GernBlansten

Rooster - Of course, the law must pass the constitutionality test but jurists need to restrict their interpretations to the text of the Constitution and stop expanding the meaning beyond what is reasonable. The problem with Gay Marriage bans is that they currently don't pass the constitutionality test. Conservatives know this. They need an ammendment to the constitution to be able to do this. You want to change the rules. Would it have been OK for congress to pass an ammendment to allow Interracial Marriage bans, because it didn't pass the constitutionality test?

I'm a pretty black and white kinda guy (paleo-conservative). I like things clearly defined and loophole proof. I am against the procedure of abortion because I think it is a barbaric method of birth control. I won't have one and I would try my best to avoid anyone in my family to have one either. Nothing religious about that opinion, just basic human instinct. However, the US government has established the life begins at birth and therefore the fetus is not protected by rights granted to citizens. Because of that, I do not want laws passed that outlaw a specific medical procedure. If you want to end all abortions, pass legislation that defines life as something prenatal. Don't go after the procedure. But be prepared to deal with everything else that comes with that. Citizenship, investigations into wrongful death via miscarriages, welfare benefits, the list goes on and on.

Saying that laws against murder, rape and incest are examples of Christian values is akin to saying that eating healthy is a Christian value. Sure Christians value it, but so does 99.999% of Americans (OK, I'll retract that eating healthy is universally valued). To claim that these laws are a result of Christian values is at best arrogant and at least ignorant. Do any of you who prescribe to this notion ever heard of Ven Diagrams? The interlinking groupings of ideas that overlay and intersect a larger grouping. Its the bases for logic and critical thinking. Think of the largest circle as all the laws, rules and moral codes from every sector of society. Then within that is a circle of Christian laws, rules and moral codes. Intersecting that will be Muslim ones. Intersecting that will be the US Criminal code. Some regions of the circles are exclusive to the particular grouping, some are shared. Some are wholly encircled by other circles. The area that all the circles intersect is the common ground. This is probably the area of dispute here. To call that area "Christian Values" is absurd, unless the circle of US laws was entirely and exclusively within the Christian values circle. Clear as mud eh? Hows that for remembering Logic and Critical Thinking-101 from 20 years ago?

OGE, on the topic of miscarriages, how many funerals are held for prenatal miscarriages? Sure, families who want the child grieve, but never have I heard of a funeral held for a miscarriage. Never seen a headstone in a cemetary either for the prenatal. Perhaps in some independant churches churches they do but not any of the mainstream ones. So from that, do churches view the prenatal as full humans with souls?

OGE, how does Islamic Law deal with homosexuality? Well, you make my case on how we should tread very, very carefully when passing laws based on majority religious values. My own solution to the whole gay marriage issue is to remove the word marriage from the government lexicon. Call it a civil union where two adults can enter a contract to secure the legal benefits and responsibilities that marriage currently grants. Then relegate marriage to the churches. The church can marry who they like and reject those who they don't. Marriage in itself would provide no better or worse treatment in the government viewpoint. It would be a two step process, get your civil union contract accepted by the government, then if you wish, have the union blessed by the church through marriage.

Independent web software developer currently working for the largest defense contractor in the free world. Write OSHA tracking software. I also write financial planning software for mortgage brokers and finance types.

While I will agree that America is now and always has been a majority Christian nation, I reject the thought that our laws are driven by exclusive Christian values. Christians do not have a lock on morality. If that were the case, all of the big ten would be laws. The three that are laws (murder, theft, false witness) are universally accepted in all nations, even Muslim and Athiest ones. Except for the proposed gay marriage ban amendment, I would say America has kept it's Christian values (ones exclusively Christian) in check. Your local laws may vary.

The inconstancy of the application of these laws is maddening. Why was Peterson charged with murder of the unborn child when abortion is legal in that state? You can't have it both ways. Thats why I think we need a legal definition, not a medical one on the begining of life. At the Federal level too. It would eliminate all these problems.

Instead of trying to overturn a decision on the medical procedure, conservatives should push for a decision/ammendment on when the US government recognizes a human life. Currently, it is after birth, when the child is independant of the mother. Move that to a point somewhere between conception and birth, and the rest falls in place. Doctors are held to their oath to do no harm. Someone who murders or otherwise harms a pregnant woman will now face two charges. Women who neglect the fetus through drug or alcohol abuse will face child abuse charges. Roe V. Wade was decided on privacy rights. I'm all for privacy rights, especially between me and my doctor. I say let that decision stand and address the real problem. When do we as Americans define the start of human life? When does that mass of cells become a US citizen?

I've heard of people keeping their courage in a Tequila bottle but never their marbles in a Crown Royal bag. At least Ed, you haven't lost your marbles. ;-)

When I started packing for my first summer camp with the boys, I found that every one of my T-shirts advertised alcohol. I used to race yachts and every t-shirt I had was from the regattas. Rum and beer manufacturers sponsored many of the events. Really didn't realize it until then. I had to head down to the Walmart and buy some blank shirts.

In 1984, Ron and Dan Lafferty murdered (with a butcher knife) the wife and infant daughter of their younger brother Allen. The crimes were noteworthy not merely for their brutality but for the brothers' claim that they were acting on direct orders from God. Ron Lafferty, a fundamentalist Mormon, believed he received a revelation from God to butcher his sister-in-law and niece. Who are we to claim otherwise? What proof do we have God did not give Ron that revelation?

Right on Lisa bob. BSA seems to fixate on its detractors and not promote the positive. Perhaps that is the root cause for the decline in membership. Ops, that's already another thread altogether. Back to my box of chocolates...

Kaji, Here you go. Full text http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_v._City_of_New_York Excerpt... The Court decided that the Act allowed the President to unilaterally amend or repeal parts of duly enacted statutes by using line-item cancellations, and therefore violated the Presentment clause of the Constitution (article I, section 7, clause 2), which outlines a specific practice for enacting a statute. The Court construed the silence of the Constitution on the subject of such unilateral Presidential action as equivalent to "an express prohibition", agreeing with historical material that supported the conclusion that statutes may only be enacted "in accord with a single, finely wrought and exhaustively considered, procedure" (from INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983)) and that a bill must be approved or rejected by the President in its entirety.

Pass the koolaid. One of those chocolates didn't go down the right way.

My momma always said, "Issues and Politics is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get."

SueM brings up a good point. You just can't go into your family practice doctor and demand Ritalin. It requires a diagnosis from a qualified mental health professional. My good friend Gern went through a battery of testing. Some of it was fun, some very tedious. Took the better part of a month. A lot of the same tests they give Alzheimer's patients. Memory, concentration, spatial skills, intelligence tests. What they look for is spikes and valleys in each test. A typical ADD patient does extremely well in some tests and mediocre or poorly in other tests. Gern broke the clinic record in one test where complex shapes needed to be formed from simple blocks. The tester didn't believe it and made Gern do it twice because of the extraordinary time. Kinda like Rainman counting toothpicks. They also interview spouses, family members, friends and coworkers to get a feel for how the patient responds in the real world. Overall, a pretty thorough evaluation. That report is then sent back to your family doctor to recommend treatment options. Counciling is part of it, for both the patient and the family that must live with the patient. That's where the weekly punch list came from and the supportive spouse.

Hence my call for single term limits. No retirement, no career politicians. Remove some of the incentive to bribe, since they will only be there one term. Pass laws that allow citizens to put their day jobs on hold, return to them when they finish their service. Like jury duty, just longer.

Yes, Gern is very fortunate to have a spouse who supports him in his life. Without her, Gern would probably have long ago wandered down the path so many adult ADD patients tread. Gern tried Ritalin. The side effects are loss of sleep and a racing pulse. The latter effect drove poor Gern from the medication. Otherwise, it is very effective. The loss of sleep wasn't really an issue as ADD patients like to soak up as much life as humanly possible. Gern has a theory though, adult ADD people tend to be extremely creative, energetic and driven. A lot entertainment types like muscians fall into this lot. It also explains a lot of the self destructive behavior found in them. The challenge of the ADD patient is to exploit the positive and avoid the pitfalls.

Excellent point John in KC, Line item veto is a double edged sword. Like the nuclear option to stop filibusters, it is great when your party is in power, but a real problem when you find yourself in the minority. Perhaps our founding fathers foresaw this and worded the constitution against such actions. What our country needs a responsive congress to weed out the pork. Term limits are the answer. One term and out, Senate and House. No re-election. A peoples congress, like it was intended from the beginning. Remove the incentive to get re-elected and perhaps we will get a government by the people, for the people.

This is not good news. A 10 percent decline in membership should send off alarms at National that something is very very wrong. Those at the top should be losing sleep about losing their jobs. A complete and open investigation on the problem should be forthcoming. Lets see how they react.

Funscout, My spouse faces the same dilemma. Her spouse was clinically diagnosed with Adult ADD 5 years ago. The aforementioned patient, lets call him Gern, had shown signs of ADD from childhood but was never treated. Gern was the kind of guy who never studied, but aced the exams. Report cards always came back, "exceptionally bright, but doesn't apply himself". Never turned in homework but was two steps in front of the teacher. Those reports followed Gern into his professional career. "Go to guy when there's a problem, but doesn't follow through with the details". Both a bosses dream and nightmare. Gern was successful and admired by his peers, but never promoted to upper management, thank goodness. After diagnosis, he tried several medications, but Gern didn't like the side effects or they had no effect at all. Gern read several books on adult ADD and tried several self help methods. None worked. The problem with most adult ADD patients is their desire to self medicate. This leads to high incidents of drug and alcohol abuse, cocaine being the drug of choice. Cocaine allows the ADD patient to focus on the task at hand. Gives temporary relief to the wanderings. No wonder that Ritalin is called "kiddie coke". Another bad trait is the inability or want to commit to long term relationships. Luckily, Gern has avoided those pitfalls and leads a generally happy and fulfilling life. Gern has learned to live with it, adapt. Much like someone who loses a limb learns to adapt. Gern's spouse is also supportive and understanding. If she wants Gern to accomplish something, she writes it down, doesn't nag. A punch list of outstanding tasks is found every Saturday morning on the night stand. Very detailed and do-able. Gern happily checks those things off between his wanderings to the next shiny object that might catch his attention, if only briefly.

Ed, many, many, many Christians accept Evolution including all Catholics, if they follow the Pope.

Unchanging Moral standards are more based on ones individual degree of a conscience than any religious training. From Wikipedia... Conscience is a moral faculty that leads to feelings of remorse when we do things that go against our inbuilt moral precepts. Such feelings are not intellectually arrived at, though they may cause us to 'examine our conscience' and review those moral precepts, or perhaps resolve to avoid repeating the behaviour. While many people's conscience is driven by their religiosity or conversely their conscience drives their religion, religion is not necessary for the development of a conscience.

Of course, the proper term would not be "retired" but "rear". Rear Scoutmaster. Once a SM, always an SM.