A petition with nearly 700 signatures; hecklers who had to be called to order; religious leaders with conflicting views; elected officials invoking parental rights; an ACLU lawyer invoking the law; and school board members whose comments included terrorists, psychotics and recreational sex; all made for a dramatic public comment period at the school board meeting in Harford County on Monday, April 26, 2010.
At issue was a recent HCPS decision to lift the schools’ internet filter on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Web sites. The impetus was a letter to HCPS from the ACLU, saying that the categorical filtering of LGBT sites was unlawful. From stakeholders, there was passion on both sides, with some thanking the school board for swift and just action, and others calling to bring back the ban.
Here is ACLU letter:
Before the public had their say, the school board amended their agenda to include a PowerPoint presentation explaining the rationale for lifting the filter in late January.
Clearly, HCPS got wind of the public turnout in advance, possibly thanks to an e-mail sent by Maryland State Delegate Rick Impallaria rallying support for the ban.
School Board Attorney Patrick Spicer offered background, citing the federal Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), which requires that sites containing obscenity, child pornography or content harmful to minors be filtered. Spicer said that HCPS continues to block such content. But he also pointed to state law and HCPS policies against discrimination based on sexual orientation, saying they were the reason the filter was lifted on LGBT sites not proscribed by CIPA. The LGBT filter was lifted on January 29, 2010.
In response to a request from The Dagger, HCPS said they could not provide a list of the newly unblocked sites, because of the nature of the filtering service. But here’s one site that was previously blocked, which The Dagger has confirmed is now accessible.
Spicer also explained that parents can decline internet access for their students by signing a form at the beginning of each school year, and parents can opt in or out at any time. But, he said that selective access to the internet was not practical to enforce, “It’s all or nothing.”
Drew Moore, director of information technology, later added that blocking different sites depending on the student would require the system’s nearly 40,000 students to have a separate profile, which would make selective access unmanageable.
School Board President Mark Wolkow asked how students would be impacted if their parents opted out of internet access. Superintendent Robert Tomback replied that students would not be penalized, because other types of research materials are available.
Next came the public’s turn to speak:
Reverend Lisa Ward, from the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Harford County, said that when she found out about the block, “I was shocked.” She thanked the board for their decision to lift the filter, “Thank you for doing the right thing.” She also said that HCPS allowed access to sites that condemned homosexuality, “HCPS doesn’t have the right to teach my children discrimination.”
Sara Waldron said that she had trouble carrying out a 9th grade assignment, which was to research a controversial issue. She said she had tried to get statistics on gay marriage but was blocked, while friends who were doing research against gay marriage had access to information.
Lauren Rogers, a graduate of Havre de Grace High, said she started an LGBT club while she was in high school, but didn’t have access to resources relevant to the club. She thanked the board for their decision.
Gary Ambridge declared “I call this the end of censorship in HCPS.” More of his comments are posted in the forum section here on The Dagger.
Joseph Smith thanked the board, saying he was an openly gay man, “We’re made in the image of God and I don’t think God makes mistakes.”
Fallston High School parent John Soos came out publicly as a gay man, telling the school board what he said his children already knew: “My children have a gay father”.
Ken Youngman, representing a group called “One Nation Under God”, presented a petition with 692 signatures and called for the board to reinstall the filter until parents could vote on whether or not the ban should continue. “Stick to the basic education issues” he told the school board “Leave the moral ones to us”.
Charles Hicks, a deacon at St. Mark’s Church in Fallston said ‘We have just been beaten to death…by the notion of tolerance and intolerance… as if to speak out against something we believe intensely against is intolerant.” He urged the board to allow access to Web sites based on what the majority of parents find acceptable.
Delegate Rick Impallaria, who is also a HCPS parent, told the board, “I don’t buy the intolerance argument.” He said morals were up to the parents and not to the school board. He suggested that students gain access to LGBT sites by opting in. “Human sexuality outside of reproduction really doesn’t belong in the school system, in my opinion.” Impallaria said sites that discriminate either for or against homosexuality should be blocked and “When a child has a problem, go to the guidance counselor, not the computer.”
Heckling began as Impallaria neared the end of his remarks, with calls for the time limit to be enforced and someone calling out “What are you talking about?”
Delegate Pat McDonough was up next, saying he was “seeing a lack of tolerance”, which prompted some more heckling.
McDonough responded, “Tolerance is a two-way street” But he said his main concern was the process. “We need to be fair and deliberate.” He said the board “quickly caved in” by unblocking the sites without stakeholder involvement, which he contrasted with the handling of Drama Therapy, a controversial program at Havre de Grace High School. “Why are we moving so quickly on this particular issue, is it because it’s politically correct?” He said stakeholders could come up with solutions that comply with the law.
Nine-year-old Maggie Jones took to the microphone to thank the school board” “It’s the right choice to let anybody go on.”
Candidate for Harford County executive Stephen Wright, who identified himself as the president of the Route 40 Republican Club, asked “Why are these Web sites necessary for the curriculum?” He asked if Christians and Jews would have to defend their religious beliefs about homosexual conduct and questioned whether a religious debate belonged in the schools. He asked the board to eliminate such issues from the curriculum and reconsider their decision, ending with “We should all tolerate each other in this world”
Last to speak on the topic was attorney Allison Harper, whose letter on behalf of the ACLU sparked the lifting of the LGBT ban. She said she had been brought into the issue at the request of community members. “I want to thank you for your rapid, positive and just response to the community.” She thanked the school board for their action, citing federal law in some detail, and adding that the Supreme Court had warned against letting negative reactions infringe on the constitutional rights of others.
Reaction from the Harford School Board
Board members voiced support for the school system’s action, although their reasons varied.
“It really doesn’t matter what we think… this is codified in federal and state law.” said Board Member John Smilko. But he added to Ms. Harper, “I have a low opinion of the ACLU…What I see here a demand for selective tolerance”. He said the ACLU was “all for terrorists” and “very anti-Christian”. That prompted another round of heckling, (“Are you elected?”), which prompted several calls for order from Board President Mark Wolkow. Smilko later said he apologized for losing his temper, but said he stood by his points.
Board Member Leonard Wheeler’s wide-ranging remarks started with support for following the law, but then invoked Hitler’s Germany and the Rev. Jim Jones, whom he said also had laws that people obeyed. He noted that within families there were “alcoholics, lesbians, homosexuals of all kinds, psychotics and pedophiles, they live among us” and said they should be protected. He discussed movie censorship, but drew a contrast: “This is education” adding that students should be exposed to knowledge. As for sexuality, he said there was a need to be honest: “Sex is…no longer just procreational, but recreational.” he said the question was “How do we handle it?” Wheeler concluded, “Even if the law was not out there, it would be the right thing to do.”
Board President Mark Wolkow said that the school system acted correctly, but lifting the filters was a non-issue. He said that HCPS had not been in compliance with the law, and acted to get into compliance. “I don’t see any reason why the school system would turn around and flaunt the law… We would lose that battle and it would cost the taxpayers in Harford County money”. He concluded, “I hope for Harford County this issue is done”, adding that anyone who had concerns about the law could go to their elected representatives and try to get the law changed.
Wow, just wow. Can’t wait for the board elections. Not because of this issue either. Filtering LGBT sites is the least of our children’s concern when we have board members who can’t even conduct themselves in a proper manner for their positions at board meetings.
I think it is ironic, to say the least, for Stephen Wright to end his presentation by stating, “We should all tolerate each other in this world” when his whole presentation belied tolerance. Perhaps if he would actually review some of these web pages, such as the GLSEN site cited by Mrs. Mumby in her excellent article, he would see that he need not rail.
The purpose of GLSEN taken from its home page is: “GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, is the leading national education organization focused on ensuring safe schools for all students. Established in 1990, GLSEN envisions a world in which every child learns to respect and accept all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression. GLSEN seeks to develop school climates where difference is valued for the positive contribution it makes to creating a more vibrant and diverse community.” This site certainly teaches tolerance.
As far as Mr. Smilko’s very unprofessional behavior is concerned, he should step down from his post. It is clear he does not have the objectivity and forbearance needed by someone is this sensitive and critical position.
Harford County Public Schools removed the filter blocking some pro homosexual websites on their computer system. One of these unblocked sites is the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which was founded by Kevin Jennings, who is now President Obama’s Safe Schools Czar. Google Kevin Jennings and determine for yourself, how qualified he is to keep our schools, and your children, safe. Mr. Jennings wrote the forward for the book, Queering Elementary Education, and in that forward he mentions, as one of his idols, Harry Hay, who was a strong proponent of the North American Man Boy Love Association, or NAMBLA.
GLSEN has a recommended reading list on their website and I would encourage any parent with a child in public school to check out the books that GLSEN recommends for 7th through 12th grades. Parents need to Google the titles of the books on their recommended reading list and get a full picture of what your child can now access from their school computers. To see where this newly opened door will lead our school system, check out http://www.massresistance.org . Click on “Assault on children in the schools” to see where our school system is heading.
The leaders of our school system sought no input from the parents of their students in this matter. I guess they consider themselves better qualified to determine what is, or isn’t, morally appropriate for our children.
To say that they were following “the law” is a weak argument. Why wasn’t filtering out the anti homosexual websites an option? If being anti homosexual is discrimination, why does the school system continue to allow access to the anti homosexual websites?
Alas you fail to understand input or no input the school system was breaking the law. THey had no option but to comply or face a big lawsuit!
have you ever heard of …”in loco parentis” in leu of parents. the school every right to block whatever it wants ,just as we ,as parents, do.
mike public schools do not operate in loco parentis to that degree. It is limited by a few supreme court rulings notably WVBOE v Barnette (1947) and Tinker v Des Moines (1969). Kids do not shed their rights at the door.
“GLSEN’s own curriculum guides for teachers advise them to – without parental knowledge or consent – question their students on the validity of their religious upbringing. Their tactics are to create an atmosphere where any objection to the practice of homosexuality (no matter how legitimate, loving, or reasoned that objection might be) is perceived as a threat of violence, and therefore must be dealt with by the school through disciplinary action. If that isn’t bullying into silence, I don’t know what is”.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=823610
I see Mr. Galt is very selective in his examples of GLSEN. One must consider the whole site. If he would have heard Mr. Mark Wolkow’s presentation, he would realize that our school board is merely following state and federal law. Does Mr. Galt advocate that we should flaunt the law? As Dr. Wheeler stated, “Even if the law was not out there, it would be the right thing to do.”
It is evident that Mr. Galt is a short-sighted homo-phobic rube who is afraid that gays and lesbians are going to take over the world. The web-site he cites is ridiculous in its fear-mongering.
It is amazing that there are so many adults in Harford County who are intolerant of others and are creating an issue/debate about something that their children care very little about.
The idea that because these sites are being unblocked means that they are being incorporated into the curriculum is misguided. If you want to start blocking sites that are promoting a certain group’s ideas or ideals, then I guess HCPS needs to block any and all religious sites as well as any political sites. We don’t want our children to be exposed to the evils of christianity or the unfounded views of the republicans/democrats.
HCPS has a nondiscrimination policy. It specifically addresses sexual orientation. Federal law states that the sites can not be blocked. McDonough is still upset about the reaction to the Drama Therapy issue. It has nothing to do with this. The parents in Havre de Grace were demanding immediate action on that issue. The community members on this issue took their time and put together a good case to address the issue. They were able to cet the assistance of Allison Harper who did research and found out exactly what was going on before sending the letter to the school board.
It IS refreshing to see that there were a number of people who were supportive of the school board’s decision. It’s just frustrating that there are ehough uneducated and intolerant prople out there to raise a fuss and make this an issue
wow; For me to be homophobic, I would have to fear (phobic) homosexuality (homo). Not so. I, along with many others, see homosexuality as a sexual sin, just like adultry, pedophilia, beastility, etc. One is no worse than the other, it’s just that homosexuals look to gain mainstream acceptance as an alternative lifestyle. To do this, they must silence me and indoctrinate my children.
A person is going to believe as they will. Legislating morality can’t be done and forcing acceptance of what we know to be immoral, doesn’t change the facts.
I’m free to believe as I will. The first amendment applies to me, just as it does GLSEN. The school board shouldn’t have a say about either.
and I see you as amoron but you are allowed to speak!
they are not legislating morality simply not censoring material. No one is teaching students to go home and become “gay.” No one is using this GSLEN curriculum. SImply allowing it to be acceptable like many other websites out there!
What you consider a front to your religious beliefs is just that – YOUR beliefs. Keep your beliefs in your church and out of our public schools.
You seem to want the freedom to believe and act the way you want to while silencing others who you believe to be sinful. Not everyone shares YOUR religious beliefs.
You are trying to force your morals on others. The school board’s action is just making sure that everyone has access. (They are NOT changing curriculum or adding pro-GBLT ideas into the curriculum)
You can profess to not be homo-phobic, but the links you’ve posted and what you are saying speak volumes for your real thoughts.
My religious beliefs hold that homosexual sex is a sin. Am I allowed to express this, and if I’m not, isn’t that discrimination against me?
Google “fistgate” and tell me about Jennings and GLSEN.
Why, once again, does any of this belong in schools?
You can express it but you also say that we must all accept this as fact and alas we don’t all agree.
Mr. Galt’s beliefs notwithstanding, he should realize that modern people can differentiate the historical bible from the living bible. Does he also believe the following?
• “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be submissive to their own husbands in everything.” (Ephesians 5:22-24)
• “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.” (I Corinthians 14:34-35)
• “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” Timothy 2:11-12
• “However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.” (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
• “When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
• “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)
You can’t have it both ways Mr. Galt. There are parts of the bible no thinking person would lay claim to. Which are you?
1 Cor 6:9 “Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals”
1 Tim 1:9-10 “realizing the fact that (civil) law is not made for a righteous man, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers”
Rom 1:26-27 “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.”
Your questioning my beliefs and that is good. If I were a shallow minded person, who bought ideas from whomever spoke them, I wouldn’t be any more right or wrong. Beliefs are what we believe and were free to do so. You believe I’m wrong and I believe your wrong, except now, my belief will be labeled hate speech and intolerant, while your belief will be labeled politically correct and be protected by law.
Once again, where does this belong in school?
Mr. Galt,
Tolerance and acceptance of others is what belongs in school.
You can quote your bible all you want. It doesn’t make you right more “right” than people who choose to have other beliefs or ideals.
I don’t actually believe that you’re wrong, I just don’t agree that it is your place (or the school board/government’s place) to tell people/students/parents what they should or should not believe.
Your original post #2 above is an example of fear-mongering and obviously intended to creat the feeling that our school system is headed in a direction that will be promoting a homosexual lifestyle. This simply isn’t true. The school board is adjusting the internet filter so as not to discriminate against sexual orientation which is in line with the HCPS nondiscriminatory policy as well as federal law.
Is is people like you who are making an issue of it because you feel that your own belief system should be forced upon everyone else around you. It is egotistical and arrogant of you to thing your own ideals trump the ideas of others…especially when you live in a free society and are using the first amendment to back up your argument.
I seem to recall that it was an intolerant mindset that gave us the Spanish Inquisition in 1492. They believed they were doing the work of God also.
The only thing I would say is:”And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” Matthew 25:40. These are words with which we all can live.
Horrible things have happened in the name of religion. I wasn’t there in 1492.
The verse you quote above is about helping others when they are in need. I dont get anything about overlooking sin out of it. What am I missing?
You speak of an “intolerant mindset”. That’s a subjective phrase. Who determines what should be tolerated, you? Me? A group?
Well that’s the problem, Mr. Galt.
You started this discussion by demonstrating that YOU believe that YOUR ideas are the ones that should be tolerated…and not that of others.
You seem to be speaking out of both sides of your mouth now.
You want to subject others to YOUR views, while not allowing yourself to tolerate the views of others.
Again — Egotism and arrogance.
Wow –
While I don’t approach this subject from religious perspective and certainly those that do are entitled to their personal views as are those folks that approach this from secular beliefs on sexual preferential choice.
The issue I see is whether schools should promote passively or actively any ideology and I believe schools should not be in a position to promote, defend or attack leaving these matters to parents to decide.
Joe
Joe,
I don’t see how this is representative of the schools actively/passively promoting anything.
With that logic, by allowing internet access at all, they are promoting ANY ideas/ideals/morals …that are available online — Including access to the media, political and religious viewpoints, etc…
Isn’t access to varying information what allows our students to learn and develop independent decision making skills. Parents have the option to not allow their students access to the school’s internet.
This information is out there. Period. It IS up to the parents to decide what/how their children see it. If the moral education isn’t started at home, it doesn’t matter what sites at school are blocked or unblocked.
It bottom line is that the school board does not have the legal right to restrict access to these sites. It is not their place to do so. It is up to the parents to actively promote their own ideology to their own children. Not dictate what the schools can and can not allow access to the children of other people.
Why is this even a debate?
People like Mr. Galt remind me why I choose to raise my children without the influence of religion as much as possible. They should do what is right because there are consequences of their actions. No one should make decisions for them. If one of my children decides to live a homosexual relationship, I would not fully approve, but I would also make sure he was properly informed of all the risks and lifestyle issues that he would be faced with. We can not live our children’s lives, but we should make sure they can make informed decisions and find support in the world rather than ridicule.
The school system will now be helping you to teach your children “what is right”. Raising your children without the influence of religion is impossible. Your religion looks to be agnostic, humanism or athiest and is a religion just as much a Christianity, Hindu, Buddhism, etc.
A LBGT lesson plan, from GLSEN (they don’t want to influence curriculum :o)http://www.glsen.org/binary-data/GLSEN_ATTACHMENTS/file/000/001/1446-2.pdf
Did I ridicule homosexuality? Please point out where I’ve done this.
John,
You are posting lesson plans that are not being used by teachers in Harford County Public Schools. If you can document where in any HCPS curriculum teachers are implementing lesson plans from GLSEN, please let us know. (Maybe you have inside information the rest of us do not have)
Otherwise, your links to these sites are nothing more than an attempt to stir up fear among people who don’t know any better than to think that what you are saying is true.
There is nothing wrong with educating people about homosexuality or its history. I would not even protest this being part of sex education in health class. A public school would probably never go for this though and the issue is not whether Harford county is teaching our kids to be homosexuals. The lesson plan you linked looks like it is creating awareness of gay and lesbian people’s struggles for acceptance. Just like a similar lesson plan would teach about women’s struggle to get the vote, or African American struggles for desegregation. As for your ridicule, it is implied in every word you type.
I make up my own way as I go through life based on choice vs consequences, not by fear of damnation. You should try it sometime.
My ridicule is implied in every word I type? Totally subjective statement. Maybe you infer ridicule on my part because you’ve already judged me. How else could you read into my words for hidden meaning?
You’ve bought into the mainstream, politically correct idea that fairness and acceptance is human nature and if won’t be given, it will be legislated. Humanity, myself included, is broken and can do no good thing apart from God. You preach to me and accuse me of preaching to you. I have no fear of damnation because of the message of the cross. Choice vs. consequences is humanities version of a loving God, a father who loves his children enough to let them live their lives as they wish.
If I’m so wrong, why was prop 8 voted down in California in 2008? In California, of all places?
True we can be intolerant of people with receeding hairlines and bad oral hygene if we want!
I noticed John Galt did not answer the question if he believes in slavery and abusing women. I don’t believe he does, but the point is we do not follow every decree or law that the Bible commands. That is because we live in the twenty-first century which is a far different place than the place that existed when the Bible was written. Since we can interpret the Bible through our modern eyes and reject the part about slavery and abusing women that is no longer applicable today, so too can we reject the verses Mr. Galt seems to remember.
He can counter-quote all the Bible verses he likes and that does not change the fact that we are selective in how we read the Bible. What we should never forget is that Christ taught us to love ALL of his creatures, not just the ones that Mr. Galt approves.
Having studied the bible in depth, it being sacred to me, I try not to fault those who pull out random verses to justify their beliefs. If I believe that the Bible is the living, breathing word of God, it would make sense that I look deeply into it, yes?
Laws in the Bible covered civic, moral and worship/atonement issues. Civic laws and worship laws were changed by the message of the Cross, while moral laws remained. To verify this, see which laws flowed from the old to the new testament, unchanged. A “slave”, in those days, was a person who contracted themselves to a “master”, their labor being traded for room and board. A person on welfare today, would be considered a slave of that time.
And, yes, Christ taught us to love others. He told us that the world would know us by our love for each other. He also taught us that the world will hate us, but to remember that the world hated Him first. If I believe that homosexuality is a sin, wouldn’t it be an act of love to speak to that, or, would it be an act of love to go along to get along?
As I’ve said already, love the sinner but hate the sin.
But the point is you are asking everyone to ccept your moral judgements as absolute in a society where not everyone agrees with your moral code! You are forcing your religous values on someone else. Acceotance is acknowledging you disgree but respecting someone elses right to disagree. That is the rule of law in this country.
I have seen no love from your side as of yet.
Sorry my patience for the intolerant christian jihadists is low!
“That is the rule of law in this country.” you don’t have to by law respect anyone, in fact you can lawfully disrespect others.
You can but you must allow them to disagree and let them have their right to disagree!
Yadid says: “A “slave”, in those days, was a person who contracted themselves to a “master”, their labor being traded for room and board. A person on welfare today, would be considered a slave of that time.”
Alas, Yadid, there were slaves in those days as there are today. It was a common institution in Roman days, and since Christ and his followers were Jews and much more likely to be a slave than own one, they did understand the institution. In fact, it was so common that the Romans even had laws governing how they were to be treated and what their rights were. The bible quote, I feel, just reflects this. Some examples are:
“As the empire changed, and social conditions along with it, the spread of slavery slowed and eventually was transformed. The Christian church and its policies regarding bondage helped alter the conditional mindset of the populace, despite the fact that it and its priest often owned slaves as well.´ http://www.unrv.com/culture/roman-slavery.php
“The original power of life and death over a slave, which Gaius considers to be a part of the Jus Gentium, was limited by a constitution of Antoninus, which enacted that if a man put his slave to death without sufficient reason (sine causa), he was liable to the same penalty as if he had killed another man’s slave. The Constitution applied to Roman citizens and to all who were under the Imperium Romanum (Gaius, I.52, &c.). The same Constitution also prohibited the cruel treatment of slaves by their masters, by enacting that p1037if the cruelty of the master was intolerable, he might be compelled to sell the slave; and the slave was empowered to make his complaint to the proper authority (Senec. de Benef. III.22). A Constitution of Claudius enacted that if a man exposed his slaves, who were infirm, they should become free; and the Constitution also declared that if they were put to death, the act should be murder (Suet. Claud. 25). It was also enacted (Cod. 3 tit. 38 s11) that in sales or division of property, slaves, such as husband and wife, parents and children, brothers and sisters, should not be separated.” penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Servus.html
GARY, “A “slave”, in those days, was a person who contracted themselves to a “master”, their labor being traded for room and board. A person on welfare today, would be considered a slave of that time.”
What does the welfare recipient trade in return for welfare payments back to the government?
I guess you are nor aware of welfarm reform. Welfare rules now:
Require most recipients to work within two years of receiving assistance,
Limit most assistance to five years total, and
Let states establish “family caps” to deny additional benefits to mothers for children born while the mothers are already on public assistance.
And who was it that got this through congress?
GARY again what does the welfare recipient trade in return for welfare payments back to the government?
Oscar: Trade? Do you think when someone is on TEMPORARY welfare it is some kind of barter. A better question is what big business trades for corporate welfare that costs us much more.
Oscar: You still have not answered my question: who initiated those caps on welfare?
But Gary, what does the welfare recipient trade in return for welfare payments back to the government?
I guess he “trades in” starvation and sleeping on the streets. Since you do not know, or refuse to acknowledge, who put the caps on welfare, I’ll tell you: it was Bill Clinton.
WE just all need to get along! My gosh all the good folks from the left side of the aisle want is for us to recognize homosexuality as normal. What’s so hard about that? It is normal isn’t it?
Yes it is. Just as normal as being left handed.
It may be relatively common, but normal? Unless Dr. Ambridge, famed geneticist, you’ve found the gene for sexual preference?
Here are two articles to start with:
The science of desire: The search for the gay gene and the biology of behavior.
Hamer, Dean H.; Copeland, Peter
New York, NY, US: Simon & Schuster. (1994). 272 pp.
Abstract
In “The Science of Desire,” [the author] explains the thinking behind his study [of a gene marker linked to male homosexuality], how the experiments were actually carried out, and what the discovery means. [This book] expands on [the author’s] history-making research to explore the scientific, social, and ethical issues raised by his findings. He explains why the old “nature versus nurture” dichotomy is a false one, why the discovery of a genetic link doesn’t mean that everyone with the gene will be gay or that everyone who is gay has the gene, and how the gene might act through personality traits such as independence and self-reliance. Dr. Hamer also addresses such tough questions as whether it would be possible or ethical to test in utero for the gay gene and whether genetic manipulation could or should be used to alter a person’s sexuality; how a gay gene could have survived evolution; and why the discovery of this 1st genetic link to a human behavior is so important for the future of genetic research—and of mankind. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved)
Gene- and Environment-Dependent Neuroendocrine Etiogenesis of Homosexuality and Transsexualism
G. Dörner, Ingrid Poppe, F. Stahl1, J. Kölzsch2, R. Uebelhack3
1 Institute of Experimental Endocrinology, Humboldt University Medical School (Charité), Berlin/Germany
2 Department of Dermatology, Humboldt University Medical School (Charité), Berlin/Germany
3 Department of Psychiatry, Humboldt University Medical School (Charité), Berlin/Germany
Summary
Sexual brain organization is dependent on sex hormone and neurotransmitter levels occurring during critical developmental periods. The higher the androgen levels during brain organization, caused by genetic and/or environmental factors, the higher is the biological predisposition to bi- and homosexuality or even transsexualism in females and the lower it is in males. Adrenal androgen excess, leading to heterotypical sexual orientation and/or gender role behavior in genetic females, can be caused by 21-hydroxylase deficiency, especially when associated with prenatal stress. The cortisol (F) precursor 21-deoxycortisol (21-DOF) was found to be significantly increased after ACTH stimulation in homosexual as compared to heterosexual females. 21-DOF was increased significantly before and even highly significantly after ACTH stimulation in female-to-male transsexuals. In view of these data, heterozygous and homozygous forms, respectively, of 21-hydroxylase deficiency represent a genetic predisposition to androgen-dependent development of homosexuality and transsexualism in females. Testicular androgen deficiency in prenatal life, giving rise to heterotypical sexual orientation and/or gender role behavior in genetic males, may be induced by prenatal stress and/or maternal or fetal genetic alterations. Most recently, in mothers of homosexual men — following ACTH stimulation — a significantly increased prevalence of high 21-DOF plasma values and 21-DOF/F ratios was found, which surpassed the mean + 1 SD level of heterosexual control women. In homosexual men as well – following ACTH stimulation – most of the 21-DOF plasma values and 21-DOF/F ratios also surpassed the mean + 1 SD level of heterosexual men. In only one out of 9 homosexual males, neither in his blood nor in that of his mother increased 21-DOF values and 21-DOF/F ratios were found after ACTH stimulation. In this homosexual man, however, the plasma de-hydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEA-S) values and the DHEA-S/1000 × A (A = androstenedione) ratio were increased before and after ACTH stimulation. Furthermore, highly significantly increased basal plasma levels of dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate were found in male-to-female transsexuals as compared to normal males, suggesting partial 3?-ol hydroxysteroid dehydrogen-ase deficiency to be a predisposing factor for the development of male-to-female transsexualism.
I disagree Dr. Ambridge, but consenting adults can do what the will do in their privacy.
Please give a reason Dr. Wilde. One should not disagree without a reason.
empirically unproven science, there is more proof for the existence of Big Foot
as there is no more proof of the exsistence of GOD but we postulate he exists
Oh I see Dr. Wilde. I didn’t realize that you are a “famed geneticist.”
don’t worry you don’t need the genetic certainty of the origin of sexual preference to continue your sexual practices
I see that Dr. Wilde is a denier. Our history is replete with his ilk. There were those who denied the Earth is round, that the sun is the center of our solar system, and that evolution is responsible for life’s form and features today. Denial did not make these fact less true. If he would bother to do a little research, he may open his mind a little.
BTW: Oscar Wilde (the actual one) was a homosexual who spent time in prison for his “sin.” “Oscar Wilde” meet “John Galt” and pardon me while I roll on the floor in laughter.
it’s irony Gary, Oscar Wilde the “the love that dare not speak its name” guy who dated women, was married and most definitely had liaisons with men was either homosexual or bisexual.
Irony? One need not be gay to fight for equality for all Oscar. This is just the right thing to do. It is the Christian thing to do.
not a question of equality, it’s a question of parental rights and the role of schools. buggery is a choice of activity that adults can make.
And I, as a parent, want my children to have non-discriminatory access to websites (in accordance with HCPS policy and the federal law)
Who are you to infringe on those rights?
There are an awful lot of people who seem to want the schools to do the parenting for them, but when they don’t agree with the schools decisions, they jump on the parental rights bandwagon. (With Mr. “John Galt” driving it)
as a parent you can grant access to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender information of any type and in any manner you want to your children at home.
We could solve this quick no internet in school!
And as a parent, you can choose to not allow your children to have access to the internet at school.
Why is this so hard for proplr to understand? I think that some of you just like to incite arguments.
You say:
“We could solve this quick no internet in school!”
I say:
Extreme and probably a bit sarcastic? Maybe?… but how about a more targeted approach of: Use the Internet as a research tool to assist in learning the subjects that actually belong in a school setting. I don’t believe there is any actual school credits for learning gay/lesbian issues so I’m not sure why they need to research it… although I’m sure the Anti Christian Lawyers Union will be demanding courses any time now. Tolerance should be taught, but one can do that with only CNN as a source of material.
Fedup —
Not as extreme would be allowing the parents opt out of allowing their children use the internet.
Oh wait….they already do that…
It’s against the law. It’s a non-issue. especially for you…you’re opting out of having your children subjected to a horrible public education anyway.
I think some people are just on here to argue for the sake of arguing….
Fedup –
Not as extreme would be allowing the parents opt out of allowing their children use the internet.
Oh wait….they already do that…
It’s against the law. It’s a non-issue. especially for you…you’re opting out of having your children subjected to a horrible public education anyway.
I think some people are just on here to argue for the sake of arguing….
Wow – I never intended my post to invoke any rancor… yet I seem to have offended you. I apologize.
I didn’t even know they could opt out, but that seems like a right they should have.
As far as the law, since you know my kids are in private school you’ve probably seen my other post where I stated that if it’s the law then there’s little to be done. I’m only questioning the need for this material in school.
As far as the quality of public education, I simply prefer the private setting my kids are in… it’s peaceful and most of the kids know each other by name 8th down to K. They are like a family. I always found it telling to watch the public school teacher kiss her boy before they parted and he walked over to the private school.
As far as arguing for the sake of arguing… my taxes are collected to pay for a service I don’t (admittedly by my own choice) receive. I would hope you don’t just want me to be quiet because we disagree.
fedup read the ACLU letter. It came up as a result of an after school activity request.
cdev… so the sites won’t be unblocked until after school… that’s perfect.
Fedup —
It’s in the article:
“Spicer also explained that parents can decline internet access for their students by signing a form at the beginning of each school year, and parents can opt in or out at any time.”
I figure that puts the ball back in the parent’s court. There shouldn’t have to be this much debate about it…
Oh, well that’s a let down isn’t it? I was only looking at the comments here to get a feel for what the article meant. If you’ve left the kiddies there at school after hours they’re basically unsupervised anyway… they can walk up the street and get the same stuff on the public library computers anyway. Bummer. No drama here. See ya.
Don’t think anyone is asking you to accept it as normal. Simply accept that it exists and homosexuals are acctual people and entitled to be treated as people too!
Who is Jon Galt? He is a man who stated in an earlier post, ” I, along with others, see homosexuality as a sexual sin just like adultery, pedophilia, beastiality, etc. One is no worse than the other.” He is man with incredibly flawed judgment and is possibly unbalanced. Anyone who can see the sexual victimization of a child as no worse that consensual sex between two adults who happen to be married to other people has more in common with NAMBLA than he may care to admit.
Google “fistgate” and tell me where the line between homosexuality and pedophilia exists. Read the forward to Queering Elementary Education, and explain to me how Kevin Jennings, our safe schools czar, has Harry Hay for an idol, he being a strong proponent of NAMBLA.
If it were only consensual sex between two adults, there wouldn’t be such an issue. But, they are coming into our schools and teaching our children that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle. Teaching our children that it would be hate speech to speak otherwise. Teaching our children that their religious beliefs are “flawed and unbalanced”.
Spare me your petty insinuations also. You’re riding the PC rail and are 100% on message.
One is actually gainst the law and the other isn’t!
Again where is HCPS actually doing this.
Clearly, you continue to confuse homosexuality and pedophilia. That is a dangerous mindset and your religious beliefs, given your equating the two, really are flawed and unbalanced.
As you continue to spout about what is appropriate and should or should not be taught to children, if you are teaching your children to believe as you do, your “concrete” belief system is seriously warped.
Your opinion.
You wont look up “fistgate” so I’ll help you out;
At a “Teach Out” conference in 2000, sponsered by GLSEN,and others, hundreds of teens and adults were brought together.
In the workshop, instructor Michael Gaucher, prompted by a teen’s question, verbally guided the students on the mechanics of “fisting” — a homosexual slang term for a sadistic sex act in which a man inserts his hand and arm into another person’s anal cavity. Another instructor, Margot Abels, said fisting “often gets a really bad rap,” and described it innocuously as “an experience of letting somebody into your body that you want to be that close and intimate with.” Abels and Gaucher also guided the students on techniques of oral sodomy and lesbian sex.
I would submit that this is “warped”. Objections?
I would submit that it is irrelevant as there is not intent for “fisting” to be included in any curriculum / lessons taught in Harford county Public Schools…If you are aware of a lesson of this nature being included in a class PLEASE enlighten us.
You have continually posted allegations of students being subjected to lessons about homosexuality when there is NO evidence of such activities.
Please stop associating the issue of non discriminatory access to websites in Harford County with an issue that occured in Massachusetts ten years ago.
It is so typical of some people to take the name of something and appropriate it without knowing what it stands for. “John Galt” was Ayn Rand’s main character in her novel “Atlas Shrugged”. What is hilarious about this religious “John Galt” is his seeming ignorance that Ayn Rand was an atheist.
Gary Ambridge –
You can appreciate Atlas Shrugged’s John Galt character irrespective of you belief or non-belief in a religion.
Joe
Was John Galt an athiest? Are athiest authors limited to creating athiest characters? You’re over reaching to malign me. Stick to the topic, “schools allowing gay rights websites”. Better now?
You don’t even stick to the topic. You go off on tangents about HCPS indoctornating children and making them want to be homosexuals.
I havn’t said anything about HCPS making children want to be homosexual. My point is, allowing access to these websites on school computers is another step toward normalizing homosexual behavior. If my belief system tells me that homosexual sex is a sin, and I raise my children in that belief, they will soon be forbidden to say as much. It will be discrimination, hate speech.
Please do a little research before accusing me. Look at the GSLEN website. Check out SOULFORCE and tell me the homosexual agenda isn’t aimed at shutting me up.
Please cite where HCPS is teaching this GSLEN curriculum you keep talking about. You want us to believe that HCPS is teaching lessong about homosexuality and they are not. This article is about allowing equal access to web sites, not changing curriculum or including the web information you are so opposed to in everyday lessons.
Teach your children to be as closed-minded as you are. That’s your right, but there are others of us that disagree with your views.
You can say whatever you want to. You have that right, but when you are infringing on the rights of others (my children included) to have access to information, then you are in the workn. Period.
wow and I mean WOW, can you not offer lessons in the study of homosexuality yourself for your children? do you need the school to allow web access to sites that could provide info on how to “teabag”?
John read post 8.1 by you say
“But, they are coming into our schools and teaching our children that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle. ”
So what are you saying. There is no instructyion going on or is there!
You’re missing the point.
Parents are trying to get the school board to block access to sites that they have no right to block access to. It is against the law.
I will teach my children to be accepting of others regardless of their race / gender / orientation.
I think everyone has the right to whatever ideas, ideals and morals they believe in, … but they DO NOT have the right to force others to believe the same thing.
It is not the government’s (or the school system’s) place to block access to sites that are informational (not pornographic).
As for sites that provide info on how to “teabag”, I suppose you would want to block every site that allows the word teabag to come through. It is after all a very offensive word. Perhaps they should block dictionary.com and m-w.com because they provide definitons for words like “homosexual”, “penis” and “scrotum”
Are you all, as parents, so incompetent that you can’t deal with the fact that there is information available to students that you might have to explain to them?
wow I think that matters of male on male, female on female sexual lifestyles and acts are for parents to deal with at home with their children and as I am Oscar Wilde I come at this from a hedonistic and do whatever you want with your body and other bodies you like persuasion and have no fears that fettered access on the web at school will interfere with lifestyle choices, and as PETA sympathizer I due draw the line on bestiality until such time as we can prove animal consent in these unions
Again…The bottom line is that what you “think” is not applicable to what everyone else thinks. Schools “due” not have the right to block access to these sites.
Oscar that is agreed it is the parents job to teach that stuff. Again the school is not teaching it but simply complying with the equal protectio clause as it relates to school internet.
This is a complex and highly charged issue. If the law says this must be so, then there is little to be done about it. I think opposition breaks down into basically two camps… those that are truly phobic and those who resent the government involving itself in the formation of their children’s inter-personal relationships. I find myself in the latter… but again I will state for the record that my kids are in private school and I wouldn’t want it any other way (where they wear uniforms and I can teach them about the stupidity of pining over $200 sneakers that cost $8 to make and put on the shelf). In the stone age (70’s to early 80’s) when I was in school we didn’t have pc’s let alone the internet and we did fine with our personal relationships… you knew who was straight and who was not. People are attracted to the opposite sex or the same sex – they don’t need the internet (or the Anti Christian Lawyers Union) to tell them which. By all means, children should be taught tolerance. It is no ones concern how another wants to live their life while it doesn’t infringe on theirs. I do not however believe that this stuff belongs in school. Ditch this crap and teach these kids the stuff they need to be successful in life – like how to think for themselves and stop believing what every politician tells them. If they have time to sit around and read this stuff they don’t have enough real work to do. It isn’t against the law to view pornography yet the majority has determined there should be an age limit. There’s nothing in the Constitution about it. Now, if it were determined that a majority wanted an age limit on this material do you think such a law would ever come to fruition? Of course not… but this is just the ramblings of one “incompetent parent”.
Every time I hear about something the schools have done I am happier than ever to make the sacrifices I make to have my kids in private school. I don’t have to put up with the Anti Christian Lawyers Union telling me what my kids are allowed to view while the state has them. I don’t care what kind of lifestyles people want to live. It’s none of my business. It does seem to me that many in the gay/lesbian community will never be happy with simple acceptance or equality. Many seem to insist that we all embrace their lifestyle choice and profess it’s moral rightness. Tolerance is and should be taught but for the state to dictate what my underage child can and cannot view is not a right I’ve granted them. The state holds parents accountable for raising their children, yet somehow feels entitled to teach and allow access to any material they deem fit. Why not filter all the interpersonal relationship materials from the school pc’s and try teaching the kids something… half will graduate without the ability to correspond in anything but texting shorthand or find Kansas on a U.S. map… but at least they’ll be able to embrace alternative lifestyles.
I’m sure that ‘John Galt’ would also say dinosaur fossils were placed there by ‘God’ to test our faith. Just another Bible thumper trying to hold our country back from progression in thought, nothing to see here.
Is it really progress? I hear the folks who are saying that GLSEN wont encourage curriculem adaptation, but, they have lesson plans. Why would they have lesson plans available to educators, if not to influence education.
JD; I don’t pretend to seek the mind of God, I only seek His heart. Evolutionists accuse the creationists of having small minds, but they are the ones who are narrowing their beliefs to fit within a set parameter. If God created time, how would He be bound by it’s one way motion? What is a “day” to an omniscient being? Life is full of paradox’s, why get hung up on the “fossil” one? My belief is concrete. Everything I see and hear convinces me of God’s existence, including the fear/anger/dismissal tone of your post. You’re assuring yourself, more than me.
Obviously you have little experience in education so let me fill you in. Many groups, including the heratige fondation have lesson plans. A lesson plan is a far shot from curriculum. These groups make lesson plans they are not always used by educators and in some cases they are used by outside groups. Either way they are not being used in Harford County Schools as a form of indoctornation like you claim! All that is happening is equal access on websites!
Your naivete is amusing. It’s sheeple like you that help to advance the agenda, believing all the while in your moral superiority. Your guiders consider you a “useful idiot”, to use their term.
I am not a sheep! You however need a dentist!
John Galt please realize your religion and its ‘holy scripture’ is nothing but a demonization of the pagan religion. Your beliefs aren’t your own, they are the beliefs of a small sect of incredibly rich and influential people that you have been duped into believing it is true. These bloodlines have been around for centuries and have worked long and hard to take away your capacity for free and open thought.
Instead of participating in Group Think without being given reasons you should reach your own conclusions. The whole reason we have so much hate and misunderstanding isnt because people personally disagree with others, it is because people follow the masses blindly for that is what we have been taught to do since a young age. It isn’t your fault that you are so biased and discriminatory, you have been trained to think that way by your ‘religion’ and our government.
‘Thou shalt not lie’ – the American government and religion lie to you(us) daily. Do not try to argue this point, because it is a well known fact that our government purposley keeps information from the people to keep us in the dark about what is REALLY happening.
‘Thou shall not steal’ – the church has throughout time been known to commit genocide in the name of resources. I wont even begin to talk about the government on this topic.
‘Thou shall not covet’ – the church and American government have covetted everything anyone has owned since their beginnings. I.e. the government being able to rob a normal person blind in the name of tax debts, but then having a document that allows them to write off any of their own debts at will.
If you really want you opinion to be heard, keep ‘God’ out of it. Going on and on about your religion and its (discriminatory) beliefs show that you are unable to form your own opinion.
I’ve been where you’re at, in my views and attitudes of religion. I considered myself a pagan at one time, and an athiest, agnostic, wicca, taoist and humanist at other times. We all have endless information available to us these days, and theres never been a better time to be a seeker.
You say to “keep God out of it” if I want my opinion to be heard. With me being a follower of The Way, there is no seperating myself from God. Thoughts are secondary to the fruit of the Spirit, what some consider a “gut feeling”, or the language of the heart. A true follower of Christ must let their love for mankind be known. It’s how He said they will know us. Love the sinner but hate the sin, and we have an obligation to speak out against evil. Believing in the Trinity, I also believe in satan, and believe that he rules this world, that mankind has fallen and Christ’s sacrifice reconciled us to God. Basic stuff. Read some of the ancient writings of the desert fathers, like Justin Martyr.
Now, if you’re a resolute athiest, there is no understanding between you and I. You will believe as strongly as I do, that there is no way other than the way we believe. Understand though, 76% of America considers themselves Christian, most being, admittedly, less spiritual than myself, so taking God out of the conversation would give me a weaker voice. Being completely secular comes off as cold to most people, because the law will never meet people at the level of the heart. As is said, “the heart has it reasons, that reason knows nothing of”.
I take from your writing, that you believe that mankind is pretty rotten, what with the government and church(institutions of man) both lying and stealing and feeding us false information. With you having no God or Higher Power, it must be depressing to look upon your fellow humans, right? Are individuals exempt from the lying and stealing part? Just curious.
No Joe you have it wrong again. The financial trouble that Greece is in has been caused by people like you: the Greek equivalent of the TEA PARTY, i.e., people who refuse to pay their fair share of taxes. They lie and cheat to get out of paying taxes and the Greek government is not good at catching them. A government will soon collapse when there are citizens who use government services but expect the next guy to pay for it. In Greece, as in the US, it is the rich who are the worst tax evaders.
So Joe the people who are in the streets are people like you and Braveheart who has nothing to add to any discussion but some stupid name calling.
US Taxpayer
Violent Greek protests are being led leftists and pro-communist unions.
Joe
You have been there and you know or is this information from Fox? It does not matter who is protesting. Greece’s problems are caused by the Greek Tea Baggers who refuse to pay their fair share of taxes and expect everyone to pay. Unfortunately for Greece, none pay.
US Taxpayer –
I don’t think you can prove a nexus between Tea Party activists and Greek protesters. In fact the Greek protesters are decidedly union, socialist and communist controlled.
Socialism is the problem – “Socialism causes yet another massive failure with Greece” http://tiny.cc/23k3i
Joe
Joe:
Yes, socialism is a problem in Europe, but we do not have that problem in the USA. In fact, the Democratic party today is much like the Republican party twenty years ago. For example, the health care bill that was passed was a Republican bill from the 90s. Both parties are moving right.
I will say that the Greek government gives too much away to keep people happy and quiet and now the bill is due. Since no one wants to pay taxes there is no money in the kitty.
US Taxpayer = Leach of American Society
US Taxpayer – I’m betting I’ve paid more in taxes last year than you’ve paid in your whole life. In fact based on your views – I’m certain you have been a net recipient of Real Taxpayer Taxes.
So what is it – are you paid to do government work, perhaps you are a census worker or are you on federal disability on a mental illness claim?
My God you are a child!
US Taxpayer = Leach on American Society
And yes thank you – definitely a child at heart.
US Taxpayer – As I said my job is to keep left wing idealogues like you exposed. You have no real perspective. I almost feel sorry for you. But then I realize you have and continue to try to milk our Society for your personal gains.
You are pathetic.
Braveheart: Not a child at heart, but one of understanding. Try to post comments that entail thought.
BTW Braveheart try to spell your modifiers correctly.
US Taxpayer – Please answer a question rather than defer all. You are a typical Liberal Dem – don’t answer questions and defer responsibility.
How long have you been Leeching American Society?
Braveheart –
The only question you’ve posed is one about US Taxpayer’s employment — In an attempt to demean anyone who is employed by the government.
Other than that all you’ve done is name call and put people down.
Braveheart = elitist ass who thinks he is better than everyone else and that no one could possibly have a differing opinion.
This news from Utah is the beginning of the end for the Republican Party. Bob Bennett loses the Utah seat. RIP
“He is Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s trusted lieutenant. But Bennett is a serious man who wants to work on serious issues — and in doing so, he found ways to work across the aisle. The health-care measure he crafted with Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden was the most prominent example, and one factor in his ouster.
Bennett is no squishy moderate. Dick Cheney endorsed his reelection. Newt Gingrich campaigned for him. National Journal’s most recent voting ratings had him as the 23rd most conservative senator — compared to fellow Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch at number 30.
But Bennett’s brand of conservatism was not pure enough for the Tea Party wing of his party. He committed sins such as voting for the Troubled Asset Relief Program. He was, horror of horrors, an appropriator — meaning that he helped to bring money to his state. The conservative Club for Growth spent more than $200,000 to oust him.” http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/?hpid=topnews
And somehow you deduce from all of this that the republican group is in trouble? You have got to speed up your kool-aid consumption. This indicates the demise of the status quo. The victories in Massachusetts and Virginia are more of the same. All of the mush heads who got all the education they need in a public school are in for a rude awakening. Lots of us want to go back to the actual Constitution and divide responsibilities and authority according to that august document, not the interpretation of some idiot in a black bathrobe.
Are you referring to the Republican dominated Supreme Court? I did not hear any of you complain when it ruled that big businesses were a “person” and could buy whatever political ads it wants to sway an election (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. ___ (2010).. That Supreme Court is a tool for the GOP. Is that the one?
No. I’m referring to the entire court system. At every level these egotistic judges are making law rather than interpreting it. I hardly expect US Taxguy to understand any of this. The response to my comment is indicative of the perverted thinking that goes on with the guy.
OK Dave we will trash the constitution and do away with that branch of government. Is that your answer to “your” problem?
You can’t complain about our constitution or a court that Republicans built from 2000 to 2008 without realizing that conservatives are part of your problem. If you had only a rudimentary knowledge of our government instead of Fox talking points you would understand this. But what can you expect from a ditto head?
I am specifically not responding to the dolt who refers to himself a a taxpayer. My reference for all the rest of you has to do with the “activist” courts. Not so much the Supreme Court as to the circus courts. Who nominated or voted for these people is of little to no importance to me. The fact that the Judges now feel in some perverted way that they have the right to make law simply pisses me off.
I am specifically not responding to the dolt who refers to himself as a taxpayer. My reference for all the rest of you has to do with the “activist” courts. Not so much the Supreme Court as to the circus courts. Who nominated or voted for these people is of little to no importance to me. The fact that the Judges now feel in some perverted way that they have the right to make law simply pisses me off.
Hey tax…news flash…thats only the Republican choice of Republican candidate.
Go Dagger !
You predict: “the beginning of the end for the Republican Party”.
The two parties have – right of wrong – been around for some time now and I’m willing to predict they will be here long after you and I and anyone reading this is long dead. Such a prediction, while wishful thinking, only tends to marginalize the points you try to make. I would shy away from empty rhetoric to avoid the label “fringe”.
There is also a point: “He was, horror of horrors, an appropriator — meaning that he helped to bring money to his state.” I have to assume this is dollars from DC and believe it or not they don’t actually fall from the sky there… and I have a problem with taxes I pay involuntarily being sent to Utah or anywhere else for some pie pan museum named after the current dirtbag senator. All this earmark pork barrel crap needs to stop. I’m not holding my breath.
fedup:
The beginning of the end of the Republican Party as we have known it: the party of Reagan, George H. W. Bush or even Eisenhower. What we will have is some extreme “fringe” led by the Tea Party philosophy or rhetoric from Fox that seems to run the GOP these days.
In those by-gone days, that I remember well, Democrats and Republicans worked together for the benefit of the Republic. Not now! To prove my point watch what happens with the President’s Supreme Court nomination. Elena Kagan is, by all accounts, a conservative. The GOP will oppose her just because the President nominated her and for no other reason. Just as with the Health Care bill which was a Republican bill from the 90s. The GOP is much different now and I don’t think most Republicans like it. Since the Democrats are also moving right, many Republicans and Independents will move to the Dems.
I don’t know, but perhaps you are of the Tea Party point of view, but I think they are wrong. I think they are causing harm.
I agree with you about wasteful pork, but the local folk like it and they are the ones who vote politicians in. I have not heard of anyone complaining about money that benefits their state only other states.
I tend to be an independent since I opened my eyes and saw that they all suck. You seem to be solidly liberal democrat. I believe both sides are capable of having a good idea once in a while. I refuse to blindly follow either side because I refuse to ignore the out of control corruption on both sides. I refuse to cover for anyone who is cheating on taxes, treating themselves like royalty on the public’s money and blatantly lying about what they will do if elected. I do not fear the Tea Party. I do not fear Fox news. I believe the federal government has grown far beyond what it should be. I have seen I-66 in it’s all-lane HOV splendor and it is breath taking – I would even concede that a quarter of them might actually work when they get to their government desk. Government spending is out of control, and Obama shows no signs of letting up on that. I believe the health care law will prove to be unconstitutional since you can’t force people to purchase something they don’t want. I also don’t like the law because it still protects dirtbag lawyers (no tort reform) and the authors wrote themselves out – big red flag there. I do, however, fear any situation that leaves both the white house and congress in the hands of the same party.
I feel partisanship is a tool used to blind otherwise intelligent folk to the transgressions of one side or the other.
As far as Kagan, I suppose if Obama doesn’t need any experience at governing why should a justice have ever judged a case…
Among the dems and reps I know, I don’t see the migration you describe.
The local folk like the pork money because they are largely gullible idiots… foolish enough to believe some magical kind-hearted senator is bringing in more than they are paying out while never understanding how the system works.
fedup: Was Clearance Thomas a Judge prior to being nominated to the Supreme Court by President Bush?
I wouldn’t know or care. If he wasn’t it seems just as stupid. I don’t play he said, she said. Politicians all suck. Politicians all lie. Most of them are lying sucking dirtbag lawyers. I would never put myself in a position of defending any p.o.s. politician. I believe in voting for the least repulsive candidate who is at least promising to do what I believe is right for the country… all the while with the understanding that they are lying to me. It’s easy to see if you open your eyes and stop allowing marketing and branding to shape your perceptions. The last election was more of a commercial for dandruff shampoo than an election.
Meanwhile the border continues to hemorrhage and NO ONE has the balls to stop it.
Dear Fed Up,
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, Justice Thomas was on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.