I see quite a few leaves raked into plies along the street in Auburn. If they get picked up then why should we bag them?
Would it be appropriate to get answers to questions about the Fort Hood tragedy by utilizing waterboarding techniques ?
Emerson and Deauville are outside the city of Auburn, and hunters are just like anyone else that have rights. I agree that hunters could be somewhere else, where there are not people.
America's troops are being killed because President Obama was too busy campaigning for New Jersey Governor Corzine to send requested troops. God help America.
I'd like to express my concern about the voting situation at Owasco at Emerson Park: My biggest gripe is I wrote a candidate on the sheet and my ballot was not accepted by the machine, and for 15 to 20 minutes I had to make the necessary corrections with the personnel up there.
Click here to see the previous round of Two Cents entries
Two Cents starter comments will be updated online as new submissions are called in or e-mailed. To contribute new Two Cents items, please call 253-5311 ext. 292 or e-mail twocents@lee.net.
Citizen
Hot Jobs
New! Off the Menu
The Citizens' Say
Post your comment - click hereThere are 103 comment(s)
scooter wrote on Nov 17, 2009 2:39 PM:
cm wrote on Nov 16, 2009 4:51 PM:
http://www.aetna.com/groupinsurance/members_benes.htm
IRA's:
Initially, it is important to realize that IRA accounts are similar to life insurance policies in that you do get to designate a beneficiary to receive the money upon your death. If you fail to name a beneficiary, or if the beneficiary you have named fails to survive you and you haven't named a contingent beneficiary, then the terms of the IRA account will dictate the recipient of the money.
Nonspousal beneficiaries cannot transfer assets within an inherited IRA to an existing IRA. Instead, they have two options: They may take all distributions within five years of the original account owner's death or take annual distributions determined by the life expectancy of either the beneficiary or the decedent, whichever is longer.
Employer-Sponsored Retirement/Pension Plans:
For married individuals, the law requires that a spouse be the primary beneficiary of an employer-sponsored retirement plan unless he or she waives that right in writing.
Prior to 2007, nonspousal beneficiaries (children, siblings, unmarried partners, and others) were required to cash out retirement plan bequests between one and five years after the account owner's death.
http://finance.yahoo.com/how-to-guide/retirement/18440 "
Farmer's Gal wrote on Nov 16, 2009 4:46 PM:
Personally, I always accepted that there was some real person back in the murky depths of history, just as there was some model for King Arthur and for Robin Hood, despite all the apocryphal tales which have grown up about them all ever since. As a non-believer, I don't think for a minute this person was divine, but he surely must have been quite extraordinary and very charismatic.
Let those who don't believe there was any such person go on not believing; let those who believe go on believing, and if you must debate religion, why not expend your energies on something of more substance and import, like the merits of certain tenets or the impact of faith or something more meaningful in today's world. At this point, there is very little import in whether there were a specific man or not -- the religion is rolling, it is continuing to have an impact on the world, and that's where to focus your attention. It comes off as just spiteful to keep insisting among believers that there was no such person. The faith is either good or bad (or a more realistically a blend of both) on its own merits, regardless how it got its start.
And that's my Two Cents on whether or not there was a real man Jesus. "
cm wrote on Nov 16, 2009 4:19 PM:
A power of attorney is an instrument containing an authorization for one to act as the agent of the principal that terminates at some point in the future either by its terms or by operation of law such as death of the principal or agent. They are also called letters of attorney. The person appointed is usually called an Attorney-in-Fact. The person making the power of attorney appointment is called the principal. A power of attorney can be either general, durable or limited. Some states have adopted a statutory power of attorney.
Other specific types of power of attorneys include: Health Care Power of Attorney, Power of Attorney for Care and Custody of Children, Power of Attorney for Real Estate matters and Power of Attorney for the Sale of a Motor Vehicle. Free law summaries provide a detailed explanation of state specific law concerning the power of attorney.
1) What is a General Power of Attorney?
A General Power of Attorney is a legal document which gives the person you choose (the agent) the power to manage your assets and financial affairs while you are alive. The document must be signed by you (the principal) while you have the required legal capacity to give your agent clear and concise instructions. The appointment may be for a fixed period and can be revoked by you at any time providing you still have the legal capacity to do so. A power of attorney ceases when you die. The executor named in your will then takes over the responsibilities of your estate.
2) What is a Durable Power of Attorney?
A "durable" power of attorney stays valid even if you become unable to handle your own affairs (incapacitated). If you don't specify that you want your power of attorney to be durable, it will automatically end if you later become incapacitated.
3) What is a Limited Power of Attorney?
A limited power of attorney allows the principal to give only specific powers to the agent. The limited power of attorney is used to allow the agent to handle specific matters when the principal is unavailable or unable to do so.
4) Why have a Power of Attorney?
When accidents, sudden illness, planned or unexpected absences occur, or when you just can't cope, you may need someone to manage your financial affairs. It can be done in anticipation of a future need, for a special purpose or for a limited time. The person you appoint is called your agent. The agent will (by your instructions) safeguard and manage your assets and financial affairs if you are unable to manage them for yourself or if you lose legal capacity.
4) Must a Power of Attorney be recorded?
Please refer to the state specific law summary to determine if a particular Power of Attorney must be recorded. Usually, most Power of Attorney forms do not need to be recorded. However, Power of Attorneys dealing with the sale and purchase of real estate must be recorded.
5) Can a Power of Attorney be revoked?
A Power of Attorney can be revoked by the principal at any time, as long as he or she is competent. "
cm wrote on Nov 16, 2009 4:12 PM:
medical decision-making privileges:
Making a will:
By making a will you can decide what happens to your property and possessions after your death. Although you do not have to make one by law, it is the best way to make sure your estate is passed on to family and friends exactly as you wish.
Why it's important to make a will:
if you're an unmarried couple (whether or not it's a same-sex relationship), you can make sure your partner is provided for
How to make a LIVING will:
Every adult with mental capacity has the right to agree to or refuse medical treatment. To make your advance wishes clear you can use a living will. Living wills can include general statements about your wishes, which aren't legally binding, and specific refusals of treatment called 'advanced decisions' or 'advance directives'.
Family and friends can also use them as evidence of your wishes.
Durable power of attorney for Health Care:
YOU CAN appoint a 'proxy'; a partner, relative or friend who has the legal power to give consent to medical treatment when the patient can't make decisions.
A durable power of attorney for health care is used to appoint an agent to make health care decisions for you and usually includes the power of the agent to make decisions regarding terminal conditions and whether to prolong life. However, if you have a Living Will, the directions of the Living Will control over the durable power of attorney, because you have already made the decision of what is to be done under certain circumstances. Many people use a Durable Power of Attorney for Health Care and a Living Will because they do not want to place the agent in the position of making decisions regarding choice in dying. The agent still has authority to make other health care decisions for you when you cannot make the decision yourself in situations where you need medical attention but are not terminally ill or in a permanent coma. "
The Bone wrote on Nov 16, 2009 3:59 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 16, 2009 3:51 PM:
So, Apologetics has told you that "That is HISTORY! and left it at that, huh? Oh Bone--you must learn to demand more from your intelligence.
ALL copies of Antiquity of the Jews come down to us from Christian sources. The oldest are from the 9th-10th century. That leaves several hundred years of being handled by Christians in the interim period between the events allegedly described, and the surviving copies. That's a LOT of time for rewriting and interpolation.
Of the two mentions of "Jesus" in Antiquities, only the "Testimonium Flavianum" is considered to have any chance of authenticity. But even that is easy to debunk.
First of all, unless Josephus HIMSELF has independent, FIRST-HAND KNOWLEDGE of "Jesus",--and did not merely rely upon Christian "sources"--then this claim is worthless. As early as the 16th century, both Jewish and Christian scholars started to doubt the authenticity of the passage. NO SCHOLAR with any integrity today maintains that he entire passage could be true. The first problem is the one about calling "Jesus" the "Messiah"--something ONLY a Christian would have done. NEVER a conservative Jew!
Furthermore, when studied from the point of Linguistics and Typology, the whole passage completely interrupts the flow of the preceding and following three paragraphs. IN other words, you could remove it entirely, and the whole chapter flows MUCH more smoothly and with greater continuity and flow. This is POWERFUL evidence of Christian meddling in the text.
Also, though "Antiquities" contains detailed chapter headings in the table of contents, NOWHERE is "Jesus" mentioned in the table of contents! Such a significant figure, and no mention of him? Nonsense. The Christians who wrote in the passage missed that significant error.
Understand that these table of contents for each chapter are EXPLICIT. They list things like; "How Salome the sister of Herod died and left her possessions to Julia the wife of Caesar." and "How Pontius Pilate wished to bear busts of Caesar secretly into Jerusalem, and the people did not accept this, and rebelled."--little, trivial things--and yet NO MENTION of a man who allegedly spawned a new religion, a political movement, was called a "Christ" and was executed? Honestly--it completely strains credibility.
In addition; Josephus was a Jew who vigorously denounced the "Messianic" movements popular in his day, and he ALWAYS wrote pretty negative, cynical comments about any of the would-be "messiahs" and criminals who were executed or punished by the Romans, and yet, in the "Testimonium" passage, it's like a glowing endorsement of Jesus--who would have been executed in an exact same manner, under the same circumstances as that which Josephus so clearly disdained. Of course, if later Christians wrote in this phony piece of "witnessing", it would completely and plausibly explain that?
But here's some of the most d'amning evidence that this passage was "written in" by Christian scribes. Until the reference to the Testimonium passage is mentioned by Bishop Eusebius in 324, there is NO OTHER REFERENCES to the passage, even by Christian apologists who had referred specifically to "Antiquity" --even specifically to book 18!
That means TWO HUNDRED YEARS go by, and NOT ONE!--writers like Origen, Theophilus Antiochenus, Melito of Sardis, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Julius Africanus, Justin Martyr, Pseudo-Justin, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Methodius, Minucius Felix, and Lactantius all fail to mention or use the Testimonium passage! All these writers were demonstrably familiar with Josephus' works, and used it liberally in their defense of Christianity and "Jesus"--and yet NOTHING from them about the passage?!?
Origen alone UNDOUBTEDLY read the 18th book of Josephus--he uses it to defend John the Baptist, YET NEVER MENTIONS THE "TESIMONIUM"?!
It is unmistakable, Bone--the passage mentioning "Jesus" in Josephus' "Antiquity" is a FRAUD.
For the purposes of this discussion, it's not necessary to dispute the existence of Herod, or John tB, or other figures who were actual historical figures. The question--and the quest--is to find out if a literalized figure of "Jesus" was inserted into the pages of actual historical events in order to create a phony "reality" of his "existence". But if this passage is the cornerstone of most Apologists' strongest arguments, then you can see how it has been thoroughly discredited.
Next? "
The Bone wrote on Nov 16, 2009 2:23 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 16, 2009 10:14 AM:
You really DON'T know any Gay people, DO YOU?
Siiighhhh--cm, Gay Marriage isn't about "proving love"; it's about the Gay persons receiving approximately 1,000 LEGAL RIGHTS that you otherwise DO NOT HAVE if you're not considered a "spouse".
These rights include access to a spouse's medical, life and disability insurance; hospital visitation and medical decision-making privileges… workers' compensation survivor benefits; spousal benefits under annuity and retirement plans…the right to refuse to testify against one's spouse, among others.
Tell us, oh Wise One, how someone is going to get around the law on any of those? If they did, they'd be guilty of Fraud, or worse, and you'd be all over them for "abusing the system".
Sorry, cm, but you'd better to do your research before making such a foolish post again.
On the second post, BY ALL MEANS, get involved in the discussion about "Jesus"! Go ahead, I DARE YOU to try to "prove" that "Jesus" existed historically. You're WAAAAAY out of your depth here, honey!
Oh and, I was being sarcastic about calling you "wise". "
cm wrote on Nov 16, 2009 8:32 AM:
I suppose this is like the new studies that found blood cells in the bones of dinosaurs, though a few scientist say yes --actually prove it under a microscope,
the 'blind'...still say no.. "
cm wrote on Nov 16, 2009 8:27 AM:
get over your thoughts that they are!
just as man/woman couples who simply live together, NOT every needs a piece of paper to prove their love!
in living this way--they set up their directives/wishes to be known as any married couple would.
(or would not if they didnt want their spouse to recieve them)
Just because I am married doesnt mean my spouse would get my share if I passed before him...I could 'will' my stuff/half my share of the house etc. to my kids!
heck, I could 'will' it to a stranger if I deem so, and as long as my paperwork is in order there is nothing family could do!
PAPERWORK, dear karl, PAPERWORK !!
you ASSUME --and I am sure you know the underlining meaning of assume---
that every person Liberal thinks the same, every person catholic thinks the same, and now every person gay thinks alike---
so NOT TRUE!
sometimes karl, people just want to live their lives without all the drama!
and its people like you who love drama, that must try to influence them to your beliefs, some follow, and some simply ignore your BS! "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 15, 2009 11:17 PM:
"Jesus" is a myth.
Please don't go telling me about Josephus, whose texts were interpolated in later years to include references to a "Jesus". Likewise, many ancient texts were altered to include references to "Jesus", but if you understand typological analyzing, the truth become clear. The evidence AGAINST a historical "Christ" is HUGE. You DO know that "Nazareth" never even existed at the time of "Jesus"' alleged "virgin birth", right?
There was no "Star of Bethlehem" recorded ANYWHERE ELSE!
No "Roman census"
No "Massacre of the Innocents" recorded anywhere outside of Matthew!
Philo, a prolific Jewish writer from about 20-50 CE (You would say "A.D.") NEVER wrote a word about "Jesus". BONE, Philo was significant because he actually wrote about the political goings-on in Rome at that time--and you mean to tell me he never even heard of "Jesus"?! (See, now I have to put quotation marks around every "Jesus" so you don't think I mean him literally!)
Seutonius' work used the name "Chrestus"--which is NOT "Jesus Christ", but is a common LATIN name. Not only that, but the time period he was talking about was the time of the emperor Claudius--"Jesus" would have been dead by then. SO--"NOT" "Jesus".
The letter from Pliny the Younger mentions "Christians", but that is not historical "proof" of anything--that's like "hearsay" in a court of law. Mentioning a group of followers of an alleged "anointed" someone is not proof of an ACTUAL PERSON's existence. Put it this way, BONE--you believe in "Jesus", but you've never seen or had contact with him, right? You believe in the myth because that's what you've been told was "Truth". The same reality is likely in the case of these mentioned "Christians".
Even current Christian scholars like John P. Meier admit that Tacitus' passages about "Christus" being the "founder" of the name "Christians" is not "evidence of Jesus". It merely tells hearsay of one of hundreds of cults existing in Rome at the time which happened to call itself "Christian". This does not 'prove" "Jesus" at all.
As I said, "Josephus" is a blatant interpolation by later Christians. Josephus would NEVER have called "Jesus" "the Messiah", ad he was a strict conservative Jew. IN fact, this writing is the most widely recognized as a fraud.
BONE, do you know that in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd century, there were MANY interpretations of "Jesus" that held that he was NOT indeed a "literal man" or even "real". There are no details of his early "life" for a reason--he never "existed". This is typical of almost ALL "messianic" figures in religions around the world. "Jesus" is just another invention; a vehicle for the story. A frame for the picture to hang inside.
Please don't go quoting Justin Martyr, or another apologist, How about some source without extreme bias or connection to the Church?
Oh, and I love you too. "
movedsouth wrote on Nov 15, 2009 7:45 PM:
excnyer wrote on Nov 15, 2009 7:37 PM:
Next question: Why on earth are our gasoline prices so HIGH????? We seem to have a lot of oil right here. I guess we have to SELl our oil to foreign countries so we can BUY it from the Middle East. C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N ??? "
The Bone wrote on Nov 15, 2009 5:02 PM:
As I explained to you before,my cousin is gay. I have know this since I been say 8-10 years old. I dont care, you do what you do,but not marriage.You think that you are so righteous none of us are. I am tired of hearing how you stand up for the depressed,poor,gay.homeless. You are just a big mouth with no action do you go out and support any cause or you just sit back and blow wind. I love my Catholic Religion as much as you love being an atheist. I really dont believe that your a true antheist. I want you to show me that Jesus didnt walk this earth if you do I will show you true evidence that Jesus was here. Lets do it with out name calling or any other remarks. Do you agree? I love you "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 15, 2009 2:43 PM:
Put simply, established law today makes certain legal actions impossible under today's climate. Any Gay person who was willing to accept the status quo as is would be a fool to accept the discriminatory nature of the law as it applies to them. Either that or they've never been in love yet to the point of where these statutes would affect them and their possible futures together yet. "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 15, 2009 2:40 PM:
There are at least three that I can name--but won't, out of respect for their anonymity.
One is a relative, and her spouse. The other works with me. There are actually two more, now that I think of it.
They run the gamut from being involved in political matters to not being concerned at all. That has no breaking however on the import of the issue. That makes no difference at all. That would be like saying, "Well, I don't eat beef, so I think they should just stop selling hamburger."
WHat exactly are you trying to say?!?! "
movedsouth wrote on Nov 15, 2009 1:45 PM:
When issues arise in 2009, you need not to have followed politics for the past 10 years. Analyzing current information would allow one to have an educated opinion.
Other than me being a part of you outing yourself and making an idiot out of yourself then, I don't really know what your problem is. "
movedsouth wrote on Nov 15, 2009 1:32 PM:
Someday post something of value instead of just making personal attacks. Challenge my content, and not just make ignorant remarks. "
cm wrote on Nov 15, 2009 11:59 AM:
the ones I know, arent interested in the POLICTICS they simply want to their live their lives together.
They use other avenues for their benefits to go to WHOM they want, they know how to do their proper paperwork.
THEY DO NOT NEED a piece of paper stating 'marriage' or otherwise! "
cm wrote on Nov 15, 2009 11:46 AM:
AJ wrote on Nov 15, 2009 11:36 AM:
AJ wrote on Nov 15, 2009 11:33 AM:
" No AJ, I'm not a hypocrite. More than likely you don't remember me saying that, in the past, I didn't pay that much attention to politics. With the TARP, stimulus, and bailouts, I have been much more aware of politics. I have been against this spending since TARP, if that was the start of these give away programs.
"
That's very interesting, MS. For someone who didn't know much about politics, admittedly, you have been a staunch defender of the Bush administration who has probably been the most criminal and immoral in all of history, to date. I'm not saying Obama is much better - it surely is shaping up to be following in Bush's footsteps, but that doesn't surprise me.
You should get away from the tube and read some decent books that are not afraid to critique both the right and the left using FACTS rather than hyperbole and propaganda - something that the right-wingers have gotten down to a science. "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 15, 2009 11:13 AM:
The Bone wrote on Nov 15, 2009 10:16 AM:
learned respelling of ME, OE Crīst < L Chrīstus < Gk chrīstos anointed, trans. of Heb māshīaḥ anointed, Messiah. Where did get your answer from I got mine from Dictionary.com. I am going to pick your remarks one at a time. This is the first! "
movedsouth wrote on Nov 15, 2009 10:11 AM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 15, 2009 9:27 AM:
HA HAH AHA HA AHA HAA AHAHA AHAHH!!!!!
Can I sue him if I get a hernia from laughing so hard??! "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 15, 2009 9:25 AM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 15, 2009 9:24 AM:
If you do indeed know Gay people and see them as real human beings, then I'm now convinced more than ever that your opposition to GM is based upon a refusal to "let go" of yet one more piece of Catholic doctrine that has, and will be, discredited as scientifically un-viable. That's a shame, because the ramifications for YOU are just some days of disappointment and questioning, but the ramifications for Gay people are HUGE and life-changing. Most especially in terms of end-of-life access to them, visitation rights in hospitals during terminal illness and the like.
Think about that, and open your heart and mind to it. That would be the "Christian thing" to do. "
The Bone wrote on Nov 15, 2009 8:34 AM:
movedsouth wrote on Nov 15, 2009 6:55 AM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 14, 2009 9:56 PM:
Nope. The guy wasn't a terrorist. Just your garden-variety disgruntled nutcase who happened to be a Muslim and narcissistic enough to plan his murder spree by conflating it with a religious correlation to "martyrdom" as he went out.
movedsouth--THIS GUY WAS A PSYCHOLOGIST. He knew that to go out in a blaze of "Jihad glory" would leave deeper scars and undercurrents of fear in the Army which he began to hate so much.
Obama is just smart enough to know that, and to realize that by calling this loon a "terrorist" you give him the credibility and "Martyr" status in the Muslim world that the REAL terrorists would be only too happy to exploit.
Sadly, it's people like YOU who are so eager to label him a jihadist that are giving the real terrorist the propaganda coup that they crave. Smarten up, man! "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 14, 2009 9:49 PM:
Bone, I'd like you to explain to me how being born as Gay is somehow "immoral". While you're at it, explain to me how your "God" would create a person as they are and then condemn them to hell? Oh, wait--that's right; this is that baby-killing god, right?
Bone, let me make this assumption about you as well--you don't actually KNOW any Gay people, do you? Have you ever run into one that wasn't like the crazy caricatures that you see on TV at the Gay Pride parades? Have you ever actually MET one? Talked to them? Seen that they are just regular people like you and me?
Well guess what--I have. Seen and worked with many of them. And they love just as genuinely, deeply, and with just as much loyalty and passion as anyone you might imagine. There is nothing "perverse" in their love, or their relationships. There is nothing "Immoral". And how about this--you would condemn them as "immoral" when what they're fighting for is monogamy!
I suppose you feel the same about people who are born the wrong physical sex, and then decide to get sex changes too, huh? They're probably "Sick" or "perverted" or 'Immoral" too, huh? Even though it's a documented fact that they function much better as their changed-sex? Can you get your head around that, or is that "immoral" too in your small mind?
And let me just go out on a limb and hope that you do accept that scientific reality, and ask you then, if you can allow that people can be born with differently-sexed brains opposite from their physical bodies, then why couldn't they have opposite-sexed brains while still being comfortable in their physical selves?
Prove to me how big or small your mind is?
You know what I think? I think that you, and people like you, are just unable to admit, and let go of yet one more inaccuracy of the Christian Bible, because it's just one more brick falling out of the edifice of what is the ever-more obsolete dogma of the Christian religion and Scripture. I think that somewhere in your logical heart, you KNOW that being Gay is an intrinsic condition, but you just will NEVER admit it. Your apologetical training has conditioned you to deny too much. Pity. "
movedsouth wrote on Nov 14, 2009 6:29 PM:
movedsouth wrote on Nov 14, 2009 6:21 PM:
Many college students have been awakened also. To quote one student, " you have awakened a sleeping giant."
Look at charts and graphs of spending over the years and you will see why I am concerned. The housing loan/market has raised hell with the economy.
Sorry AJ, you are wrong. "
The Bone wrote on Nov 14, 2009 5:23 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 14, 2009 4:33 PM:
Look, form all accounts, this guy was a social disaster, a loner and loser whom they couldn't even arrange a date for through the mosque. In the end, he chose to use a religious aspect to his murder plot to give it some greater, more significant aspect greater than that of just another "workplace shooting".
The guy was crazy, but he wasn't stupid. "
AJ wrote on Nov 14, 2009 4:08 PM:
" "Obama Urges Congress to Delay Fort Hood Investigation
by
AP
On an eight-day Asia trip, President Obama turned his attention home and pleaded for lawmakers to "resist the temptation to turn this tragic event into the political theater."
Are you kidding me? This murderer was a terrorist and You want to DELAY an investigation. Don't want to offend the Muslims. "
I don't recall you EVER complaining about the 911 investigation which Bush had to be PRESSURED into doing AT ALL. And the one he did give us was a "half-baked farce". NOt my words, but those of the magazine Fire and Engineering.
Hypocrite... "
excnyer wrote on Nov 14, 2009 3:53 PM:
Congratulations to you and your bride.
As you know, we wish you the best that life can offer and happiness always. "
movedsouth wrote on Nov 14, 2009 3:02 PM:
by
AP
On an eight-day Asia trip, President Obama turned his attention home and pleaded for lawmakers to "resist the temptation to turn this tragic event into the political theater."
Are you kidding me? This murderer was a terrorist and You want to DELAY an investigation. Don't want to offend the Muslims. "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 14, 2009 2:09 PM:
movedsouth wrote on Nov 14, 2009 12:51 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 14, 2009 11:00 AM:
"The Church's lamentably bigoted and frankly, hypocritical stand on this issue alone is characteristic of the many reasons why I left this corrupt, power-hungry, and controlling institution years ago after being a Catholic for nearly 35 years,, and why I work tirelessly to rescue others from the influence of Catholicism.
On one hand, the Church is trying to stop women from using public funds to pay for abortion services through the Health Care reform bill; on the other hand, while the Church gorges itself at the public trough as well, it wants to retain its "right" to discriminate. Do you people have a lawyer who can explain the most basic concepts of the requirements of utilizing public funding, and why you cannot discriminate against some members of the very same public from which you are receiving your largess?
Interestingly, your article here makes NO MENTION whatsoever of the ultimatum that you gave the city. This fact alone is disingenuous and unfair to your flock, as you are not providing accurate information. Your article simply explains the Church's paranoia about being sued for discrimination, which would be absolutely and entirely appropriate! YOU CANNOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST THE PUBLIC WHO IS PROVIDING YOUR FUNDING!
It sickens me, and countless Americans, that the Church would choose to leave some of the Sick, the Needy, The Poor, and the Elderly out in the cold rather than move into the 21st century. This sad, sad affair is an example of cynical, evil old men in positions of power cherry-picking through discredited, dusty tomes of Scripture to both assert power and control, and to attempt to justify their bigotry by using Religion,
The Church cherry--picks the ancient prohibitions against Homosexuality from the lines of Scriptures such as Leviticus, which also, by the way proscribes rules concerning women's menstrual periods, men with damaged testicles, childbirth, and burnt animal sacrifices--all of which have been discarded by the Church, or explained-away as "in context of the era". Yet in an era when Homosexuality is being more and more discovered to be an intrinsic condition dictated by biology, the Church comfortably retains it's Bronze Age mentality because it conveniently excuses the latent and institutionalized bigotry of some of its members.
There is a reason why the Church's coffers are shrinking every year, and this is among the greatest fo those reasons.Shame on the Catholic Church for its distinctly anti-Christian behavior and for betraying the greatest pronouncements of Jesus--to love others, and to not stand in arrogant judgment,
And rest assured, proponents of the Separation of Church and State are watching closely..." "
ANGMOM3 wrote on Nov 14, 2009 10:23 AM:
Farmer's Gal wrote on Nov 14, 2009 10:20 AM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 14, 2009 10:13 AM:
BONE--YOU POST AN ARTICLE WRITTEN BY ONE "MONSIGNOR CHARLES POPE" AND RELEASED THROUGH THE "ARCHDIOCESE OF WASHINGTON" AND EXPECT THAT TO STAND AS "TRUTH"?!
Bone, that would be like me posting this story with a link a Gay/Lesbian site--do you know what it means to seek out information from an UNBIASED SOURCE?!
The propaganda you posted makes NO MENTION of what has been roundly, and accurately reported by literally HUNDREDS of news outlets--namely, that the Catholic Church has given the City of Washington an ULTIMATUM that IT WILL STOP ALL SOCIAL SERVICES IF IT DOESN'T"T GET IT'S WAY. --NO MENTION OF THE TRUTH AT ALL!
Interestingly, it does, however, provide a window of thought into how the Catholic Church "thinks"; "...religious organizations and individuals are at risk of legal action...' --YES. EXACTLY. Because when the Church feeds at the public trough, with PUBLIC FUNDS, IT HAS NO RIGHT TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST SOME OF THOSE VERY MEMBERS WHO ARE PROVIDING THOSE SAME FUNDS!
Bone, do you understand the HYPOCRISY of the Catholic Church here? On one hand, the Church wants to stop women from using public funds through Health Care reform to cover abortions. And yet, on the other, they want the right to discriminate against members of the public whilst using public funding themselves! HYPOCRITES!
Or, they're going to "take their all and go home". And you know who loses out? The Poor, the Elderly, the Needy. This is so utterly disgusting and sickening that it has absolutely reaffirmed my commitment to speak against this utterly corrupt, ANTI-"Godlike" institution at every turn available!
Bone--here's an assignment for you; type "Catholic Church threatens to stop social services" into your Googler/search engine--you'll get 75,600 results from news organizations that tell the TRUTH about this sickening affair. Among them willl be non-partisan outlets like the Boston Herald which reported this story--here's the link.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/south/view.bg?articleid=1211748&srvc=rss
Do you get it yet? No wonder you can't see the Truth, when you're relying on biased, incomplete Church propaganda to skew your opinion on things like this! "
bassistlearningdrums wrote on Nov 14, 2009 8:17 AM:
The Bone wrote on Nov 14, 2009 8:04 AM:
DC Council Committee Narrows Religious Exemption in Same Sex Marriage Bill
November 10, 2009
The DC City Council’s Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary today narrowed the exemption for religious freedom in a bill that would legalize marriage between same-sex couples. The bill is headed to the full council.
The committee’s narrowing of the exemption leaves religious organizations and individuals at risk for adhering to the teachings of their faith, and could prevent social service providers such as Catholic Charities from continuing their long-term partnerships with the District government to provide critical social services for thousands of the city’s most vulnerable residents.
The bill provides no exemption for individuals with sincerely-held religious beliefs, as required under federal law. In fact, one council member opposed an amendment that would have respected an individual’s federally-protected, deeply-held religious beliefs by saying that would encourage a “discriminatory impulse.”
The committee rejected concerns raised in testimony by the ACLU, the Archdiocese of Washington, the InterFaith Conference of Metropolitan Washington and a group of nationally-recognized legal scholars, including Robin Fretwell Wilson, professor at Washington & Lee University Law School. In calling for broader religious liberty protections in the bill, the experts cited well established United States Supreme Court case law under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), a federal law that applies to the District of Columbia.
Under the bill, religious organizations do not have to participate in the “solemnization or celebration” of a same-sex marriage ceremony. An earlier version of the bill also exempted them from “the promotion of marriage that is in violation of the entity’s religious beliefs.” The revised language significantly narrows that exemption to the “promotion of marriage through religious programs, counseling, courses, or retreats.”
As a result, religious organizations and individuals are at risk of legal action for refusing to promote and support same-sex marriages in a host of settings where it would compromise their religious beliefs. This includes employee benefits, adoption services and even the use of a church hall for non-wedding events for same-sex married couples. Religious organizations such as Catholic Charities could be denied licenses or certification by the government, denied the right to offer adoption and foster care services, or no longer be able to partner with the city to provide social services for the needy.
“It is our concern that the committee’s narrowing of the religious exemption language will cause the government to discontinue our long partnership with them and open up the agency to litigation and the use of resources to defend our religious beliefs rather than serve the poor,” said Edward Orzechowski, president/CEO of Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington. Catholic Charities serves 68,000 people in the city each year. The city’s 40 Catholic parishes operate another 93 social service programs to provide crucial services.
The teachings of the Catholic Church, including those of the Archdiocese of Washington, hold that all individuals have equal dignity and deserve equal respect. However, marriage by its very nature must be between a man and a woman. One essential purpose of marriage is an openness to creating and nurturing the next generation, which is the reason that governments and cultures throughout all time have given these relationships special recognition and support. See www.MarriageMattersDC.org for more information on marriage.
The Archdiocese of Washington includes over 580,000 Catholics in the District of Columbia and five Maryland counties: Calvert, Charles, Montgomery, Prince George’s and St. Mary’s. In the District of Columbia, there are 40 parishes, 21 Catholic schools and 25 corporations established to serve the community. "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 13, 2009 6:56 PM:
"In a Nov. 10 statement, the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington threatened to drop contracts with the District government to provide social services, unless church programs are broadly exempted from civil rights provisions that will protect same-sex couples.
Catholic Charities DC, the social service arm of the archdiocese, received $16 million of its $23 million budget last year through governmental contracts."
HOW ABOUT THAT?!
The Catholic Church will stop social services--feeding the Poor, clothing children, giving medical services and transportation for needy people--unless they "get their way" regarding a PUBLIC POLICY matter!
WHAT HYPOCRITES!! Cutting off the Poor, the Elderly, and the Needy because they're throwing a hissy fit about not being able to discriminate against Gays! PIGS!
This is simply disgusting!They should LOSE their tax exempt status, and lose their funding as well! Give the services to a public firm like ACORN, and watch things get done without religious discrimination and bigotry!
Bone, are you embarrassed yet? "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 13, 2009 6:51 PM:
WHAT?!?!
ARE YOU JUST YANKING MY CHAIN, OR ARE YOU ON DRUGS?!
WHAT ABOUT THE PEDOPHILE COVER-UP SCANDAL?!?!
You are in a perpetual state-of-denial, I swear!
Stay tuned--here comes another example of disgusting behavior by the hypocritical Catholic Church.... "
CVA62 wrote on Nov 13, 2009 5:14 PM:
The Bone wrote on Nov 13, 2009 5:08 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 13, 2009 3:21 PM:
Prejean/Palin are BOTH enormously hypocritical, and self-defeating. This is beyond doubt, and easily provable. Especially Prejean. Her self-righteous moralizing and preaching has been TOTALLY undermined by her "p0RN" videos and silicone show-me Orbs of Doom. She's so phony she's hiding from herself. Palin may be just plain crazy, or just plain ignorant and simple. The jury's still out.
Honestly now, Chris--put the shoe on the other foot for one second--imagine your sarcastic, scurrilous attacks YOU'D have made against any "Liberal" girl who did the same? Honestly, Chris--that's some SERIOUS denial you've got going on.
I will give you this--Prejean had every right under the First Amendment to her opinion, no matter how bigoted I believe it to be. But as an iconic symbol of America, with our promise of "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness", she has NO BUSINESS representing America. She would be an embarrassment to the ideals of this country.
No, I'm not sending a check, Chris. I'll pay through my taxes--SAME AS YOU. "
united we wish wrote on Nov 13, 2009 12:36 PM:
chris van note wrote on Nov 13, 2009 12:26 PM:
So, people like Karl are slaves to thier predjudices. The moronic logic is as follows:
Every prudish, judgmental belief that has ever been imagined by a critic of Christians and conservatives is hereby ascribed to Carrie Prejean (or Sarah Palin or Michelle Malkin, etc...) Anything she has ever done in contradiction of these imagined beliefs thereby proves her hypocrisy.
Oh yeah, did you write that check to the Treasury dept. yet Karl? Come on now, be patriotic!!! "
gonesouth wrote on Nov 13, 2009 11:15 AM:
Not sure how healthcare makes it into this. The tea party's were held back in April prior to the June release of any healthcare bills ect. These were to protest the ever increasing debt and eventual taxes due to the bailout plans.
You are again falling prey to the media twisting things to make their case. The media has lumped together any and all groups that oppose Obama's plans. Even if they are not related or hold the same beliefs. The Tea party people were to show their displeasure with the gov't as a whole including Bush and the previous Administration.
*** disclaimer not saying you are the following****
Funny how they always say the right is a bunch of brainwashed idiots when a majority of people on the left do the same thing with what is reported instead of looking into it and finding the facts for themslves. "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 13, 2009 10:06 AM:
CHRIS IS DEFENDING CARRIE PREJEAN?!?!?
OH MY GAAAWD!! I'M FALLING OFF THE COUCH LAUGHING!!!!
Chris, let me educate you about this--seriously, bud; There is N-O-T-H-I-N-G that the Left can or NEEDS to do to "destroy" Carrie Prejean THAT SHE HASN'T DONE HERSELF!!!
This UBER-hypocritical Silicone p0rn Star-wannabe BIMBO has quite a set of cajones on her--I'll agree--to talk about how moral and upright she is, and about how people shouldn't "focus on looks and physical appearances"--and then she gets plastic tata's and makes not one, but SEVERAL sex tapes that she sends to a guy she's known for only a FEW WEEKS?! SHE'S A WALKING TRAIN WRECK!!!
There is no hypocrisy like Conservative Christian hypocrisy. Hey, buddy--IF THE SHOE FITS, WEAR IT!
And oh yes--the Left is "afraid" of "strong women"? You mean ike Hillary Clinton? Nancy Pelosi? Or a strong, independent thinker like Deedee Scozzafava? PuhhhLEEEEZE!
If Carrie Prejean and Sarah Palin are your examples of "strong, Conservative women", then the Left's got NUTHIN to worry about, ha ha. WHAT A JOKE!
ROTFLMAO!!! "
chris van note wrote on Nov 13, 2009 9:10 AM:
Just another excuse for the all knowing Karl to bash Christians...he's the smartest guy in the room you know, just ask him.
In my opinion, the left is doing all they can to destroy her and make an example of her…so that the next person who stands up and defends marriage (or another traditional conservative or Christian value) will pause and think…do I want every mistake aired out in public…
Look at what they tried to do to Palin, this isn't any different. Liberals are petrified of strong, conservative women and it shows time and time again. "
chris van note wrote on Nov 13, 2009 8:59 AM:
The U.S. Treasury Department accepts gifts, payable to the Bureau of the Public Debt. Just mail them to the attention of Department G, Post Office Box 2188, Parkersburg, West Virginia, 26106-2188. Make a note in the memo section that it is a gift to reduce the debt held by the public.
Come on now, pony up...its the patriotic thing to do. "
whybother wrote on Nov 12, 2009 7:57 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 12, 2009 7:41 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 12, 2009 7:40 PM:
united we wish wrote on Nov 12, 2009 4:59 PM:
gonesouth wrote on Nov 12, 2009 1:22 PM:
"Liberals"?! NO WAY. There's no way a true liberal would EVER stand with these bought-and-paid-for puppets. IN so many cases, Dick Armey busses them in, and they come in with pre-made signs, handing them out to them to stand and pose with.
Like Acorn does for the Liberal's..again people need to look past parties and start electing people that want the best for the country not just their party.
You have to subscribe to the radical-RIght philosophy and emails to even be taken in by this phony "outrage". Rachel Maddow has PROVED that a lot of these demonstrations are organized and funded by a Conservative group that specifically does these kind of fake "grass roots movements" for Big Business. They are about as authentic as scripted stage performances. "
Again listen to the liberal media and this is what you hear and get. The 100 or so people from my neighborhood that attended the tea party in Cola, Sc were not bussed in by anyone. We attended due to the fact we are tired of the gov't spending. We were made up of liberal's, convservatives, dems and repubs ect. Again people need to think for themselves and stop listening to media that leans towards either side. To many sheep and not enough leaders anymore. "
owastocat wrote on Nov 12, 2009 1:01 PM:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8HeJuBcI3Y "
Farmer's Gal wrote on Nov 12, 2009 12:31 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 12, 2009 12:06 PM:
MY.
GOD.
Did you guys see Carrie Jean Prejean's utter FIASCO on Larry King last night?!?! OH MY GOD--this woman has even LESS INTEGRITY than Glenn Beck!
WHAT A FLAMING HYPOCRITE!!!
Watch her flaming meltdown here--http://rodonline.typepad.com/rodonline/2009/11/carrie-prejean-unplugs-on-larry-king-refuses-call-from-gay-viewer.html
There's a video a few scrolls down. This silicone bimbo is so completely FOS!
"The anti-gay beauty queen has apparently been caught lying about her XXX video adventures. Carrie Prejean's ex-boyfriend—the guy to whom she sent the XXX solo video—tells TMZ Carrie and company called him last week and tried getting him to 'lie' and say she was 17 when she shot the video. During an audio interview with TMZ, the man says Carrie sent him the video when they were involved with each other in 2007. He says Carrie sent him numerous explicit videos and insists the one in question was shot when she was 20."
"WWJD? The so-called "Christian" Prejean began sending XXX photos and videos to the man after knowing him only for four days. "
FOUR DAYS!!!!! FOUR DAYS!!!!
Another anti-gay hypocritical bigot goes down--CRASH AND BUUUURN, BABY!
Check this out too-- "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 12, 2009 11:44 AM:
These wingnuts--with their racist/derogatory/hateful signs seem to be the extreme-Right of the Repub/Conservative Party.
"Liberals"?! NO WAY. There's no way a true liberal would EVER stand with these bought-and-paid-for puppets. IN so many cases, Dick Armey busses them in, and they come in with pre-made signs, handing them out to them to stand and pose with.
You have to subscribe to the radical-RIght philosophy and emails to even be taken in by this phony "outrage". Rachel Maddow has PROVED that a lot of these demonstrations are organized and funded by a Conservative group that specifically does these kind of fake "grass roots movements" for Big Business. They are about as authentic as scripted stage performances. "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 12, 2009 11:37 AM:
We'll discuss it tomorrow afternoon, OK?
OK! "
gonesouth wrote on Nov 12, 2009 10:35 AM:
The NY race that has been metioned NY23 is funny. A guy gets beat by what 15% and he ran against a Dem who was backed by a Repub. Imagine if the repub party actually backed him.
Gay marriage will pass in our life times. It is just a matter of time before people wake up and realize it nothing to do with religion but civil rights. If two people want a civil marriage fine with me. Do not see how the religous aspect has so many people bent on denying basic rights to people. All I have to ask is if two men /two women get married is yours going to end? Did Massachusetts fall of the earth? Marriage has more than a religous aspect to it. It is about two people who love and care about eachother. The ring is a symbol of that commitment the two people have, it has no defined end. "
Conservative wrote on Nov 12, 2009 9:13 AM:
http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&thid=124e6d551c346aa2&mt=application%2Fpdf&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3Df9c2c91772%26view%3Datt%26th%3D124e6d551c346aa2%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&sig=AHIEtbSm021cVnocUqrGLI72kdGdF7ffOA "
movedsouth wrote on Nov 11, 2009 8:01 PM:
"maybe someone has teabagging on their mind. "
A little humor that was missed? "
movedsouth wrote on Nov 11, 2009 6:18 PM:
Bagging is not required here, but we put 30 bags out in front and they gone on the same day as trash. Neighbors have them on the street and they remain there. Bagging makes sense. "
former resident of auburn wrote on Nov 11, 2009 6:11 PM:
I don't know what the party will be called. If it's Tea Party, then I was wrong. But you know what's funnier? Those honest to goodness 'teabaggers' don't even know what that term means! I won't give a detailed description, but just ask any young person you can trust to give you an answer and not look at you like you're some kind of sicko or look it up in the 'urban dictionary'... "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 11, 2009 4:31 PM:
I'm takin' flight I said I'll never get enough
Stand tall I'm young and kinda proud
I'm on top as long as the music's loud
If you think I'll sit around as the world goes by
You're thinkin' like a fool cause it's a case of do or die
Out there is a fortune waitin' to be had
You think I'll let it go you're mad
You've got another thing comin'... "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 11, 2009 4:28 PM:
Religion is "against the Gays" so therefore...you MUST be "against the Gays", right? Even though there's pretty much irrefutable evidence that being Gay is a way that people are born?
Now before you go telling me that you believe Bronze-Aged "Biblical science' over modern findings, let me remind you that the Church was wrong about the Flat Earth, the Geocentric Theory, "bleeding" to cure diseases, Witches, the cause of Bubonic Plague--but expects you to believe in things like talking snakes and magic apples.
Now, tell me again that I'm an idiot and you're not?
How about some independent thinking, Bone? How about some empathy and compassion for people who only want to love each other and commit? What the hell does it matter to you if two people in love get married?
I see what's going on here. Religiously conservative people like you see the world going away from religion, and they see the Liberal bias in politics now, and felling frustrated, they have made the Gay population their whipping boy. An easy target. Something to take out their frustrations on. What a sad, pathetic example of the inauthentic nature and hypocrisy of your belief system.
Definitely nothing I would ever stoop to be a part of. "
chris van note wrote on Nov 11, 2009 3:58 PM:
The Bone wrote on Nov 11, 2009 3:17 PM:
abstract wrote on Nov 11, 2009 1:20 PM:
katrinaluv wrote on Nov 11, 2009 12:18 PM:
katrinaluv wrote on Nov 11, 2009 12:16 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 11, 2009 9:46 AM:
Radical-Rong Wingnut Dick Armey has started a new political party called "Liberty 1st" with the aim of supporting radical-rong, extremist, know-nothing Conservative candidates in 2010. He claims that if they had had the money, they would have thrown much of it behind COnservative Doug Hoffman in that recent NY race where Hoffman got his *** handed to him by voters.
Here you had a guy that apparently didn't know ONE THING about the local issues, but yet was trucked in and propped up by wingnuts on the Right, and voters saw through it! And Armey and his gaggle of nutbags is going to support THESE KINDS of candidates for AMerica for 2010?
I don't know whether to laugh or cry! "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 11, 2009 9:37 AM:
Isn't it funny that for years the Religious RIght whined about Homosexuals being promiscuous, and "spreading" AIDs and all, and now when they want to settle down into monogamous, committed relationships, they want to spin around on their heels and deny them that too?
Like I said, it will happen. And I will cheer for all those who will be able to commit to the ones they love, and be recognized by the States for it. "
bear wrote on Nov 11, 2009 9:19 AM:
whybother wrote on Nov 11, 2009 8:47 AM:
chris van note wrote on Nov 11, 2009 8:45 AM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 11, 2009 8:41 AM:
As usual, avoid/ignore the hard questions and mental challenges and spout unsupportable dogma. "IT'S WRONG!, IT'S WRONG!" Say it enough times til you convince yourself of it. How utterly 'Catholic" of you. YOU ARE going to watch the show about the corrupt Church and the Priest scandal, right?
You're not convincing me, nor the majority of the new voters who will make Gay Marriage a reality by 2016, I predict.
Just remember, we who laugh last, will laugh best. "
movedsouth wrote on Nov 11, 2009 8:15 AM:
I don't see anything on a Teabag Party, maybe someone has teabagging on their mind. "
The Bone wrote on Nov 11, 2009 6:01 AM:
former resident of auburn wrote on Nov 11, 2009 12:27 AM:
Who is writing the comments--about the leaves, Fort Hood, President Obama, etc...?
I only have time for one comment today--the reason we're seeing all these tragedies with our military is because they are literally TIRED. Tired of going back and forth to either Afghanistan or to Iraq. Why Bush didn't just finish the job in Afghanistan way back in 2002, I'll never understand.
Why Bush invaded Iraq is crystal clear--for their OIL. How much OIL has Bush, Cheney and their gang received yet? Yes, Bush thought he could invade Iraq, take out Saddam, and the Iraqi people would give him whatever he wanted (OIL). Cheney wanted candy and flowers. We see how well that all worked NOT.
Now some Republicans are trying to form a third party--the Teabag Party. It's being recognized already in Florida as a legitimate political party. In order to be in this party you have to be either Ultra Right Wing or out of your mind; and these people LOVE that we are at war. Iran is next on their invasion list.
How much more can our dear troops take before they either go AWOL or snap and start shooting? "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 10, 2009 11:52 PM:
THe Church covered the whole thing up, and paid hush money just as long as she wouldn't expose the Church and the priest.
Sounds like a great story of "Catholic morality". You're gonna watch it, right?! "
NoHope wrote on Nov 10, 2009 11:43 PM:
It's only a matter of time before you and your liberal j*rkoffs are run out of this country.... actually and officially, it is 1166 Days, 12 Hours, 17 Minutes, 11 Seconds until that nincompoop is run out of the White House for good! "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 10, 2009 8:09 PM:
I dare you to explain away your own hypocrisy?
Gay Marriage will happen in your lifetime and mine, because in reality, it is a "Civil Right" question, And that's the final word on it. "
Tom wrote on Nov 10, 2009 6:54 PM:
Well, actually it's because our former pres decided to start a war with Saddam instead of going after the real enemy that actually attacked the US.
If he had done that, the war in Afghanistan would likely be over and the worldwide threat of terrorism greatly diminished. "
Tom wrote on Nov 10, 2009 6:45 PM:
Not until we have the Republican party back in charge. Then it will once again be the "American" way. "
CVA62 wrote on Nov 10, 2009 5:19 PM:
Visualize this outside your front door: A noisy, fume spewing front loader, an earsplitting diesel dump truck (or two) and a crew of city workers who may not always use appropriate language picking up your piles of unbagged leaves. Or perhaps a vacuum truck with the decible level of a jumbo jet airliner.....OR....one slightly purring dump truck and two city workers tossing bagged leaves into the truck. Which would YOU rather have?
re; Fort Hood Waterboarding. No, the shooter "HAS RIGHTS" ya know.
re; Hunters. So, hunters can exercise their rights as long as it's somewhere else....correct?
re; Mr. Obama. Hey, the Prez can't be everywhere at once.
re; Voting Machines. As with anything new and basically unproven, it has bugs. Just think, your 15 to 20 minute wait not only exposed those bugs, but will help to exterminate those bugs. "
justventing wrote on Nov 10, 2009 5:09 PM:
The Bone wrote on Nov 10, 2009 4:37 PM:
The Bone wrote on Nov 10, 2009 4:29 PM:
movedsouth wrote on Nov 10, 2009 3:54 PM:
liberal karl wrote on Nov 10, 2009 3:07 PM:
Make a note of it. "
liberal karl wrote on Nov 10, 2009 3:06 PM:
Look at the margins, Bone--according to a Research 2000 poll of likely voters in Maine, voters under 30 supported Gay Marriage equality by a 14-point margin-as their anti-Gay counterparts over the age of 65 backed Question One by 15 points. 52.8 percent of Mainers had voted to repeal the state’s same-sex marriage law, versus 47.2 percent who voted to keep it.
In November of 2008, Californians voted only 52% to 48% to limit marriage to a man and a woman.
Know what that means? That means that as younger people get off the couch, and start entering the electorate in greater numbers, the vote balance will tip inexorably in favor of Gay Marriage. It's not a "moral" thing, Bone--it's simply "math".
IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME.
In every case where public policy has been predicated on religious garbage, the policy has failed or had deleterious effects on society. "Abstinence Only". "Mexico City Policy".
ERA Equal Rights Amendment. Same with the denial of Civil Rights to Gays based upon religious prejudice and bigotry.
Defend your position that I'm wrong--use the math, Bone, and uh....good luck. "
The Bone wrote on Nov 10, 2009 2:09 PM: