Archive for the ‘debate’ Category

How about some REAL news please?

This was born of a discussion on Facebook.

It is important for the people who live in the White House (whoever they are) to be able to take a break, just like everyone else. They work harder than us, have more responsibility than us, and more stress than us – their vacations should reflect that. Mrs. O said that we should visit the gulf-while she was there, so ‘yet they go to Maine’ isn’t really relevant they were there, and do you think that was really relaxing for them? {Not to mention the fact that they got grief for that trip too click here for that story} Being in the gulf shows the effort to make that connection – no, and I mean NO government official has anything in common with the ‘average’ American, they live differently, they have to in the case of the first family’s case.

And the Bush’s don’t own the part of Africa that the American people paid for Laura and daughters took a safari in 07′ That seems ‘insensitive’ in a time of war to me.

Where is/was the outrage over the lack of sensitivity over declaring “Mission Accomplished’ when it was so obviously not? Where is the outrage when Palin spend inordinate amounts of campaign money on clothes? Where is the outrage when the Repub’s were creating un-needed fear by making up ‘death panels”? Where is the outrage over denying rights to gay and lesbians? Where is the outrage over all the ridiculous party of NO? Stop acting like children please elected officials (on both sides, though the right seems a bit more belligerent about it) and work together!

With all the other issues going on in our country and the world Mrs. O’s trip to Spain is NOT NEWS – it is an opportunity (and Repub’s can’t seem to pass them up, no matter how trivial) to criticize. If the same effort was put into legislating I bet we could get a lot accomplished.



Six states ban Athiests from holding public office

Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Maryland, and North Carolina  ban, in their state constitutions, atheists from holding office. This is directly at odds with the UNITED STATES of AMERICA constitution. This is at the very basic level of the seperation of church and state.

Here is Rachel Maddow explaining and exploring this issue as it has come up in North Carolina:

What do you think about this?

The Gay Marriage Post

The “Sanctity of marriage”, really? That‘s your argument? Weak. Have you been seen what marriages look like in contemporary America? Wait let me adjust your glasses – there’s your problem, they were set for 1950, check it out now and tell me what you see. Divorce runs rampant through our society, what else you got? The Bible says? Do you do everything the Bible says? yes you say okay well what about the treatment of women in the Bible? They are property and baby-makers according to most of the Bible. If you trim your side whiskers you’re to be put to death? (I’m on the run from that one right now) You aren’t supposed to touch the skin of a pig. There are lots of ridiculous rules that are in the Bible.

Now don’t get me wrong, the Bible is an important piece of writing – regardless of your belief in the content.

But the simple answer to this argument is this: SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. Churches enjoy all sorts of tax breaks and such for this same reason. Religion and Government should not mix – they already do too much as it is [thanks W]. You think it’s ‘icky’ – too bad, I don’t like seeing people suck face in public either but you don’t have to watch. If you are against gay marriage then don’t marry one. Fourteen states (including Maine and hopefully it will stay that way) ‘legalized’ gay marriage. ‘Legalized’ – it is a sad commentary that it was even an issue to begin with. Our neighbors, Canada and Mexico, have no problem with it. Eighteen countries in Europe have no problem with it, and neither does South Africa. Click here for a detailed list.

Why is it any of your business really? People can love whoever they want. It has no bearing on your life except that which you invent. Get over it. There are a huge amount of rights that come with marriage – rights that one group of people are being denied. The conservatives go on and on about patriotism and blah blah but they are the biggest opponents of this FREEDOM. Remember this word? Merriam-Webster defines Freedom as such:

1 : the quality or state of being free: as a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another.

Let’s examine this definition: “constraint in choice or action” “liberation from . . . restraint” well, well, well – this is pretty obvious don’t you think? This can be applied quite literally and liberally (no pun intended) to what is happening with gay marriage. Their choices are constrained, they’re lives are being subject to restraint.

The commercials that are running are an amalgamation of hyperbole and lies. They state that gay marriage “will be taught in schools, whether you like it or not” – it is already mentioned in some schools and, like now, parents can opt out of health class. I don’t understand how they can get away with blatant lies.

What I think it boils down to is fear: of difference and change. My advice – grow up, the only constant is change – I know it’s cliche but it’s true. Why stress over things that don’t concern you and that you have no business trying to change. “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” doesn’t this include marrying the person you love?

Respect and Censorship

(This post is not about healthcare but the first paragraph does mention it – if you want to get to the issue I’m focusing on scroll down to the red header.)

I respect your opinion, I respect your right to disagree with me. I do hope that your disagreement can be formulated in a cohesive manner that does not parrot slogans or blind obedience to a group. I have heard people speak of their hatred for our current president. I have heard stories of people saying “If Obama is for it, I’m against it,” without even knowing what “it” is. This I do not respect. Back up your beliefs/opinions with personal reasons – this leads to debate, which can, and I stress can, lead to compromise. This dialogue is what is missing from current debates. I have attended meetings and rally’s about the health care issue – I am unimpressed with the people who do not want change, or those who are against the proposed change due to their lack of ability to formulate why they are against it, their unwillingness to suggest changes of their own, and lack of respect for those who are working for/towards what they believe in.
There is a new debate – one that won’t be as long lasting I think because the event happens next Tuesday, 9/8/09.

The newest thing that has gotten my attention:
I saw a poll on Facebook: Should the United States President be allowed to do a nationwide address to our children at school, without prior parental consent? this is a ridiculous question designed to stir up or stoke anti-Obama sentiment. Since when has presidential speeches been banned from schools? Are you so insecure in your own beliefs that you don’t want your child to hear what the President of the United States has to say?! This is remarkable for two reasons.
One, people really want to censure the president? These same people who let kids watch and listen to whatever they want on TV and Ipods? How does this idea even make any sense to someone – if you are reading this and would vote yes on this poll I sincerely want to know the reasoning behind that decision and if I respond you can be assured that it will be respectful.
Two, this is why you should talk to your kids. This is the perfect opportunity to discuss what you believe, what the other side of the argument is and discuss the issue with your child. Unless the aim is to pump out a robot that believes exactly what you tell them to and is devoid of any means of thinking for themselves – you know, they may agree with your opinion, they are your child. This is a free country – the thought that the President addressing the children of America is wrong,

“Pat Waite, an unsuccessful Republican candidate for San Jose city council, summed it up nicely in his statement to the San Jose Mercury News:

I may not agree with a lot of what he’s doing, but come on, he’s the president of the United States and his words ought to carry some import. It’s kind of ironic that the president wants to talk to the schoolchildren about the importance [of] staying in school and people are going to protest by pulling their kids out of school.” (And yes that is a correct example of irony)

Pat Waite brings up another good point – the subject matter. He is going to be talking about the importance of education and staying in school – what a terrible message to be sending to upcoming generations right? (please note the heavy sarcasm there) Where is the danger in this message? Someone, please tell me!

I just don’t understand the concern, he is going to address students about the importance of getting an education and staying in school. What is so outrageous about that? I would certainly agree with you if the focus were going to be the war in Afghanistan or the health care debate – that would be a real cause for concern in my book, but to urge kids to stay in school and receive an education seems appropriate for back to school and as a positive role for a very large public figure (regardless if you agree with him on other issues).
I would certainly commend George W. or Cheney if they were going to make a similar speech to students, and I agree with very few (read as ‘none’) of their political positions.

More on this story here:

%d bloggers like this: