StrangeSox

QUOTE (vandy125 @ May 1, 2010 -> 03:55 PM) I'm pointing directly at the law, "make no law regarding an establishment of religion". I don't see how this is doing that because you can pray (or not pray) to whatever in the world or out of the world that you want. But heck, if you are your own god, give yourself a peptalk that day. I'm pointing directly to court precedent interpreting what the means. What secular or non-religious purpose does the NDoP serve?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 1, 2010 -> 02:57 PM) This guy doesn't give a flying s*** about the individual. He's a statist at best, Marxist is more likely, and deinfinitely a socialist. Only if we go with your wacky world of redefining words and what economic systems are based on a given country's political landscape at a given time. The biggest piece of legislation by far during his administration is a giant f***ing leap from even the quasi-socialism we see in just about all other Western countries. "I don't know what you mean by 'glory,'" Alice said. Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't – till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!'" "But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument,'" Alice objected. "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less." -Humpty Dumpty, Through the Looking Glass Oh and please show me anything that indicates he's a Marxist. Please.

QUOTE (vandy125 @ May 1, 2010 -> 03:47 PM) That is completely avoiding my question... You have the freedom to do whatever you want to do. If someone doesn't want to pray to whatever god they do or don't serve (he/she/it/whatever), then don't. Which religion is it establishing? What secular or non-religious purpose does NDoP serve?

QUOTE (vandy125 @ May 1, 2010 -> 03:30 PM) I'm curious, which religion is government endorsing or establishing by having a NDOP? With prayer being so general as to convey a word or thought to God or a god, you can pray to anything that you like. Whatever your god is (yourself, White Sox, sports, Athena) go right ahead. Please read this thread where it's been pointed out several times that the government isn't endorsing a specific religious sect, but is promoting religion over non-religion.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ May 1, 2010 -> 02:56 PM) So your definition of "prayer" is religious in nature? Please define non-religious or secular prayer.

hahahaha. Man, good thing we have socialized medical care now! Or at least a government single-payer system! Or a public option!

Please define non-religious or secular prayer.

Story on npr said the administration included the offshore drilling in the proposed legislation purely as a deal to get some republican support. Boo.

Is this another example of nature out to spite GOP rhetoric?

Wow, they've managed to top the bill from AZ in awfulness. Good work, Dems.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Apr 30, 2010 -> 09:34 AM) No, they didn't. They gave power to people with money and land. They designed the system so that small groups of elite could always control what was going on to protect themselves from government. They gave power to individual states to decide what worked best for them. That's why I said yesterday they'd be spinning in their graves if they knew how much government invaded everyones lives today. Good, let them spin. We shouldn't have a government run by small groups of elites.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 06:06 PM) It does? Pray to yourself. Or don't. I don't think it mandates anyone to do anything, like say, buy health insurance. It promotes prayer over non-prayer. It grants government endorsement to praying. No one said anything about a mandate.

OK and TX are considering similar bills now.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Apr 28, 2010 -> 09:42 PM) This dude should be the idol of all Cubs fans http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=7695107 guy's got an arm

LOL, that's a good one. Reminds me of surveys where most people think LG is American and Motorola is Japanese. Actual Arizona firms facing a boycott: Cold Stone Creamery, U-Haul and Best Western. Are we sure this was meant to be legitimate and not hipster irony? Package some crappy beer with that slogan and it'd sell like hotcakes in certain Chicago markets.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 12:08 PM) Back on subject...the D-Backs start a 4 game series at Wrigley this weekend. Protests appear to have been organized. M&H were talking about it this morning and offered a little bit of criticism of the bill. Their phone lines blew up but I got to work before I heard any of the callers.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 11:03 AM) That is a terrible analogy. The problem was sending him back to an oppressive communist government. Did Castro take over Mexico? So we're still cool with Cuban refugees, then?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 28, 2010 -> 10:17 PM) OK, some Kaperbole ™ aside here - it's a problem when the government eusurps anything, IMO, that's not explicit to the constitution. So, the NDoP doesn't mention any religion, nor was that its intent. Yet, there's a lot of people who are getting their noses out of joint because of this huge over-reach by our government. Yet, real over-reaches of different kinds occur every day, so why is this a big deal? It favors religion over non-religion, and that's enough to trip over the judicial hurdles.

QUOTE (The Ginger Kid @ Apr 27, 2010 -> 02:16 PM) they give rings for division championships? What about Wild Cards, are those like promise rings?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 29, 2010 -> 06:38 AM) Not quite. Fannie and Freddie weren't very private and didn't help matters much. I'll concede that point.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 28, 2010 -> 10:18 PM) Uh, yeah, with a LOT of help from our government "regulators". That's like blaming the Chicago Police for gang violence -- just because they're ineffective at stopping it doesn't make them ultimately responsible for it.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 28, 2010 -> 08:22 PM) It's clearly the private sector's fault. Greedy f***ing capitalists. GET THEM f***ERS... I'm glad to see that Obama just took over GS. Uh, yeah, it was.

First, that's how they're used, not my interpretation. More to the point, how is that analogous to violating an amendment?

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Apr 28, 2010 -> 08:21 PM) And that's ok? And then, they should do away with the first amendment. does not compute.

Well they did manage to f*** up a good majority of the world's economy.