I know, you make more than me doing it. It's the politics thread, what do you expect to happen in here? We aren't talking about girl scout cookies.
OT: Politics & News... Have at it.
- Thread starter lapin
- Start date
I know, you make more than me doing it. It's the politics thread, what do you expect to happen in here? We aren't talking about girl scout cookies.
that posts makes less sense than yours normally do.
If I complained about you posting about Iran, then fine, it might have some relevance, but I simply stated you should not worry about.
I never stated I made more nor than I made less than you. You do mention often that I am a "rich" lawyer or that I make a lot so you must be jealous somehow.
northernlou
Idi Admin
Nice one Louis 
Nah, not at all. The Ethiopian famine jokes were out before the first guy starved to death.
northernlou
Idi Admin
Trudeau taking punches from all corners
Justin Trudeau fancies himself a pugilist, but even his supporters must be wondering whether the last few rounds in the political ring haven’t left him a little punch drunk.
In case you missed it, Trudeau this week stuck to his…um…guns and refused to back Canada and its allies’ military mission to combat ISIL. Once again, Trudeau declared that Canada should instead support a robust humanitarian intervention.
To which I say: Alan Henning.
Henning was a taxi driver from Manchester who was so moved by the plight of suffering Syrian children that he went to the region to drive aid convoys. He came back in a pine box after fellow Brit Mohammed Emwazi – a.k.a. Jihadi John – cleaved off his head in a snuff video. Given that others have also lost their heads for these same “sins”, I’ll wager ISIL isn’t interested in our charity.
I’ll give Trudeau the benefit of the doubt; I don’t even think he believes what he says about humanitarian aid being the only role for Canada. He knows that aid will only reach those in need once the people who are raping, enslaving and killing them are stopped. And stopping them involves guns and bombs. Trudeau’s preference is simply for others to do that particular dirty work.
Stirring stuff, to be sure.
Trudeau’s tack to peacenik is all about finessing the left-right divide to get elected. To do that, remember, he not only has to beat Harper, he also needs to beat Mulcair, which goes a long way to explaining his recent political choices.
http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/trudeau-taking-punches-from-all-corners
Justin Trudeau fancies himself a pugilist, but even his supporters must be wondering whether the last few rounds in the political ring haven’t left him a little punch drunk.
In case you missed it, Trudeau this week stuck to his…um…guns and refused to back Canada and its allies’ military mission to combat ISIL. Once again, Trudeau declared that Canada should instead support a robust humanitarian intervention.
To which I say: Alan Henning.
Henning was a taxi driver from Manchester who was so moved by the plight of suffering Syrian children that he went to the region to drive aid convoys. He came back in a pine box after fellow Brit Mohammed Emwazi – a.k.a. Jihadi John – cleaved off his head in a snuff video. Given that others have also lost their heads for these same “sins”, I’ll wager ISIL isn’t interested in our charity.
I’ll give Trudeau the benefit of the doubt; I don’t even think he believes what he says about humanitarian aid being the only role for Canada. He knows that aid will only reach those in need once the people who are raping, enslaving and killing them are stopped. And stopping them involves guns and bombs. Trudeau’s preference is simply for others to do that particular dirty work.
Stirring stuff, to be sure.
Trudeau’s tack to peacenik is all about finessing the left-right divide to get elected. To do that, remember, he not only has to beat Harper, he also needs to beat Mulcair, which goes a long way to explaining his recent political choices.
http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/trudeau-taking-punches-from-all-corners
lecoqsportif
Well-known member
When WalMart has the higher moral ground, ya just know things are fooked.
But, it is a Red State after all.
But, it is a Red State after all.
Habs-25
Banned
He is full of $hit, as i said before he makes Mullah look like Gandi! Anytime he opens his mouth he just make things worst and make the life of Islamic Republic longer in Iran!
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
Every time the tea baggers want to pass a law restricting freedom they call it the "Freedom of (fill in the blank) Bill". I doubt that the people in favour of this religious "freedom" bill would want to extend that freedom to non-Christians, specifically Muslims. Before this one, they wanted to scrap net neutrality and give control over the internet to the big cable companies. They called that one the "Internet Freedom Bill".
northernlou
Idi Admin
Can anyone explain to me what this religious freedom act does to bring back legal discrimination, and why the outrage now after similar laws have existed in other states and federally too, for many years now?
Indiana Gov Pence has also rejected this bill since the uproar, and is calling for clearer language on the bill that wouldn't permit wanton discrimination against the gay community. If so, does that suffice?
Indiana Gov Pence has also rejected this bill since the uproar, and is calling for clearer language on the bill that wouldn't permit wanton discrimination against the gay community. If so, does that suffice?
I think in Indiana it might have allowed someone to refuse to serve same sex couples or gay, lesbian, transgendered, two spirits etc on grounds that their religion considered them abominations.
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
No it does not suffice. What would suffice is for the Governor not to have allowed the Bill to come to the floor of the state house in the first place and, failing that, to ensure that it was dead on arrival and never enacted. Instead he supported it and still does, despite what he's saying now. He's given no guarantee that the sum and substance of the bill will be changing at all.
What's needed isn't "clearer language". What's needed is this bill's absolute, complete and immediate repeal.
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou
I will get banned again soon, worry not.
It's also based on the false narrative that, unlike race, sexual orientation is a choice and not something one is born with. But even if that were true (which any sane person not blinded by religion knows it's not) the bill would still be unconstitutional. If a person "chooses" to be gay and you pass a law which states that he can be discriminated against because of that choice, then the State is favouring one group's "choice" over another's unfairly. Being a Baptist, a Jew, a Catholic, hell being religious at all is a choice. Sure, you may be born into a family of Catholics, for example, but once you reach adulthood you choose whether or not you want to remain on that path. So even if we accept the fiction that gay people are choosing to be gay, this law is saying that the choice made by one group of people is more important than respecting the choice made by another group.
But like I said, everyone outside of the Indiana Republican Party already knows that people aren't gay by choice any more than black people choose to be black. So passing laws which favour the religious CHOICES of some people to the detriment of others who are born a certain way (be they visible minorities, gay, or both) is unconstitutional in the extreme. It's a rubbish law and it's unenforceable because gay people don't walk around with the word "GAY" tattooed on their foreheads so in the end this will be about what these religious wingnuts "suspect" about a person.
I hope Indiana becomes a national pariah and loses every convention, trade show and sporting event (and all the revenue that goes with them) until someone in the State Capitol pulls their head out of their azz and kills this bill.
I do laugh at the "it is a choice" argument as I figure, given the discrimination that homosexuals still face in the world, why would anyone choose it?
northernlou
Idi Admin
I believe that's why they're looking for clearer language, to make sure no one is refused service based on sexual orientation, which isn't the intent of the law, nor possible, given existing laws that ban discrimination. You can't refuse service, a restaurant, a bakery .... what have you, to gay people. The issue based on faith, is the right to refuse catering to a gay marriage celebration and not be compelled by gov't to do so....based on religious freedom which are supposedly protected.
A lot of this is getting pretty muddled. It's a search for middle ground and some kind of balancing of rights where they may conflict, that we'll have to work our way through. The alternative being one side prevailing over the other....something contrary to any equal rights movement you'd think.
northernlou
Idi Admin
Like I said, there's a similar federal law and about 20 other state laws already on the books, and the re-wording is likely to better reflect what already exists.