equality was never an issue, the definition of marriage was.

The "one man, one woman" definition of marriage was never the primary definition.

[satimy]

The 1,138 federal statutes that outline rights and responsibilities related to marriage vehemently disagree with you.

- - - Updated - - -



The "one man, one woman" definition of marriage was never the primary definition.

What was the primary definition?