While we applaud her right not to stand and recite the Pledge of Alligence, has anyone thought about this girls freedom of Religion right? You can not honestly tell me that at 13 years old, (or before) she made the decision to become a Jehova Witness?

 What are your thoughts on this?



"If she was at a pro-life/anti-abortion (ridiculous terminology, to be sure) rally". This would be a an entirely different debate.  

While I do recognize this post as the strawman that it is, I'm going to address it anyway.  With regard to her being a Jehova's Witness (or whatever religion she is), her "freedom of religion" right has not been violated.  Children do not have constitutional protection from their parents taking them to church.

Look, going to war wasn't the greatest idea, but we did it.  Don't sit there and try to make out like it's all Bush's fault.  EVERYONE was gunning for us to go to war up until we actually did it.  Yeah, some folks were misled because they never stopped to think about the fact that we'd never have UN support.  Do you realize that we had TONS of evidence to show they had WMD there?  It wasn't even in doubt that they were violating who-knows how many other sanctions, and had been for the whole 10 years.  The UN was NEVER going to do crap about it either.

So, don't go blaming crap on Bush just because he was president at the time.  It was an idea that had appeal on both sides of the House.  I'm not saying Kerry's a bad guy either.  He'll probably make an okay president if he wins, but don't let the commertials mislead you.  He's playing this just as much as anyone else.

You should know that EVERYONE wasn't gunning for us to go to war.  I, for one, was dead set against it from the beginning.  

As far as not "blaming Bush just because he was president at the time"...well who the hell else should I blame?  The president of this country wanted (for reasons that are still unknown) take down Saddam Hussein.  Was he avenging his daddy?  Was he trying to one-up his daddy?  Did he believe with all of his heart that Saddam was planning an imminent attack on the US?  The answer to all of those questions is, "Who the hell knows?"  Regardless of the answer, George Bush pushed for this war, and pushed for Congress to approve it.  Hypothetically, if Bush had never once mentioned invading Iraq, do you really think that Congress would have come up with this declaring war thing on their own?  I place the blame for the mess in Iraq solely on the shoulders of that nitwit.  As the leader of this country, as the person that presented false evidence, and as the person that pushed for congressional approval, he deserves 100% of the blame for the clusterfuck in Iraq (and the resulting bad feelings the rest of the world towards America).

Cat, you attacked my use of my service.  I responded.  I'd hardly call it irrelevant.

You're absolutely right, Judge.  She has that right, and she won't be arrested for it.  To me it's ALL about respect.  She's basically demonstrated that she has none.  It would have been very simple for her to even just stand, but she chose not to.  If you go to an....  I'm not sure what they call an Islamic service, but say you went to one.  Wouldn't you keep your voice down, and not make a disturbance?  I would.  I don't believe as they do, but I have enough respect for them, and the great people that have lived and died in their religion to observe some form of just decorum.  It's not comformity in the least.

There's a major difference in the scenario you describe and Rachel's situation.  The person in your hypothetical chooses to go to a religious service.  On the other hand, Rachel didn't choose to go to school.  She is, by law, forced to attend school up until a certain age or grade level (depending on how the law is written).  Rachel is also subjected, by law, to hearing the pledge every damn day.  Again, she has no choice in the matter.  It's not like she walked into a totally foreign situation (like a mosque) stripped down and started ranting and raving.  Now that would be disrespectful.  Standing up for her beliefs, religious or otherwise, is not disrespectful.  In a different post, you say that with freedoms come responsibility.  I fully believe that it was (and is) her responsibility to stand up for what she believes in, and she did just that.  To call her disrespectful is inaccurate.  Her method of protest was very respectful and very responsible.  She sat there quietly and never once 'made a scene'.  I do applaud this girl for standing up for herself and doing it the way she did.

Summary of the conversation so far:


She has the right to stand!
No!
Yes!
No!
Yes!
No!
Yes!
No! It is disrespectful!
Yes! That doesn't matter!
No!
Yes!
No! And I am more patriotic than you!

etc...

Thank you for that completely irrelevant post.  Without it, I don't think I'd have been able to figure out what was going on in this thread.

Get funny or piss off!

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/25/chill.political.speech/index.html

So, I read this the other day and then fumed about it for days.  I'll give you guys a chance to read it before I climb up on my soapbox, because I'd hate to give away the ending.

Unfortunately, I had deal with this with my dad recently.  For some reason, he has all of the sudden become the kind of racist that makes comments loud enough to be heard by others.  He's never been like this before; it's behavior that has started over the last three years or so.  I got fed up enough with it that I had to chew his ass for it.  I told him that I couldn't change his opinion, but that I didn't want to hear it and he needed to keep the nasty remarks to himself when I was around.  

On another note, I'm finding that a bunch of people that I work with are also a bit racist.  What's so weird about it is that the people in question are extremely intelligent.  I hear these things come out of their mouths, and I just wonder how such intelligent people can come up with some of this stuff.

This NJ gov crap has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the man is gay.  It has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that he appointed someone to a very important cabinet level position whom was not qualified, just so they could exchange glances throughout the day.  Further, the man was not even an American citizen.
...

While I agree with you that the man in the cabinet position is underqualified, who cares if "he's not even an American citizen"?  Would he have automatically been more qualified if was an American?  Why does the fact that he's from another country make it that much worse?  This kind of thing gets on my nerves just as much as any other kind of bigotry.  One of the beautiful things about this country is that (theoretically) anyone can come here and hold almost any position they want.  
[/soapbox]

Also, I definitely think that the media is making this a bigger scandal because of the homosexuality.  This wouldn't have gotten anywhere near this much attention if McGreevey's affair had been with a woman.

Perhaps there is fear of rejection which is camouflaged by a perception, which may or may not be true, that the average girl is whiny and annoying, thus has no purpose in Vespertine’s world.

OMFGROFL!!!!11!!!111  But I'll agree about the 'no purpose in my world' remark.

Would it be fair to say that you are just using that as an excuse because you are afraid of commitment? You’re saying it depends, but you’re not clear about that. What exactly does it depend on? I don’t believe you know the answer.

For once, I'm gonna give you a serious answer.  I'm definitely not afraid of commitment, but I am repulsed by the idea of it.  More specifically, I'm repulsed by the idea of someone thinking that they get to have a say in what I do and/or when I do it.  On the other point, it depends on my mood.

And Vespertine, while you are very confident in your answer, there is a certain fear that is generate by it. Is refusing to change for anyone the proper approach in all situations or are there circumstances where one should be more receptive and open? I mean, look at Bush. His attitude screwed the entire country! But I commend you on your last statement. I believe it is one of the key factors in finding true happiness. If you wish to be someone else, it’s because you are miserable as yourself.

I'm not saying that I won't change my mind or my viewpoint.  I'm totally open to hearing new information and changing (or not changing) my mind about something.  What I'm saying is that I won't change who I am.  For anybody.  For any reason.

Quote from: Binoboy

I know I should be saying more than just this but: You're kidding me, right? Please, scan that paragraph and just rebut it yourself because I don't even want to start now.

I haven't commented in this thread, so please don't take this the wrong way- but I'm tired of reading this kind of comment. You cannot automatically assume that your opponent in a debate will understand your objections to something he's said. Please have the courtesy to define your arguments for the purpose of discussion, or don't say anything at all.

I'm sorry if this causes offense. Please take it as a constructive criticism, and nothing more.

w00t!  You go girl:!:  uh..i mean, uh...

Really though, excellent point.  You can't just tell someone that they should realize that their argument is self-contradictory or invalid or whatever.  That kind of thing will never fly as a rebuttal.  You should explain why you think someone needs to rethink their viewpoint.

I'm afraid, however, that his party will not allow him to act as he may feel he should.  Democrats have seemed to be typically against military pay raises and greater military funding.  It's not always true, but in current politics your party seems to dictate how you vote(or veto) as much, or more, than anything.  So that's one worry.  

Again, I don't disagree with your point about Kerry's party.  BUT, that sort of activity isn't specific to Democrats; it happens no matter what the president's political affiliation.  Hell, the only person I've seen break party ranks recently has been John McCain, and he doesn't do it all that often.  Anyway, I don't think it's fair to pigeonhole Kerry as being a patsy for the Democratic party.  IMHO, pretty much all presidents are patsies for their parties.

I don't like to look at the race aspect of it.  I like to look at 'stupid and lazy' vs 'willing to make something of yourself'.  All the things he said in that article can also be said of poor white trash.  But yes, he does seem to have a point.  Anybody can go to school and try hard.  True that some schools are better than others, but hard work is key no matter where you are.

The poll results are very interesting.  But if you think about it, the people who would tend to disagree, aren't sitting around looking at CNN.com on their home PC.

I agree with you about the poll results Detta.  I guess what I found interesting about that poll was the fact that I've never seen such lopsided poll results on CNN before.

Part of Cosby's speech was about black youth squandering the opportunities that the civil rights movement provided.  The poor white trash of the world haven't ever had a movement like that.  I can't help but wonder if the wasted opportunities of the black youth are made more profound by the fact that people died specifically to provide those opportunities...

Eh, what the hell...I'm in.