The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

With our economy how it is, it's important that tax dollars are spent so that the horrible, just horrible, invasions of privacy such as this does not go on.

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/07/136063...-on-gun-safety

What if I have an adolescent who's been bullied, who's not suicidal? I don't think, under the current bill, I'm entitled to ask him if there's a gun in the home, or if he's carried a gun to school, or if he's thinking of harming someone else with a gun.

- Dr. Paul Robinson

Yep. The World is just getting better and better.

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

How is that even Constitutional? I suppose if they're government doctors, then maybe...otherwise, something about the doctors' rights to freedom of speech comes to mind. The 2nd Amendment isn't even in play.

*****http://www.itusozluk.com/img.php/fb6fff4200578cf7110c7db70cc1377626755/they%20took%20our%20jobs******
They're taking our jobs! guns!

[5mn_Major]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

How is that even Constitutional? I suppose if they're government doctors, then maybe...otherwise, something about the doctors' rights to freedom of speech comes to mind. The 2nd Amendment isn't even in play.

Thomas Jefferson has to be rolling over right now.

[unofan]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

With our economy how it is, it's important that tax dollars are spent so that the horrible, just horrible, invasions of privacy such as this does not go on.

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/07/136063...-on-gun-safety

How is that even Constitutional? I suppose if they're government doctors, then maybe...otherwise, something about the doctors' rights to freedom of speech comes to mind. The 2nd Amendment isn't even in play.

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

With our economy how it is, it's important that tax dollars are spent so that the horrible, just horrible, invasions of privacy such as this does not go on.

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/07/136063...-on-gun-safety

[bronconick]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

How'd we miss this little gem of amusement two weeks ago

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...KbjD_blog.html

All but 16 Democrats vote present on a more extreme budget than Ryan's, forcing 120 Republicans to vote against their own budget to kill it.

[Handyman]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

So he can tell us how childish and immature we are...DUH!

[Slap Shot]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Do you really think I'm going to get into a serious discussion if this issue in here...

Then why post in political threads period?

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to listen, does it make a noise?

It disturbs molecules. If "noise" is the excitation of aural sense organs in response, then by your description, no.

There are profound antinomies, but that aint one of them.

*****http://www.whyfaith.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/bartclapping.gif******

[leswp1]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to listen, does it make a noise?

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

You go on ignore, the first person I've put there in a number of years. You just have never had anything of substance to say, and I'm tired of you following me from thread to thread, attacking me without justification.

So it'll be just like before, except you won't outright state that you won't answer simple questions.

[leswp1]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Here's the least unintelligent reasoning I've heard, though it's more of a technical legal one than a moral/ethical/philisophical one. Also, there are plenty of holes to be shot through it.

Sexual orientation is not yet a protected class afforded strict scrutiny (like race/ethnicity are) under the equal protection clause, so the government need only provide a legitimate interest in order to discriminate. Essentially, the government's interest in marriage is the promotion of a family unit and the perpetuation of the species. It can regulate it in order to ensure the health of the child (no incest), to greatly reduce the liklihood of subordination or de facto slavery (polygamy), and so forth. Since gay people biologically cannot have kids together, the government can preclude such marriages since they cannot, by definition, start families.

Now, as I said, there's all sorts of holes to shoot in that. Some states, like Arizona, allow 1st cousins to marry so long as they cannot have kids (which essentially means that the women must be at least 60), so there goes the argument that it's entirely about procreation. Likewise, between adoption and in vitro fertilization, gay couples can have kids these day, so there's another strike.

Other than that, pretty much every argument against it that I've heard is based on either A)religion, B)tradition, C)bigotry, D)all of the above.

That is actually pretty interesting.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Oh quit waffling on about poor abused you. There can be no discourse when one side (ie YOU) will never present it. Or in the case of the last time you did (to defend creationism) post it then ignore corrections.

What's that phrase? Put up or shut up? Why don't you just do the latter instead of trying to claim some philosophical high ground for ignoring requests to back up what you said.

You go on ignore, the first person I've put there in a number of years. You just have never had anything of substance to say, and I'm tired of you following me from thread to thread, attacking me without justification.

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Maybe you think that's a fine way of having discourse. I don't.

Oh quit waffling on about poor abused you. There can be no discourse when one side (ie YOU) will never present it. Or in the case of the last time you did (to defend creationism) post it then ignore corrections.

What's that phrase? Put up or shut up? Why don't you just do the latter instead of trying to claim some philosophical high ground for ignoring requests to back up what you said.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The 112th Congress - The first Orange-American to be elected Speaker

Or you could answer les' question. Maybe I'm mocking you because you pretend to be above all that you're against, yet, in the end (just like everyone else) you really are what you don't want to be. We're all narrow minded people who don't want our opinions changed. Sometimes you get mocked for them and sometimes you get to mock others.

Kepler's the smart aleckiest of them all who'd condescend anyone just to make himself feel more important (just like Old Pio), so I find it hilarious that you think he knows how to discuss things. You have to dig through 15 layers of grandeur and self importance to get to the crux of what he's saying (which is almost always calling someone an idiot using various latin phrases). And I agree with him more often than not!

Admitting your mocking is at least a first step. Maybe you think that's a fine way of having discourse. I don't. I don't think I'm above anybody, but if folks are going to attack me, I'll certainly either push back or tune out. Old Pio can be pretty harsh on things, but no more harsh than a lot of folks who you chime in with regularly and who you never say a word about. That's what's such a crock around here. You and others only call out those who you disagree with on issues for being a certain way, but give a total free pass to folks on your side of the argument that are every bit as bad or worse. Pot, meet kettle.

On Kepler, if you paid closer attention, you'd notice that he discusses things differently with myself than he does with, say, Old Pio. Kepler and I have gone back and forth on this board for quite a number of years, so I think we realize that we disagree on a lot of things, but both of us respect where the other comes from and we don't have a lot of the yapping that maybe he has with someone harsher, like Old Pio.