As far as the forcing prayer in schools, it should be a non-issue, they shouldn't even be allowed to vote on it due to that line about seperation of church and state.
So is the electoral college system.
they should have the same rights as anybody else due to anti-descrimination.
Technically they do any gay man can marry any woman I can marry. This is the problem with mob rule..
Is marraige a 'binding contract between two people under the eyes of the govt'? or is it 'a joining of two people under god'?
Personally I think it should be done away with as a legal institution.. Because marrage is a spiritual bond..
Why the hell do they have footage of stalinists at a protest saying that Hussein was good?
Lets see many of the people at these protest support castro (a dictator), and the vocal minority (yes they are a minority) think as the woman stated. There were three people around here nodding their heads
That and the protest warrior sign about war only being good if a democrat is in office.
Thats funnny there was no outrage from the left and democrats in general when Clinton bommbed Iraq, and Serbia..
Most recent one I heard about was a couple of years back- a football team in a middle school in some southern state which had a tradition of the captain of the football team (not the coach, but one of the kids) praying before every game over the loudspeaker. Until the school got sued by the ACLU, of course.
Thats somewhat different than a kid just praying aloud to himself. The school and the teachers (yes they are certified by their respective states, thats a license) were putting religious prayer over a loud speaker. Heck it was not even just the kids in the locker room, or a group of kids who decided it was a good Idea. It was a team event, this was pushing it IMHO.
It turns out that this is an authority that Congress can't delegate- to have troops involved in war for more than a specific amount of time, Congress MUST reconvine and declare war officially- and they haven't.
Actually we are also not supposed to have a standing army (the constitution does allow for a Navy. Were we in the first gulf war long enough for it to be illeal?
The point is its congress asleep at the wheel, and thats really dangerous! I would rather have the pres not doing his job than not have congress not doing theirs (because they represent the people not the states).
I like the Republic as it is writtein in the Constitution I plan to vote for the constitution party this time around and am even volunteering for them. So many of the problems we have with the power of government is peoples desire for a nanny state, give me SS, Edu$, Free Drugs,....
The kind of things people demand from the fed creates a concentration of money which can not help but suck the power from the states. I could never understand why my state taxes are so much lower than the fed. I go to school in the state, the police and fire are from the state, 95% of the roads I drive on are state roads,.... (NOTE I DO NOT WANT MY STATE TAXES HIGHER so get away you wallet snatching libs)
The fed takes money and redistributes it so that things can be 'fair'..
And thus- your arguments against mob rule are born out of Tyranny of the Minority
No they are born out of the fact I have rights, not rights given to me by the government but rights that the government can *not* take away. In Germany during ww2 the majority commited aweful offences against a minority of people. The will of the majority must *never* interfere with our inalienable rights. The will of the majority should however be given voice when it does not do so.
And what would be so bad about a teacher asking a divine power for the ability to teach?
Quietly before kids get to the classroom *nothing* but when the kids are in the classroom she is an agent of the state.
Publically, athiesm is- a kid praying aloud will get suspended at the least and sued at the worst.
Evidance?
They are one and the same- what you're for is a regulated market and likewise, in politics, Tyranny of the Minority.
Than the true free market is impossible, and thus so is the true democratic system. So why all the crying about the EC?
Actually, in a truly free market, you CAN price gouge- but it's likely that your competition will take the opportunity to steal some of your market share. One cannot be truly for a free market, laisez faire, and then turn around and be for the regulation of politics.
Agreed I am for slight regulation in both areas.
Ah, but you see- the current prayer in schools people aren't against the first Amendment- they just want their own kids, and the teachers who take care of them, to freely be able to pray as their own religion demands. And request that the government follow it's own rules- in that Congress shall make no law preventing the free exercise of religion.
Untrue, many people want the teachers to say a prayer at the begining of the school day. Many do just wnt the kids to have the right if they choose (not led or prompted by a teacher) to pray and I agree with them
Too bad a small minority is forcing atheism on the schools then- by your own argument the current situation of *no* prayer in schools is forcing a religious belief on children.
Kids are free to close their eyes and pray whenever they want. atheism is not forced on anyone in the schools.
Then you don't truly believe in the free market ideal- which states that no law is necessary to prevent the selling of lead tainted milk- any such provider will go out of business rather quickly from a lack of customers, losing market share to those who sell a better quality of milk.
I think your are confusing the free market with laisez faire, while there are many similarities they are not one in the same thing. I have always maintained a little regulation goes a long way.
Yes, but why should I? It's all on Kerry's website- in his rather detailed response to why he voted FOR authority.
No Kerry has said, "what I thought" not "what signed".
Some would say that the *resolution* to give the president this authority itself is even unconstitutional
And I would be one of those people, the act congress took was unconstitutional. They never specifically requested evidance, or international support (no in the measure itself).
How can you support the market telling us what to manufacture, but not who is elected?
The market does, even in the "free market" there are rules (you cant legally price gouge). And in the "market" of us politics there are also rules, one of which is that a state gets a number of EV's and that number is constituionally fixed to its size.
Not as long as public opinion *also* runs 75% against guns in schools
Just so you know the point of a gun was refering to the Government forcing prayer in the schools *of any religion*. The governmnets power is in the end excersized by the forceful arrest and detainment of those who do not obey the law. If no sending your kid to school is considered a crime, and you cant afford to select your school and the local public school has mostly baptist teaching you are forcing (in the literal sense of the word) a religion on sombody elses kid.
That is *NOT* the job of the government and no mob has the right to make it the job of the government. This nation was founded on the belief that we have inalienable rights, that are not protected by the government, they are protected *from* the government.
Heck- most founder-worshipers are also worshipers of the Free Market God- and that's mob rule also.
Not in the way you are implying, I believe in the free market but I dont think you should be ablle to sell led tainted milk..
Apparently fight a war- since the Iraq war was supposed to happen only under certain circumstances that were not fullfilled.
Really? wow can you point the the part of the authority they gave him in which they said you must meet these conditions? Can you point to how he did not meet those conditions.
Congress (the peoples represenatives) really messed up, I would never give a blanket 'authorization' you either say yes were going to war or no were not. This was not the examploe of the president making war, congress made it.
Some would say that in fact there was no true authorization for War in Iraq since the President failed to:
1. Go back to the UN and get consensus before we acted.
2. Actually verify the rumors of an Iraqi Nuclear or Biological Warfare Program.
I have seen many senators and congressmen say this is what they meant but I have never seen it in writing *within* the actual autorization.
That viewpoint supposes (or desires) that the national President is fairly weak. But that isn't the case- he's very powerful, and can make decisions that tremendously influence the people of each state.
Really? and what exactly can the president do to which congress can not say no?
When Bush pushes the nation into an Iraqi war, the effort and sacrifice is borne not by the states, but by the people. Does Montana share a bigger proportion of the costs of national-level action than California does? No. Treasure and blood comes from the population as a whole.
A war congress had to authorize, the president can not declare or start a war, congress has to ok it.
If the Presidency were a weak, mostly ceremonial post, then the per-capita unfairness of his selection would be less troublesome.
Why do you confuse weak with ceremonial? Are cabinate positions weak? (Yes they cant act w/o presidents ok), are they ceremonial (No they actually do alot of work).
Which is interesting, because Tyranny of the Majority is a stupid concept to begin with invented by an upper class minority bent on abusing the majority.
Really? The majority of Americans are for school prayer and against Gay marrage. I guess we should let the mob rule eh?
Back when the Constitution was proposed, it was seeking approval from each state, so it's understandable that a compromise was made to attract smaller states. But just because we know there was a pragmatic reason for it once, doesn't mean it's the best thing to continue with.
Well at least you know why it was done, not consider the consiquences of undoing it. You are essentially breaking the contract which forms this nation and every small state would wonder why join whatever replaces it?
Then again... Paul Allen and Co. spent $20 million in the hopes of winning $10 million (and I suppose also for the nostalgia surrounding the prize)...
Sometimes the lack of vision on/. amaze me. They spen 20 Million, they will win the 10 Million,or so I hope cause the only way they lose now is an accident (given DiVinci pulling out). So lets say they have spent 10 Milloin Dollars.
They have just licensed their design to Virgin Atlantic (I dont know for how much), in addition to this they probably will license or contract out other builds and who knows what patents they have to license.
All this combined with the publicity scaled composits has gotten makes this has definatly been a worth while thing for them.
His comment was based on the fact that in recent years before 9/11, the US was launching cruise missile from the safety of boats/submarines and that there was no direct contact with or risk of casualties.
Yes and we spent an enormous amount of money doing everything we could to prevent those bombs from hitting high density civilian targets.
Whereas the terrorists on 9/11 or at least the leader(s) on each plane knew perfectly well the direct and immediate outcome of their actions on their lives.
Dont forget killing 3000 infidels and getting 72 virgins in paradice...
""We have been the cowards lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, it's not cowardly"."
Is an extreemly stupid comment, these guys think they are getting 72 virgins and all they have to do is kill 3 thousand innocent people to do it...
No Bill Maher turned that show off by making stupid comments about 9/11.
I used to like PI when it was first on HBO (before it was picked up by network TV). There was some balance in his opinion and he ueually split the guest 2-2 (both in terms of political leanings and actual substance). He would have on a joker from each POV (comedian, actor,...) and a semi-serious thinker with each POV.
When he moved to network it because him and three guest who were left and one person on the right (Usually an actor or comedian). It became a sounding borad for his (rather left leaning) views. He got to think he could say anything becuase basicall only lefty knee padders and a token right winger were invited and he went to far..
Hey bill how does it feel to be replaced by the hosy of the Man show!
In other words, it's not proportional at all, because the votes don't match the seats.
Because each area chooses who will represent them. It cuts both ways. In a three way race a candidate could win with 34% of the vote in their district an pick up a full seat. The united istates is all about the local level. At a local level *you* select who will be *your* voice.
Slashdot Mirror
So is the electoral college system.
they should have the same rights as anybody else due to anti-descrimination.
Technically they do any gay man can marry any woman I can marry. This is the problem with mob rule..
Is marraige a 'binding contract between two people under the eyes of the govt'? or is it 'a joining of two people under god'?
Personally I think it should be done away with as a legal institution.. Because marrage is a spiritual bond..
I thought that it fit rather well into the imagry, but I am not the artsy type..
You seem to be ignoring the part where kerry says he was paralized and unable to think for an hour after the second plane hit...
Lets see many of the people at these protest support castro (a dictator), and the vocal minority (yes they are a minority) think as the woman stated. There were three people around here nodding their heads
That and the protest warrior sign about war only being good if a democrat is in office.
Thats funnny there was no outrage from the left and democrats in general when Clinton bommbed Iraq, and Serbia..
Thats somewhat different than a kid just praying aloud to himself. The school and the teachers (yes they are certified by their respective states, thats a license) were putting religious prayer over a loud speaker. Heck it was not even just the kids in the locker room, or a group of kids who decided it was a good Idea. It was a team event, this was pushing it IMHO.
Actually we are also not supposed to have a standing army (the constitution does allow for a Navy. Were we in the first gulf war long enough for it to be illeal?
The point is its congress asleep at the wheel, and thats really dangerous! I would rather have the pres not doing his job than not have congress not doing theirs (because they represent the people not the states).
I like the Republic as it is writtein in the Constitution I plan to vote for the constitution party this time around and am even volunteering for them. So many of the problems we have with the power of government is peoples desire for a nanny state, give me SS, Edu$, Free Drugs, ....
The kind of things people demand from the fed creates a concentration of money which can not help but suck the power from the states. I could never understand why my state taxes are so much lower than the fed. I go to school in the state, the police and fire are from the state, 95% of the roads I drive on are state roads, .... (NOTE I DO NOT WANT MY STATE TAXES HIGHER so get away you wallet snatching libs)
The fed takes money and redistributes it so that things can be 'fair'..
But bear in mind the "anti-federalits" were not against the ferderal republic, they were against giving it undue power.
No they are born out of the fact I have rights, not rights given to me by the government but rights that the government can *not* take away. In Germany during ww2 the majority commited aweful offences against a minority of people. The will of the majority must *never* interfere with our inalienable rights. The will of the majority should however be given voice when it does not do so.
And what would be so bad about a teacher asking a divine power for the ability to teach?
Quietly before kids get to the classroom *nothing* but when the kids are in the classroom she is an agent of the state.
Publically, athiesm is- a kid praying aloud will get suspended at the least and sued at the worst.
Evidance?
They are one and the same- what you're for is a regulated market and likewise, in politics, Tyranny of the Minority.
Than the true free market is impossible, and thus so is the true democratic system. So why all the crying about the EC?
Im sorry I think you have me confused with a Bush supporter...
Agreed I am for slight regulation in both areas.
Ah, but you see- the current prayer in schools people aren't against the first Amendment- they just want their own kids, and the teachers who take care of them, to freely be able to pray as their own religion demands. And request that the government follow it's own rules- in that Congress shall make no law preventing the free exercise of religion.
Untrue, many people want the teachers to say a prayer at the begining of the school day. Many do just wnt the kids to have the right if they choose (not led or prompted by a teacher) to pray and I agree with them
Too bad a small minority is forcing atheism on the schools then- by your own argument the current situation of *no* prayer in schools is forcing a religious belief on children.
Kids are free to close their eyes and pray whenever they want. atheism is not forced on anyone in the schools.
Then you don't truly believe in the free market ideal- which states that no law is necessary to prevent the selling of lead tainted milk- any such provider will go out of business rather quickly from a lack of customers, losing market share to those who sell a better quality of milk.
I think your are confusing the free market with laisez faire, while there are many similarities they are not one in the same thing. I have always maintained a little regulation goes a long way.
No Kerry has said, "what I thought" not "what signed".
Some would say that the *resolution* to give the president this authority itself is even unconstitutional
And I would be one of those people, the act congress took was unconstitutional. They never specifically requested evidance, or international support (no in the measure itself).
The market does, even in the "free market" there are rules (you cant legally price gouge). And in the "market" of us politics there are also rules, one of which is that a state gets a number of EV's and that number is constituionally fixed to its size.
Not as long as public opinion *also* runs 75% against guns in schools
Just so you know the point of a gun was refering to the Government forcing prayer in the schools *of any religion*. The governmnets power is in the end excersized by the forceful arrest and detainment of those who do not obey the law. If no sending your kid to school is considered a crime, and you cant afford to select your school and the local public school has mostly baptist teaching you are forcing (in the literal sense of the word) a religion on sombody elses kid.
That is *NOT* the job of the government and no mob has the right to make it the job of the government. This nation was founded on the belief that we have inalienable rights, that are not protected by the government, they are protected *from* the government.
Heck- most founder-worshipers are also worshipers of the Free Market God- and that's mob rule also.
Not in the way you are implying, I believe in the free market but I dont think you should be ablle to sell led tainted milk..
Really? wow can you point the the part of the authority they gave him in which they said you must meet these conditions? Can you point to how he did not meet those conditions.
Congress (the peoples represenatives) really messed up, I would never give a blanket 'authorization' you either say yes were going to war or no were not. This was not the examploe of the president making war, congress made it.
Some would say that in fact there was no true authorization for War in Iraq since the President failed to:
1. Go back to the UN and get consensus before we acted.
2. Actually verify the rumors of an Iraqi Nuclear or Biological Warfare Program.
I have seen many senators and congressmen say this is what they meant but I have never seen it in writing *within* the actual autorization.
Yes at the point of a gun, gret tolerance
Really? and what exactly can the president do to which congress can not say no?
When Bush pushes the nation into an Iraqi war, the effort and sacrifice is borne not by the states, but by the people. Does Montana share a bigger proportion of the costs of national-level action than California does? No. Treasure and blood comes from the population as a whole.
A war congress had to authorize, the president can not declare or start a war, congress has to ok it.
If the Presidency were a weak, mostly ceremonial post, then the per-capita unfairness of his selection would be less troublesome.
Why do you confuse weak with ceremonial? Are cabinate positions weak? (Yes they cant act w/o presidents ok), are they ceremonial (No they actually do alot of work).
The president cant act without congress.
Really? The majority of Americans are for school prayer and against Gay marrage. I guess we should let the mob rule eh?
Except this part
That's why most states have a "winner take all" policy for their electoral votes.
It would be more accurate to say thats why each state can decide their electors as they see fit..
Not the point, someone in WY has different needs than someone in Atlanta should they be ignored because Atlanta is bigger?
Right. That non-popular vote sure has done a good job at preventing secession.
Umm he did not say that keeping it prevents the issue, what he says is that getting rid of it encourages the act.
Well at least you know why it was done, not consider the consiquences of undoing it. You are essentially breaking the contract which forms this nation and every small state would wonder why join whatever replaces it?
Sometimes the lack of vision on /. amaze me. They spen 20 Million, they will win the 10 Million,or so I hope cause the only way they lose now is an accident (given DiVinci pulling out). So lets say they have spent 10 Milloin Dollars.
They have just licensed their design to Virgin Atlantic (I dont know for how much), in addition to this they probably will license or contract out other builds and who knows what patents they have to license.
All this combined with the publicity scaled composits has gotten makes this has definatly been a worth while thing for them.
Yes and we spent an enormous amount of money doing everything we could to prevent those bombs from hitting high density civilian targets.
Whereas the terrorists on 9/11 or at least the leader(s) on each plane knew perfectly well the direct and immediate outcome of their actions on their lives.
Dont forget killing 3000 infidels and getting 72 virgins in paradice...
Is an extreemly stupid comment, these guys think they are getting 72 virgins and all they have to do is kill 3 thousand innocent people to do it...
Ackkk mush have more coffee..
Should read
network it bacame..
No Bill Maher turned that show off by making stupid comments about 9/11.
I used to like PI when it was first on HBO (before it was picked up by network TV). There was some balance in his opinion and he ueually split the guest 2-2 (both in terms of political leanings and actual substance). He would have on a joker from each POV (comedian, actor, ...) and a semi-serious thinker with each POV.
When he moved to network it because him and three guest who were left and one person on the right (Usually an actor or comedian). It became a sounding borad for his (rather left leaning) views. He got to think he could say anything becuase basicall only lefty knee padders and a token right winger were invited and he went to far..
Hey bill how does it feel to be replaced by the hosy of the Man show!
Because each area chooses who will represent them. It cuts both ways. In a three way race a candidate could win with 34% of the vote in their district an pick up a full seat. The united istates is all about the local level. At a local level *you* select who will be *your* voice.