NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

[JNA]

Ever hear of "Political Pron" ?

read this article from my fair city's newspaper -
http://www.courierpress.com/news/20...-voters-often-detect-reject-porn/?partner=RSS

Why do campaigns and political parties resort to political pron?

 

[TerraSapient]

Wouldn't it be super if there were a way to present and vote on measures or ideas without the giant R or D associated with it? Maybe then we would have a chance of people voting on the merits of an idea rather than based on which party is backing it. It is exhausting dealing with people who fit all of life's complexity into one of two boxes - Democratic or Republican - and make all their decisions based on which box that particular item is in.

 

[Tarf]

Wouldn't it be super if there were a way to present and vote on measures or ideas without the giant R or D associated with it? Maybe then we would have a chance of people voting on the merits of an idea rather than based on which party is backing it. It is exhausting dealing with people who fit all of life's complexity into one of two boxes - Democratic or Republican - and make all their decisions based on which box that particular item is in.

We do this in California all the time... While sometimes the citizen initiatives have a clear bias towards one party or the other, a lot of issues placed on the ballot are generally non-partisan (though that's not to say "non-political").

 

[arcplans]

We do this in California all the time... While sometimes the citizen initiatives have a clear bias towards one party or the other, a lot of issues placed on the ballot are generally non-partisan (though that's not to say "non-political").

And this is exactly what is wrong with this state. I despise the initiative process. It just sucks balls. Look at some of the last few initiatives that are just stuck in court,or even better, make our state's budget process a giant turd (Prop 13, Prop 99, Prop 22..blah blah blah blah). Honestly, the general public lacks the knowledge, a general basic idea of what "laws" lie behind an initiative. Call me un-american if you will, but the principal of direct democracy in our society is general a bad idea because people just don't take the time to frame the issue and make a decision for themselves...

que.. Tey took ourrr jerrbs...

 

[michaelskis]

Wouldn't it be super if there were a way to present and vote on measures or ideas without the giant R or D associated with it? Maybe then we would have a chance of people voting on the merits of an idea rather than based on which party is backing it. It is exhausting dealing with people who fit all of life's complexity into one of two boxes - Democratic or Republican - and make all their decisions based on which box that particular item is in.

I personally think it would be awesome, if the funding from the parties was also eliminated. I wonder how well that would work on a national scale and everyone had to run as an independent at all levels? It is the way that the Founding Fathers wanted it to be, but parties quickly were established... even by them.

 

[TerraSapient]

I personally think it would be awesome, if the funding from the parties was also eliminated. I wonder how well that would work on a national scale and everyone had to run as an independent at all levels? It is the way that the Founding Fathers wanted it to be, but parties quickly were established... even by them.

I couldn't possibly agree more. We have a serious political dichotomy problem.

 

[Tarf]

And this is exactly what is wrong with this state. I despise the initiative process. It just sucks balls. Look at some of the last few initiatives that are just stuck in court,or even better, make our state's budget process a giant turd (Prop 13, Prop 99, Prop 22..blah blah blah blah). Honestly, the general public lacks the knowledge, a general basic idea of what "laws" lie behind an initiative. Call me un-american if you will, but the principal of direct democracy in our society is general a bad idea because people just don't take the time to frame the issue and make a decision for themselves....[/SIZE]

Why do you hate America?

I see it both ways. Yes there are bad things (Prop. 13, at least for us planner types), but some good things too (medical marijuana for one). It can be a cynical process, or it can also be a process whereby the citizens make up for the lack of backbone of politicians. It perhaps would be less necessary if the CA state legislature wasn't deadlocked all the time on seemingly everything except the most pointless of laws (and I love reading the governors' signing statements for the stupid laws... they can be freaking hilarious!).

 

[Hink]

Really interesting article...

How Government Props Up Big Finance
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2011/11/22/how_government_props_up_big_finance_99381.html

Big finance has achieved its present girth on the back of numerous policy decisions - some going back centuries. Many of these policies had the intention of protecting the general public, but often had the unintended consequence of enriching bankers beyond the product of their labor.

Seems like a pretty fair assessment of the situation to me. I like that it seems to be pretty fair to both sides...

Indiscriminately taxing the rich is an envy-driven policy that only marginally addresses Wall Street's size, profitability and systemic risk. Vindication should always be discarded in favor of an effective reprieve. Policies that require financial industry participants to shoulder more of the risks they create will reduce the burden Wall Street imposes on the general public, will shrink the industry, and will release human talent for higher and better purposes.

Rather than demotivate the next Steve Jobs, or reduce the resources Bill Gates deploys to fight AIDS and malaria, let's instead focus the Occupiers' energy on advocating solutions that truly improve the lives of the 99 percent.

 

[Hink]

CBO: Stimulus added up to 3.3M jobs
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68965.html

Wha?!?! I thought the talking points were that the Stimulus was a waste of money, and didn't create any jobs?

The CBO figures released Tuesday estimate that the stimulus package raised the gross domestic product this past quarter by 0.3 percent-1.9 percent.

The effects of the stimulus are fading after having peaked in the first half of 2010, the report noted.

However, the CBO estimates that the stimulus will raise GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.8 percent next year and employment by 200,000 to 1.1 million jobs.

 

[mgk920]

CBO: Stimulus added up to 3.3M jobs
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68965.html

Wha?!?! I thought the talking points were that the Stimulus was a waste of money, and didn't create any jobs?

At what cost to our great-grandchildren per job 'created'? And what will happen when that money runs out?

^o)

True job creation is a PROFIT to government and taxpayers, not a loss, due to increased overall taxable private-sector economic activity.

Mike

 

[Tarf]

At what cost to our great-grandchildren per job 'created'? And what will happen when that money runs out?

^o)

True job creation is a PROFIT to government and taxpayers, not a loss, due to increased overall taxable private-sector economic activity.

Mike

I think the more salient question is: what would have been the cost to our great-grandchildren without the stimulus. The Great Recession could easily have become the Great Depression Redux had it not been for government intervention.

It's also worth noting that many of the programs that brought us out of the Great Depression did not yield profit to government or taxpayers, yet did lead to economic recovery.

 

[btrage]

I think the more salient question is: what would have been the cost to our great-grandchildren without the stimulus. The Great Recession could easily have become the Great Depression Redux had it not been for government intervention.

It's also worth noting that many of the programs that brought us out of the Great Depression did not yield profit to government or taxpayers, yet did lead to economic recovery.

Don't try reason with him. It never works and he never concedes a point. Just like a real politician. When pressed on most issues, he usually remains silent and stops responding, after he gets in his Fox News talking points.

 

[Hink]

Tennessee family home burns while firefighters watch
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sidesho...burns-while-firefighters-watch-191241763.html

Well it happened again. Now the funny part is going to see how political this becomes. The people didn't pay for protection... and yet they expected it when their house was burning down.

Cut, cut, cut... unfortunately when you continually slash budgets and public workforce things like this are going to happen.

Private governmental services are very scary. Is this the future if we continue to gut governmental funding? I think so.

 

[dw914er]

And this is exactly what is wrong with this state. I despise the initiative process. It just sucks balls. Look at some of the last few initiatives that are just stuck in court,or even better, make our state's budget process a giant turd (Prop 13, Prop 99, Prop 22..blah blah blah blah). Honestly, the general public lacks the knowledge, a general basic idea of what "laws" lie behind an initiative. Call me un-american if you will, but the principal of direct democracy in our society is general a bad idea because people just don't take the time to frame the issue and make a decision for themselves...

que.. Tey took ourrr jerrbs...

I think it allows those politicians to shift the decision making process for various complicated issues into the hands of people who don't actually know anything about those issues. Take Prop 13. People wanted control over property taxes, but there is no way they could understand the actual financial impacts of such a decision. Sometimes the initiative works, but I feel like, especially lately, it's being abused. I get the impression that "Sacramento won't be able to make a decision on this, so you guys do it instead."

 

[WSU MUP Student]

Tennessee family home burns while firefighters watch
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sidesho...burns-while-firefighters-watch-191241763.html

Well it happened again. Now the funny part is going to see how political this becomes. The people didn't pay for protection... and yet they expected it when their house was burning down.

Cut, cut, cut... unfortunately when you continually slash budgets and public workforce things like this are going to happen.

Private governmental services are very scary. Is this the future if we continue to gut governmental funding? I think so.

I think we had the same discussion on here a few months ago when the same thing happened in the same town... or maybe it was in another forum I frequent. Either way, under the City of South Fulton and the Fire Department's policy, I agree with how the situation was handled.

 

[dw914er]

Cut, cut, cut... unfortunately when you continually slash budgets and public workforce things like this are going to happen.

Private governmental services are very scary. Is this the future if we continue to gut governmental funding? I think so.

But then it will be lean and efficient

It would be crazy to be billed after every emergency response.

 

[Hink]

I think we had the same discussion on here a few months ago when the same thing happened in the same town... or maybe it was in another forum I frequent. Either way, under the City of South Fulton and the Fire Department's policy, I agree with how the situation was handled.

No we did... which is why I think it is funny that it happened again - and it made news again. I just always wonder how political these things will get...

 

[michaelskis]

CBO: Stimulus added up to 3.3M jobs
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68965.html

Wha?!?! I thought the talking points were that the Stimulus was a waste of money, and didn't create any jobs?

It did not say if they were long term jobs, project, or seasonal. I would also be interested to know how many were private sector and how many were government jobs.

I agree that people working is a good thing, but I question the method of any administration providing a short term gain for a long term loss.

 

[Tarf]

It did not say if they were long term jobs, project, or seasonal. I would also be interested to know how many were private sector and how many were government jobs.

I agree that people working is a good thing, but I question the method of any administration providing a short term gain for a long term loss.

Even providing temporary jobs can help boost the economy. Folks that would otherwise be unemployed keep their jobs (even if public sector), which allows them to keep spending. In a consumer-driven economy such as ours, even temporary jobs can help boost long-term job prospects by keeping the consumer spending going. Ultimately, long-term jobs replace the temporary (or even government) jobs, if done correctly, since companies need to retain staff or expand to meet the demand generated by the stimulus-generated jobs.

While I recognize that all the stimulus spending was not popular, I believe it's the reason why we're in a period of at least some growth. Without that spending, we would have been in a depression, easily. In fact, failure of the federal government to use stimulus policy is a large part of the reason why Hoover gets such low remarks for his handling of the Great Depression. Even FDR, initially, failed to recognize the importance of government intervention to get things back on track.

 

[WSU MUP Student]

Blagojevich sentenced to 14 years in prison!

That long of a sentence really surprised me. I don't know how soon he could actually be out with parole, credit for time served, etc. but that sentence was about 10 more years than I expected he would actually receive.

 

[HomerJ]

Blagojevich sentenced to 14 years in prison!

That long of a sentence really surprised me. I don't know how soon he could actually be out with parole, credit for time served, etc. but that sentence was about 10 more years than I expected he would actually receive.

One thing that can not be overstated is how much Illinois natives HATE Blago. That being said, I'm a bit surprised they came down so harsh too (not that I feel too bad for the guy).

I would love to say "good riddance" and maybe now Illinois won't have to deal with the same corruption at the state level, but George Ryan didn't have much sway on Blago. I doubt Pat Quinn will make the same mistakes, then again you never know in Illinois...

 

[WSU MUP Student]

I doubt Pat Quinn will make the same mistakes, then again you never know in Illinois...

Don't they have a Governor's wing at the prison in Illinois? :lmao:

 

[mgk920]

It did not say if they were long term jobs, project, or seasonal. I would also be interested to know how many were private sector and how many were government jobs.

I agree that people working is a good thing, but I question the method of any administration providing a short term gain for a long term loss.

And with those 3.3M jobs being 'created' at a $4T or more (plus interest) cost to our grandchildren?

I agree, is that a good return on investment from the pvblic treasury?

I think we had the same discussion on here a few months ago when the same thing happened in the same town... or maybe it was in another forum I frequent. Either way, under the City of South Fulton and the Fire Department's policy, I agree with how the situation was handled.

And for failure to pay a paltry $75/year non-resident fee, which, IMHO, is a VERY GOOD DEAL in exchange for not paying a full resident tax bill to the city. I'm sorry, but some people deserve what they get.

Mike

 

[JNA]

Very interesting group - Nolabels.org

Ways to make Congress work

1. No Budget, No Pay
If Congress can't make spending and budget decisions on time, members shouldn't be paid on time.

2. Up or Down Vote on Presidential Appointments
All presidential nominations should be confirmed or rejected within 90 days of the nomination.

3. Fix the Filibuster
Require real (not virtual) filibusters and end filibusters on motions to proceed.

4. Empower the Sensible Majority
Allow a bipartisan majority of members to override a leader or committee chair's refusal to bring a bill to the floor.

5. Make Members Come to Work
Make Congress work on coordinated schedules with three five-day work weeks a month in DC and one week in their home district.

6. Question Time for the President
Provide a monthly forum for members of Congress to ask the president questions to force leaders to debate one another and defend their ideas.

7. Fiscal Report to Congress: Hear it. Read it. Sign it.
A nonpartisan leader should deliver an annual, televised fiscal update in-person to a joint session of Congress to ensure everyone is working off the same facts.

8. No Pledge but the Oath of Office
Members should make no pledge but the pledge of allegiance and their formal oath of office.

9. Monthly Bipartisan Gatherings
The House and Senate should institute monthly, off-the-record and bipartisan gatherings to get members talking across party lines.

10. Bipartisan Seating
At all joint meetings or sessions of Congress, each member should be seated next to at least one member of the other party.

11. Bipartisan Leadership Committee
Congressional party leaders should form a bipartisan congressional leadership committee to discuss legislative agendas and substantive solutions.

12. No Negative Campaigns Against Incumbents
Incumbents from one party should not conduct negative campaigns against sitting members of the opposing party.

 

[Hink]

Very interesting group - Nolabels.org

Ways to make Congress work

If they could get enough money, they would have my support in a heartbeat. I would imagine they would win in a landslide, if (and that is a BIG if) they could get the money and structure needed to be a viable third party. It will happen... whether it is No Labels, or someone else, it will happen.

 

[michaelskis]

US Foreign Involvement, too much or to little?

This is one topic that seems to be all over the map. Many say that republicans want our military to occupy places with abundant oil and natural resources, some say democrats want our financial aid and talents (doctors, contractors, and such) to go places having the greatest poverty, some say libertarians want us to get the heck out of any place that is not the USA, and others don’t realize what we have done or are doing in other places.

I have heard as much as 1/3 of our active duty military is outside of the US at any one time, or around 500,000 troops and personnel. That does not include any civilian contractors, diplomats, members of government, or special ops personnel that everyone will deny even exists in the first place. It has been said that the US has the largest foreign deployment of any country on the planet and we are in more countries than any other military. Additionally, we have helped others gain power to meet our needs at a point in time, only to learn later that it causes far worse repercussions. For example, it was US interests that provided funding, weapons, and training to both Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Husain. But then there are people like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez who some say will blow up the world if the US does not prevent them from doing so.

Our foreign aid is more than twice what any other country gives, not only in terms of money, but actual people going to help out. At one point, 1/5 of the population of Haiti was actually US foreign aid works, many of which were part of church groups, private hospital staff, or other non-governmental aid. But there are also places in the world that our government ignores.

What are your thoughts on foreign involvement? Should we be the world’s police force? Do we get too involved militarily or not involved enough with aid? Where is the line of using military force on one nation to prevent massive casualties of innocent lives in another? Should we just get out of other countries and focus on our own problems?

Moderator note:

Maister: merged with neverending political thread. Carry on.

 

[stroskey]

I've been criticized for this but I'll stick to my guns. If individual citizens want to go to Haiti and Africa let them go. But otherwise we need to get our military out of all foreign countries. It's not our job to police the world except in extreme cases to prevent full-on WW3. ...and a "threat" does not equal an extreme case.

The government (not doctor's groups, etc.) should help out the poor of other countries but only if those in America have an equal opportunity to receive the help. It's not fair to give 25 million in Sub-Saharan Africa HIV drugs but then charge those in America full price.

 

[Dan]

Government is NOT a business

On the Republican side of the upcoming presidentil election, candidates are being touted for their business acumen; they ran companies of their own, so therefore they're qualified to lead the federal government. When I was living in Texas, I often heard the refrain "government should be run more like a business", which reflects a sentiment that there's something inherenty wrong at the core with the way government operates.

The new County Executive of Erie County, New York, Mark Poloncarz, bucked the trend and said the opposite in his inauguration speech; that government is not a business, and that running it like one would only make it less effective, not more. It's a point of view that isn't often expressed. From the speech:

Over the last several years, I think we have all learned a lot about ourselves and what government is and what it should be. Government is not a business and it should not be run like one.

A business is concerned with maximizing profits to benefit a select few—its owner or shareholders. However, a government is concerned with the welfare of those it represents, all of its citizens, not just taxpayers. We as a government represent the youngest child that may need protection from an abusive adult or the oldest adult that may not be able to turn anywhere else other than the greater community to provide for his or her basic medical needs.

Government exists to take on precisely those tasks that the private sector can't or won't. We unite to care for the penniless and provide a safety net for those who have fallen; maintain common amenities such as parks and libraries; and create and maintain a safe infrastructure with broad value for the benefit of all.

When times are tough, businesses look to maximize their profits by spending less—either reducing the quality of the product they sell or service they provide or by laying-off workers. The business's bottom line always comes first and there is little social regard for the people involved.

With a government, the people come first and elected officials are stewards of the public's assets. Our responsibility is to not only manage treasured assets like libraries and parks for the citizens of today but hold them in a public trust for generations to come. And, when times are tough, ensure that the people's government and the services it provides are there for those who need it most.

I think we would all agree that, right now, we are facing tough times. However, lately County government has been acting too much like a business and abandoning its true owners – the people – when they need it most.

When people need their libraries the most—hours have been cut.

When people looked to important, though small, cultural organizations to not only entertain but to enrich the mind these organizations struggled to keep their doors open after funding disappeared.

When our poorest, and often youngest, citizens needed access to quality, affordable health care—health clinics were closed.

And when people were forced to turn to public assistance—they were met by a government that viewed them with disdain.

Well, that all changes. Instead of doing less, we're going to do more and give Erie County's residents a government that truly represents them, a government they can be proud of again.

We're going to do it by not only ensuring government provides the services the public needs and deserves, but we're going to do it as efficiently and effectively as possible. We're going to do it by spending your hard earned dollars MORE WISELY.

Emphasis mine.

It's a refreshing point of view, oddly contrarian as it might seem now, and one I hope to hear more in the coming years. What do you think?

Moderator note:

Maister: merged with neverending political thread. Carry on.

 

[imaplanner]

Would the Post Office be an example of the government trying (and failing) to run like a business?

 

[michaelskis]

WOW :-c

I agree 100% that government should not be run like a business and should not get involved or interfere with business.

 

[Maister]

WOW :-c

I agree 100% that government should not be run like a business and should not get involved or interfere with business.

I strongly disagree with the latter half of this statement. The stated purpose of our government is to "promote the general welfare" and doing things like preventing companies through the passage and enforcement of laws from, say, using lead-based paints on children's toys, or depositing dioxin in a neighborhood's ground water is both a reasonable and responsible thing to do.

 

[dw914er]

On the Republican side of the upcoming presidentil election, candidates are being touted for their business acumen; they ran companies of their own, so therefore they're qualified to lead the federal government. When I was living in Texas, I often heard the refrain "government should be run more like a business", which reflects a sentiment that there's something inherenty wrong at the core with the way government operates.

The new County Executive of Erie County, New York, Mark Poloncarz, bucked the trend and said the opposite in his inauguration speech; that government is not a business, and that running it like one would only make it less effective, not more. It's a point of view that isn't often expressed. From the speech:



Emphasis mine.

It's a refreshing point of view, oddly contrarian as it might seem now, and one I hope to hear more in the coming years. What do you think?

Moderator note:

Maister: merged with neverending political thread. Carry on.

I can agree with that concept. There are very important differences between a for-profit business and a government entity that you have to pay attention to. I think we should stress, as he pointed out, that you need to run your organization efficiently and effectively (rather than "like a business"). There's nothing inherently wrong with government. The problems come from specific organizations, which is a reality for both government and business organizations.

I think that phrase just panders to the anti-government attitude our country has. It's kind of a shame too, because not all of us working in the public sector are lazy, corrupt people :not:

 

[michaelskis]

I strongly disagree with the latter half of this statement. The stated purpose of our government is to "promote the general welfare" and doing things like preventing companies from, say, using lead-based paints on children's toys, or depositing dioxin in a neighborhood's ground water through laws is both a reasonable and responsible thing to do.

In some aspects, I agree with you. Since it is something that would be universality applied for the greater good of all the residents of the US, it does fall under the General Welfare Clause, even after the definition modifications with Butler v. United States in 1936. However, the same standard is not universally applied, partly because of unethical cooperation between corporations and the FDA.

Take smoking, alcohol, fast food, GMO's, and several other products that have either been found to be harmful to your health, or have been tested in a way which results in an "results not conclusive" finding. Why doesn't the government prohibit all of those too?

I've been criticized for this but I'll stick to my guns. If individual citizens want to go to Haiti and Africa let them go. But otherwise we need to get our military out of all foreign countries. It's not our job to police the world except in extreme cases to prevent full-on WW3. ...and a "threat" does not equal an extreme case.

The government (not doctor's groups, etc.) should help out the poor of other countries but only if those in America have an equal opportunity to receive the help. It's not fair to give 25 million in Sub-Saharan Africa HIV drugs but then charge those in America full price.

Not only will I not criticize you, I will applaud your comments and agree!

 

[Whose Yur Planner]

I strongly disagree with the latter half of this statement. The stated purpose of our government is to "promote the general welfare" and doing things like preventing companies through the passage and enforcement of laws from, say, using lead-based paints on children's toys, or depositing dioxin in a neighborhood's ground water is both a reasonable and responsible thing to do.

First, excellent post Dan. If government was ran like a business, there would be riots in the streets. While there is some common ground-budgeting and HR-issues, the ends are completely different.

Second, What Maister said-we need only look back in history to find out what happened when there weren't laws protecting people and the environment.

 

[Hink]

GOP: Corporate donation ban unconstitutional
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under...ate-donation-ban-unconstitutional-110364.html

I think this is going to turn out ugly. Gingrich is already complaining about Romney using his SuperPAC to take him out. He is crying foul about the amount of money he is being attacked with. Welcome to the world after the Citizen's United case... and now the GOP is going to try and open another donation door?

More money, more money... ugh.

 

[TerraSapient]

Testimony from a computer programmer that he was asked to design a program to rig our elections

 

[Planit]

Testimony from a computer programmer that he was asked to design a program to rig our elections

That guy looks like he could be one of RJ's relatives...

 

[michaelskis]

The &$%#@ double standard of the separation of church and state.

This pisses me off... :-@:-@:-@:-@
Obama Gives Catholics One Year to Learn to Violate their Consciences

The news is riddled with idiots who whine about the Ten Commandments being posted on government property or the idea of a student saying a prayer before school lunch, all in the name of the fallacy of separation of church and state. But this current administration finds it acceptable to oppose its will on organizations that are owned and/or operated by Churches. There are several hospitals, clinics, missions, bookstores, centers, schools, colleges, daycares, and other businesses that are owned by the Catholic Church and it is their mission to help people in accordance to biblical teachings (as they see it).

First, every business is required to offer insurance, now every insurance plan is required to offer drugs and products that are a direct violation of Catholic teaching? What next, every place that sells books much sell "Audacity of Hope?" :-@

 

[mgk920]

This pisses me off... :-@:-@:-@:-@
Obama Gives Catholics One Year to Learn to Violate their Consciences

The news is riddled with idiots who whine about the Ten Commandments being posted on government property or the idea of a student saying a prayer before school lunch, all in the name of the fallacy of separation of church and state. But this current administration finds it acceptable to oppose its will on organizations that are owned and/or operated by Churches. There are several hospitals, clinics, missions, bookstores, centers, schools, colleges, daycares, and other businesses that are owned by the Catholic Church and it is their mission to help people in accordance to biblical teachings (as they see it).

First, every business is required to offer insurance, now every insurance plan is required to offer drugs and products that are a direct violation of Catholic teaching? What next, every place that sells books much sell "Audacity of Hope?" :-@

And all of that at the behest of a major BHO supporting organization that was founded on the principals of advocating anti slave-descendant eugenics....

Truly sad and I hope that the Catholic Church ignores that edict. The USA really does need to relearn the virtues of some well thought out civil disobedience!

:-@ :-@ :-@ :-@ :-@

Mike

 

[JNA]

Is there something wrong with this picture ?

Using/having your daughters from your 1st wife to convince/tell everyone that your 2nd wife is lying/wrong about your 3rd wife. :huh:

 

[michaelskis]

And all of that at the behest of a major BHO supporting organization that was founded on the principals of advocating anti slave-descendant eugenics....

Truly sad and I hope that the Catholic Church ignores that edict. The USA really does need to relearn the virtues of some well thought out civil disobedience!

:-@ :-@ :-@ :-@ :-@

Mike

My question is where will it stop. Next they will be telling the Amish that their kids need to get vaccinated, the Jews that they need to keep their businesses open on the Sabbath, and that Muslims need to eat pork.

Is there something wrong with this picture ?

Using/having your daughters from your 1st wife to convince/tell everyone that your 2nd wife is lying/wrong about your 3rd wife. :huh:

Yes, yes there is. Gingrich is scum.

 

[Hink]

This pisses me off... :-@:-@:-@:-@
Obama Gives Catholics One Year to Learn to Violate their Consciences

The news is riddled with idiots who whine about the Ten Commandments being posted on government property or the idea of a student saying a prayer before school lunch, all in the name of the fallacy of separation of church and state. But this current administration finds it acceptable to oppose its will on organizations that are owned and/or operated by Churches. There are several hospitals, clinics, missions, bookstores, centers, schools, colleges, daycares, and other businesses that are owned by the Catholic Church and it is their mission to help people in accordance to biblical teachings (as they see it).

First, every business is required to offer insurance, now every insurance plan is required to offer drugs and products that are a direct violation of Catholic teaching? What next, every place that sells books much sell "Audacity of Hope?" :-@

After thinking about my response, I am just going to say that the article is really poorly put together and biased. I am a Catholic and I am glad that they are doing this. I will leave it at that though....

 

[Tom R]

Religion's place in politics (if any).

Here is an interesting article from the Pittsburgh Post Gazette about the religious beliefs on out "founding fathers."
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/12022/1204849-109-0.stm?cmpid=newspanel
What do you think?

 

[Maister]

If one believes that the purpose of one's existence is to promote a [fill in religious sect]'s view, then nothing could be more logical than the establishment of a theocracy. Theocracies ensure the greatest numbers commit themselves to saying/acting as if their beliefs were in accord with [fill in religious sect]. Or at least they promote lip service to the very highest levels, at any rate.

Moderator note:

merged with neverending political discussion thread. Carry on.

 

[fringe]

Cpl of weeks ago the New Yorker had a good article reviewing a few recent books on the Spanish Inquisition, and what some think are its remnant influences on the Europe of today. Times have been a lot stranger than they are now, before, it seems.

 

[Hink]

Personally, I think government's role is to protect the ability of people to study and believe in whatever religion they want. Or no religion if that is their choice. Government shouldn't tell religion what to do, but no single religion should guide what government should do either.

Also, I think the framers were pretty clear in their thinking. They were all over the board, but shared the vision to assure religious freedom. It is funny how time and "different" readings of text can change the context or thoughts of someone.

 

[Linda_D]

Personally, I think government's role is to protect the ability of people to study and believe in whatever religion they want. Or no religion if that is their choice. Government shouldn't tell religion what to do, but no single religion should guide what government should do either.

Also, I think the framers were pretty clear in their thinking. They were all over the board, but shared the vision to assure religious freedom. It is funny how time and "different" readings of text can change the context or thoughts of someone.

I think that's because they all lived under a quasi-theocracy. All colonial residents were required to support the Church of England with their taxes, and in most of the colonies, compelled to regularly attend services in the established church even if they weren't members. Slave owners and masters of indentured servants were required to see that these people also attended church services. I think that Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, and New York may have been exceptions to the mandatory attendance rules.

 

[Blide]

I think religion is okay in politics up to the point that it starts being imposed on others. Once your religious beliefs start being imposed on people, you start moving toward a theocracy. Granted, what we're seeing today in the US is that the dominate religion feels that other groups are trying to impose their beliefs on them. Of course, these groups are not doing anything to directly impact or harm Christianity other than to diminish its power in politics.

 

[michaelskis]

After thinking about my response, I am just going to say that the article is really poorly put together and biased. I am a Catholic and I am glad that they are doing this. I will leave it at that though....

Ok, I am confused... in this POST you said that the government should stay out of it.

Personally, I think government's role is to protect the ability of people to study and believe in whatever religion they want. Or no religion if that is their choice. Government shouldn't tell religion what to do, but no single religion should guide what government should do either.

Also, I think the framers were pretty clear in their thinking. They were all over the board, but shared the vision to assure religious freedom. It is funny how time and "different" readings of text can change the context or thoughts of someone.

But here you say that they should get involved? How can you have it both ways?

I too am catholic (raised Lutheran), and I think what the government is doing is 100% wrong.

I think that there is a delicate balance between politics and religion. The government should not impose the specifics of any one religion or prevent one form following religious beliefs. There are also several other founding fathers, including Benjamin Franklin, who where very vocal and active in there religious beliefs. However, he also agreed that religion is a personal thing and should not be regulated or controlled by the government.

I would not have a problem voting for a non-christian if their personal actions and political beliefs did not run contrary to my own, even over a christian who's political beliefs are downright wrong.

 

[imaplanner]

My question is where will it stop. Next they will be telling the Amish that their kids need to get vaccinated, the Jews that they need to keep their businesses open on the Sabbath, and that Muslims need to eat pork.

.

And that vegetarians have to eat meat and meat eaters can't eat meat and red haired people have to die their hair!!! where will it stop!!!!


Although realistically I would support requiring Amish to be vaccinated. People that don't get vaccinated are a health risk to the rest of us.

On the topic of birth control, there are many communities where the only providers are religious based and people just don't have access to important medicine because of it.