Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged case

Rss Feed Group items tagged

saralong057

Coronavirus: Why are infections rising again in US? | AllSides - 40 views

  •  
    Why do you think the number of cases are starting to rise once again?
  • ...38 more comments...
  •  
    I think they are rising more because people are getting used to covid now and kind of got less strict about the rules and are taking less precautions.
  •  
    I believe that the number of cases is rising once again because the weather is getting colder, and viruses thrive in colder weather. I also think it's because people are starting to get used to covid as well and are getting too reckless.
  •  
    No to mention its flu season so it's almost impossible to know if it's one or the other. It's also been said if you have the flu, but think it's covid and go to get a covid test, it could come out positive even though it's just the flu. Also, it's been proven that the covid test is only 90% or so effective and you can have a false test.
  •  
    I agree with Abby I think that people are getting sick of having to deal with covid and just want it to be over. I think that this winter we will see a decrease in the number of other viruses and colds like the flu because we are wearing masks.
  •  
    I agree with "xxchrysxx" I have also read about what you've mentioned. It makes you wonder how valid Covid-19 really is.
  •  
    Going off of what Abby said, I also agree. I've seen many people walking without masks and not social distancing outside, and I think that's one of the main reasons the numbers are going to keep rising.
  •  
    I think that because of the cold weather and flu season around the corner, the number will start to rise again.
  •  
    People are not taking it as seriously as they should and not following guidelines that were put in place to protect us.
  •  
    I think people haven't been taking COVID 19 seriously, and since it is getting colder and colder it will be harder to contain it.
  •  
    People started loosening the rules and safety regulations lately, plus this is flue season and cold season so I guess its corona season too
  •  
    I think people as time is going on are not taking it as seriously anymore. People are going out not always wearing masks or sanitizing or following the rules as they should.
  •  
    I think that people are kind of forgetting that covid is a serious thing and aren't being as cautious as they were in the beginning. Flu and cold season is also coming and I feel like it will then be hard to tell who has covid or if it is just allergies/ flu.
  •  
    I think people aren't being as serious with covid as they were before. They are going out in large groups of people, hanging around lots of people and not wearing a mask like they should.
  •  
    I think people aren't being as serious with covid as they were before and people aren't wearing mask or didn't wear mask correctly.
  •  
    I believe the numbers are rising again because people have become too comfortable. Covid arrived in the united states around January 20-22 of 202. Covid will have been around for 9 months or so now. That is almost a year that many lucky people have gotten to live through. People are just now assuming that, since they haven't gotten it yet they can be lax about the new protocols.
  •  
    I think the cases are starting to rise again because states peeled back their lockdown measures and the cases began to rise
  •  
    I think it is because it is not being taken seriously enough and the lockdown measures are being repealed.
  •  
    I think that people know how serious this is they just don't care because they want it to be over. Also we should have done a better job with the lockdowns measures.
  •  
    I think cases are starting to rise because people aren't taking it as serious as they were.
  •  
    I think cases are starting to rise again because people are tired of the pandemic and aren't taking as much responsibility as they should. I think also social media influencers like TikTok stars and Kylie Jenner having major parties and posting on social media are influencing people to disregard the seriousness of the pandemic.
  •  
    I think the numbers are rising because people are not being safe and as we get closer to the holidays they have parties and gathers which is where it is probably spreading.
  •  
    I think that numbers are going to continue to rise dramatically because of the holidays, and people not taking it serious anymore.
  •  
    I think that people have become complacent and aren't taking the proper precautions anymore, meaning that the numbers are going to steadily rise, especially around the holidays.
  •  
    I believe the reason why the number of cases is going up so much is that it seems a lot of people forgot that we are still in a pandemic and go out and run around with big groups of people.
  •  
    I feel since we're so far in the pandemic that people stopped and are not taking it as seriously. that the cases are rising and people are becoming lazy on masks and sanitary needs
  •  
    I think it's because we have stopped taking covid seriously, we still have parties and only wear masks when we are required to wear them if it was up to us we wouldn't and I know because I go to parties and no one including me wears masks, not proud of it but it's true, no one takes it seriously unless they're affected by it.
  •  
    i think that it is mainly due the the change in weather. viruses thrive in colder weather. personally i hate wearing a mask and i know a lot of people do too. if you haven't been effected by it, we brush it off because it doesn't pertain to us
  •  
    cuz people still dont want to wear a mask for sum reason.
  •  
    I believe it is because it was made political to wear a mask which is simply just embarrassing for America. People now are wearing masks, but for example in our own state Covid-Kim didn't do anything about the virus and didn't make masks mandatory.
  •  
    Viruses thrive in cold weather, it is colder outside so more people will be inside together, and nobody likes to wear a mask
  •  
    I feel that covid will rise again due to, yes cold weather but also covid has been going on for over a year and people are tired of it and what to go back to their 'normal' lives when we cant yet because it is still around. people want to get back to there old life so they could be taking off the masks to make themselves feel better but it could bring harm to others.
  •  
    I think a lot of this has to do with people not taking it as seriously as they did in the beginning because either they personally haven't been affected or they got it and it wasn't that bad. A lot of the governors are also putting out restrictions but the second we begin to decrease the spread or see a drop in covid cases they then lift these restrictions which then causes our cases to rise again.
  •  
    At the start of COVID, everyone was so much more worried about it. The US immediately went into lockdown, schools closed, and the whole country became a ghost town. Once the CDC released more info to the public about this new virus, however, people stopped worrying as much as they should've been. It flipped from 3 cases and mass hysteria to 25M cases and a more lax attitude. Everyone is tired of this, it's been a year and nothing feels right anymore, so as a society we want to rush into the afterparty and return to our normal lives. But as it's the winter months and COVID hasn't gone away yet, now is especially not the time to ignore the virus. Overall, the cases are still rising because we are letting it happen.
  •  
    Considering the United States has the highest number of COVID-19 cases on the globe, there should be more light towards getting this over and working towards not having to deal with it at all. Like New York, the entire United States, like other countries, should have done a national lockdown which would have definitely stopped the spread of the cases if fewer people were going out and about. Working towards staying at home and being more cautious will help in the long run.
  •  
    Well, this is a bit outdated, and I'd like to know what the statistics are now. However, since the U.S. economy was dropping, I don't think they had much of a choice but to drop the quarantine. Plus, there is a lot of people who aren't educated about the effects of covid, and what it could do to people who have weak immune systems.
  •  
    I believe it is just because people are getting too careless about Covid and won't wear a mask or social distance.
  •  
    I believe the number is rising up again because people aren't wearing masks, people aren't social distancing and people aren't following the rules and then so they get covid and then pass it on to others.
  •  
    I definitely agree with the article because by sending hundreds of thousands of kids back to school and in small hallways and classrooms it was destined to increase the spread even with masks. Tables, door knobs, and rails are hard to keep sanitized consistently. It also says that the ages of 18-22 Covid cases increased by 55% nationally.
  •  
    I believe the number was rising because people are just selfish. There still is a pandemic and people are more concerned about long-term effects of the vaccine but no one is talking about the long-term effects of covid.
  •  
    I think the numbers back then were rising so quick because people weren't following the covid guidelines, now I feel like things are definitely way better than they were then.
alyne47

Iowa lifts mask mandate, gathering restrictions as U.K. variant surges - The Washington... - 27 views

  •  
    Is this the time or should we still keep the mandate and restrictions up until after the pandemic has officially ended? (Vaccines are done and no new cases.)
  • ...22 more comments...
  •  
    This seems like an absolutely bone head move by Governor Reynolds. I can understand now that cases are going down it seems like everything will be ok but restrictions are what bring cases down. Now with a new strain that is more infectious making its way to the US Iowa shouldn't lift any restrictions or things are going to get way worse.
  •  
    I think we should keep the restrictions, they are there to help the spread, even more, lifting it might just make things worse as how we are now. In the future, we might be ready to lift the restrictions, but it's too soon.
  •  
    i think we shouldn't lift the masking restrictions. just because the vaccines are out, doesn't mean the pandemic is over. not everyone will be getting the shot right away. numbers are going down because people are actually following the rules. when the numbers go down, we shouldn't lift the rules. it means the rules are actually working
  •  
    I think during this time lifting the restrictions is the worst possible thing we could do. There are new variants of COVID coming to the U.S. some of which are highly contagious which means now more than ever we should be wearing a mask. The only reason our numbers are down is due to these restrictions and now our governor is going to act shocked when the numbers go up again. We have battled back and forth between lifting restrictions and then enforcing them. Keeping restrictions until COVID is over seems like the most reasonable thing to do at this point.
  •  
    Even tho we have a vaccine out we should still use mask, because not everyone can get the vaccine right now.
  •  
    While we do have a vaccine being rolled out, this does not mean that we should lift the mask mandate. COVID-19 cases are going down but we still should be doing our best to make sure that we don't spread it. Plus, the vaccine is only 95% effective. While that is a large percentage, it doesn't mean that it completely protects us from COVID.
  •  
    I think that it's a horrible idea to lift the mask mandate now. Even though there is finally a light at the end of the tunnel with this pandemic it's just not a logical move to lift it now after months of it being in place when there was no solution. I think we should wait till everyone that wants to be is vaccinated and make sure that it makes a big enough impact that losing our mask will not have an effect the spread. I understand that this pandemic is getting old but if we all start spreading it right before the vaccine is released to everyone and things get so out of hand that we have to lock down again all we have done will be for nothing.
  •  
    The mask mandate should not be lifted, numbers are going down because people are being safe and wearing masks. The vaccine is out but not everyone has access to it and it is not completely effective. People going out in public with no mask increases the chance of either getting COVID or spreading it more. The mask mandate and restrictions should not be lifted until later on in the future when more people have the vaccine, now does not seem like the right time.
  •  
    We shouldn't lift the mask mandate. Numbers are going down because we're wearing masks, if we allow people not to wear masks cases will spike. We need to be diligent with these safety measures if we ever want this pandemic to be over.
  •  
    i dont think we should lift the mask mandate because even if the numbers are going down theyre just going to go right back up. there are still a lot of people who think masks are dumb and useless and refuse to wear them and they put other people at risk, the mandate was the only thing keeping others safe from them. i also know multiple people who arent able to get the vaccine because of past health issues and so wearing a mask was their only way of staying safe.
  •  
    This doesn't seem safe or smart because cases are still high, and even if they're decreasing now they will spike if everyone stops wearing a mask.
  •  
    The numbers are going to continue to grow with stuff like this happening. We already don't have a stay at home order,but now we're lifting the masks? This isn't going to make the virus disappear. If anything it will make things worse
  •  
    I don't think we should lift our masks now since Covid is still going on, if we lift our masks then Covid will just rise right back up and we'll just have to go back into quarantine.
  •  
    Lifting our masks now, would just cause more cases to rise and more people will get confirmed. Also there is not enough vaccines currently to give to everyone.
  •  
    I agree with bklopp601 because I don't think we should lift our masks because Covid is still going on, if we lift our masks then Covid will just rise right back up and we'll just have to go back into quarantine.
  •  
    I don't agree that we should lift the mask mandate as more people will get infected and cases will spike up causing another full lockdown and another mask mandate will be enforced later again.
  •  
    I don't think we should have lifted the mask mandate now that it is lifted more people are going to be getting sick & the cases are going to rise again meaning we could go into another lockdown & the mask mandate will be brought back
  •  
    I don't think they should lift the mask mandate. Yes, people are getting the vaccine, but most people don't have access to it, plus others don't feel safe getting it. We also have different strains of the virus going around that are more contagious than the original.
  •  
    I think that lifting the mask mandate is just going to set us back. Even though people are getting the vaccine, majority do not.
  •  
    I don't think they should've lifted the masking policy. Although cases are going down, Covid is still alive and thriving. If we lift the masking mandates now, we may need to wear masks longer in the future
  •  
    I agree that the mask mandate should have stayed in place because the cases may be going down but the virus is still very easily spread and without masks cases are destined to go back up.
  •  
    I don't think they should have lifted it, but honestly, not much has changed, most businesses are still requiring masks (as they should). I still think there needs to be a mandate though.
  •  
    I think its good that the mandate is lifted.
  •  
    I think its fine they lift it as long people keep getting vaccinated, but they should definitely keep the mandate in hospitals and places like that.
jessicasolorio

3 million new Covid-19 infections were reported in November, as hospitalizations reach ... - 7 views

  •  
    I can't imagine how many cases there are going to be in December when Christmas rolls around.
  • ...7 more comments...
  •  
    I think cases are going to rise very dramatically due to people getting together for Thanksgiving and Christmas.
  •  
    I think that the cases are going to keep going up. People are still going to get together for Christmas and thanksgiving and it is going to go way up.
  •  
    Cases are going to keep going up over the holidays.
  •  
    people are still getting together in big groups for the holidays and the number of cases is going to rise more and more.
  •  
    I'm sure no matter how you look at it, the cases will drastically go up in December. Especially since Christmas is rolling around, we saw how many families and people still gathered together for Thanksgiving. It's not going to be any better for Christmas.
  •  
    This is just going to get worse after black friday if nothing changes.
  •  
    thanksgiving and christmas are both holidays that are meant to be spent with your families so there was already no doubt that cases were going to go up. and same goes for black friday, you're shopping at multiple different stores in the span of two or three days
  •  
    Many people are spending time with their families around this time so there was no doubt that cases would have gone up. I'm just surprised they went up so drastically and in such a short period.
  •  
    we all suspected the rate of infection would go up during the holidays. meeting with people from all over the country definitely increases the amount of exposure a family can receive. people can choose to connect virtually instead of in person. it's not the same, but it decreases the exposure
Bryan Pregon

The Morning: 'Covid zero' isn't happening - 25 views

  •  
    This article really opened my eyes to see how the flu compares to the Coronavirus. Even with the vaccines rolling out, Covid cases will still happen even if they are decreasing. It will take numerous years to get back to "normal" and hopefully, this pandemic opened our eyes to realize just how serious these diseases and viruses can be.
  • ...18 more comments...
  •  
    i have thought from the beginning that covid will not disappear. but it will get better like the flu, thanks to vaccines and people becoming immune.
  •  
    I think this article kinda showed me a perspective that I didn't really think about. I kinda just blew off everyone saying it was gonna go away because obviously, that's just people being optimistic. But reading about the number of serious cases covid/flu wise made me realize that it is managable.
  •  
    I thought from the beginning that covid will not disappear and life wouldn't be life anymore, but I wasn't going to think about bad so I thought to myself, it will get better like the flu, thanks to vaccines older people have a better chance of becoming immune.
  •  
    I did not expect that the covid deaths were going to be that high than the flu deaths until I saw the graph that the article has. I'm glad that the covid vaccine is out so it can help sick people.
  •  
    I also believed that it was going to be very hard to get rid of or at least control covid but now I realize how our Nation has used all types of advanced technology and knowledge to stop it. Ieven see how we have achieved such as great overcome, the cure.
  •  
    "For fully vaccinated people, serious illness from Covid is extremely rare, much rarer than serious illness from the seasonal flu." i think this is great! seems like the vaccine is working! I have a question though... any update on the age limit for vaccines? i know when they first started, it was 16+ and then it was 18+... in china, they were vaccinating children as young as two.
  •  
    I believe that covid cases will happen even when they are decreasing. I looked at the chart and was surprised at the difference between covid and all of the other diseases.
  •  
    I think the thought that Covid is just going to disappear with the preventative measures has mostly just been a necessary lie or at least has intentionally not fully been explained just for the consequences of people seeing it as never going away. People already don't want to follow guidelines, but if it's never going to go away I think that would embolden a lot of people to completely disregard guidelines unrightfully.
  •  
    I think that if we had acted faster and with more intention at the beginning of the outbreak, we could've been back to normal already. Australia had some of the harshest quarantine restrictions before things really got bad and they're essentially back to normal already. As long as we don't get overconfident maybe we can avoid extending this quarantine longer that it needs to be... again.
  •  
    In the first few weeks, I did think covid would just blow over but after a year of living with it clearly didn't. I think that as time passes hopefully in the next year or two the vaccines will help create immunity and keep people safe and eventually we can return to a somewhat normal life. I've heard the analogy of covid being like how airport security came to be. A sad tragedy occurred but because of that event, we learned to put precautions in place to prevent it from happing. I feel like once covid gets under control we will be better equipped to not only survive another virus if that is the case but we are also better equipped to prevent the sickness and death from existing ones as well.
  •  
    We're still gonna be dealing with losses while covid is around but the vaccine can hopefully start to clear this up for people. So I think that within the next year these cases will go down.
  •  
    This article was definitely an interesting read. I think that even with the vaccine being given out it will take time to get back to normal, especially when people are still disregarding safety guidelines.
  •  
    I agree with tsilva588 because we are still gonna be dealing with losses while covid is around. But the whole world hopes that the vaccine can hopefully start to clear this up for people because I think within the next year these cases are going to go down.
  •  
    With the Covid vaccine rolling out, I think the number of fatalities from Covid will go down, But I think the number of people getting infected won't be going down by a large percentage since people don't trust the covid vaccine and people even then don't want to wear a mask. I think life won't be normal for the next 2-3 years.
  •  
    This article was interesting to read and very true, it won't go away completely but hopefully, soon we will be going back to normalcy. We have been learning to live with it and just like any virus, it is going to die out but we should always be cautious no matter what. Keep clean and take care of ourselves, as it overall doesn't have as much of an effect on healthier people.
  •  
    I agree, while yes it may still go down, this pandemic reminds us how bad things can get, we are lucky to brush with a not so deadly disease, yes people still die from it, but the mortality rate is exceedingly high, thanks to huge advancements in medical research and development, and, on the optimistic side of things, many good ideas and products came out of this, restaurants being able to deliver, seeing loved ones on a screen to be able to connect with them more easily, and widespread connectivity with everyone.
  •  
    this was interesting because the situation was put into perspective. They say that is should be kinda normal around the summer and that is such a good new because that means senior year will be more normal. I was kinda hesitant about the vaccine but apparently it is really helping even though there are some people who still do get sick is has come down to less people.
  •  
    I thought this article was interesting because it helped me gain a better perspective of COVID-19. Even with vaccines coming out, the world will not be put back on its axis because of all the damage that´s been done. It will take a while for things to return normally. Even with the decreasing number of cases, there will still be people who get it. It will still spread around like any other virus. I knew it was obviously a bad problem but it really put it into perspective for me.
  •  
    This article was very eye-opening. A lot of people think that the coronavirus will soon end, according to the article, it says that the coronavirus will be not be extinguished anytime soon. The University of Johns Hopkins says that people thinking the virus will end sounds like a fantasy and not a reality. The virus caused a lot of people harm and sadness. Many things were ruined by the virus and have opened a lot of people eye's to appreciate and value what they have. Having the vaccine it'll help us make the virus manageable, just like the flu.
  •  
    I liked this article because it gave me a better view on how corona is and how long it will take for people and us to get back to our "old world" and how it compares to other viruses.
Bryan Pregon

"I can't breathe!" N.Y. chokehold decision - CNN.com - 24 views

  •  
    Recent cases like these bring up issues of POWER and govt authority. Are these examples concerning? Which side (police/suspect) do you tend to sympathize with most?
  • ...14 more comments...
  •  
    I don't think it's concerning. The government is there for a reason, and they need power to do their jobs. I tend to sympathize with cops because it only shows the bad police that are in the system, a video of an officer doing something good rarely goes viral.
  •  
    I sympathize with the cop. He is here to protect us from people that can cause bad things, Michael Brown actually attacked him and the cop did what he had to do to survive. You have to show respect to cops and he didn't do only because he was black or that he wanted to kill someone, he did it becuase the felt threaten for his life
  •  
    I usually don't see death as an answer to anything unless that person is causing harm to other people. I don't think the officer should have actually killed him but instead used a different method to getting him to do what he wanted him to do.
  •  
    I think these examples are very concerning. I sympathize with the suspect, Eric Garner, after watching the short 2 minute clip of the incident. The suspect was unarmed, and was only verbally refusing arrest, there is no probable cause for putting the suspect in a choke hold, and very well killing him. The grand jury that decided that officer, Daniel Pantaleo, did the right thing started peaceful protest in the Garner family. This is like the case in Ferguson, Missouri, except these protest do not include, looting, setting businesses on fire, or tear gas.
  •  
    I think there could have been a better way to control the situation other than a choke hold. It would be understandable if it was for a few seconds to calm Garner down, but the police should have known when to stop. He should have been charged for excessive force.
  •  
    I strongly sympathize with Eric Garner and his family in this case. Police are stepping over the line in instances like these, and no penalties are given to them. The fact that death is necessary for the resistance of a single unarmed citizen is horrific. Resisting arrest or not resisting arrest, if there is no threat of fatal harm to the police officer, no arrest should ever resort to murder.
  •  
    I understand that the police thought they had to stop him, but putting him in a choke hold was not the right way. They are going to far with the power they think they have.
  •  
    i didn't see any reason why the officer put Eric Garner in a choke hold for what he did, the officer was abusing his power, a choke hold was not the right answer.
  •  
    They are going to far with the power they think they have, a choke hold was not right way to go
  •  
    yes especially the part when the officer put eric in the choke. the officer thinks he can do whatever he wants just cause hes a cop and had some power of us but he took it to far
  •  
    There were better methods of restraint to get Eric Garner into handcuffs. A choke hold was definitely not necessary, and the cop was definitely abusing his power. No attempted arrest should end in the death of someone, cop or citizen.
  •  
    The cop has a right to detain anyone that is breaking the law, but he should not have put him in a choke hold. He has numerous tools capable of detaining someone such as; handcuffs, pepper spray, and a taser.
  •  
    I don't believe that anyone should have any chances of death when being put in handcuffs, but I also don't know the full story of the incidents of the victims, maybe they weren't cooperating and the cops felt that the only way to control them was the chokehold. I believe that the cops should find another way to hold down their victims when handcuffing
  •  
    I think that this case is similar to the Ferguson case which could cause more people to start protesting more and even worse then they already are. Things could get really bad if it ever happened again.
  •  
    The cop has a right to detain anyone that is breaking the law, but he should not have put him in a choke hold. He has numerous tools he could of used while detaining someone like his taser, handcuffs, or pepper spray.
  •  
    The cop has no reason to put him in a choke hold and for so long. The guy was saying he couldn't breathe. This is very wrong and he could of detained him a few other ways.
Bryan Pregon

Supreme Court to hear cheerleader Brandi Levy's First Amendment case on student speech ... - 23 views

  •  
    ""This is the most momentous case in more than five decades involving student speech," said Justin Driver, a Yale law professor"
  • ...18 more comments...
  •  
    I don't think she should have been kicked out for expressing her opinion about the squad. There are so many people who do that especially about teachers.It doesn't effect how anyone is i.e bullying/ harassment these are just things that she thinks about the school and the sport.
  •  
    I believe that the coach had the right to kick her off of the squad. Her speech may have been protected however sports while they may be connected to the school ultimately if the coach decides that a participant is setting a bad example for their team they will be kicked out.
  •  
    I don't think she should have been kicked out for expressing how she felt if anything make her do more conditioning but dont kick her off the team
  •  
    I dont think that the coach really had any right to kick her off the team, she was expressing how it all made her feel and it was not at school, and why would someone even show the coach? why did they feel then need to do they
  •  
    I feel like the coach should not have had the right to kick the girl off the team because she expressed her feelings. The girl did this outside of school and it happens daily everywhere it is just never reported to the coach.
  •  
    I don't think the coach should have been able to kick her off the team she was expressing her feelings. I mean if they would have just let her on the team in the first place this situation wouldn't have happened.
  •  
    I think it was wrong for her to be kicked off the team just because she was expressing her feelings. It didn't even happen at school so she should not get punished by the school.
  •  
    Here is another link to the story if the original is not available for you... https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56886687
  •  
    i think he was right to kick her off the team because the speech wasn't appropriate and that represents the teams, but i also think that she had the right to say what she was thinking, just not in that way. if he kicked her off for expressing her thoughts in a different way, then that would not be okay.
  •  
    In my opinion the coach should not have been able to kick her off the team. She was simply expressing her emotions and feelings about school. Many students say stuff like this in school and don't get punished for it.
  •  
    I personally think that kicking her off the team was the right decision. Her speech directly affected the team, the coaches, and the school, and action needed to be taken so it was clear that inappropriate conduct won't be tolerated. If she had worded her thoughts differently, maybe the outcome wouldn't have been the same.
  •  
    I feel like they shouldn't punish her. She was off school and had the right to voice her opinion. The school can't do anything if she wasn't even on school grounds.
  •  
    I think in this specific case they shouldn't have kicked her off the team because she was expressing how she feels. She didn't say anything offensive and she wasn't specifically targeting people. If what she said was targeting someone negatively or she was targeting the coach then maybe it'd be a different story but she was vaguely expressing her feelings and I don't think there is anything wrong with what she said.
  •  
    I don't think she should have been kicked off the team because she wasn't directly targeting someone. She was just voicing how she felt, I don't think she should be punished for that.
  •  
    I don't think she should be allowed to be kicked off for this because with something like this there isn't really anyone in specific that this is aimed towards so there's no targeted harm.
  •  
    I feel like they had a right to kick her off of the team. I'm on a competitive dance team and if I say anything that bashes or offends people at or people that work at my studio, then I would be kicked off of the team. She posted a photo saying that she's done with cheerleading and that is definitely something that would cost her a spot on the team.
  •  
    I feel like that is the right to free speech and she shouldn't be punished, but at the same time if its F School and F Cheerleading then why do it? Why participate in it then? Seems stupid on her part and disrespectful to the team, which I can see why she should also get kicked off. Because they don want someone like her representing their team.
  •  
    I think that it was right for them to kick her off because on a team you want to have responsible and respectful teammates. What she did affect the wholes teams image so I agree with what was done
  •  
    I think this case is dumb and a waste of time. So what she said F school everyone does. She's also a teenager she should be focusing on more important things other than a case.
  •  
    Obviously, she shouldn't have said this but I think the punishment was a bit harsh and she shouldn't have gotten kicked off the team for this. Yes it was disrespectful and no okay but the punishment seems extreme.
Jeremy Vogel

ACLU asks Supreme Court to reconsider gene patenting case - 3 views

  •  
    The American Civil Liberties Union has asked for a second time that the Supreme Court invalidate Myriad Genetics Inc. 's patents on two genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancers , the latest salvo in a case with broad consequences for the future of gene-based medicine.
  •  
    http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/55391979-79/court-case-myriad-genes.html.csp There has been an update in this case. It seems that the Supreme Court has decided to review this case.
ataylor074

Volunteers provide oxygen as India's COVID-19 cases near 20 million | Reuters - 16 views

  •  
    Do you guys think they should go into a lockdown? Do you think we should join the UK in sending aid to them?
  • ...14 more comments...
  •  
    I think India should seriously considering going into a lock down, even for a few days or weeks. That way it can contain the spread of the virus outbreak. Last year, we learned about the dangers of not containing this virus. I also think the U.S. should join the UK in helping them. I know our country has it's own problems, but if we can -- even just a little bit -- we should help others in the world during these tough times.
  •  
    i think that india should go into lockdown. cases are rising and if they don't quarantine, it will continue to rise
  •  
    They should consider a lockdown. So many people are getting sick, it's the best way to go. If they don't, who knows what could happen?
  •  
    they should definitely go on lockdown because it will just get worse and worse if they do not do anything right now when they should.
  •  
    I strongly feel that India should go on a breathly lockdown. The virus could spread more than it already is. With caution and responsibility, I feel like the numbers would go down by a lot. Now that covid has been going on for more than a year, we should think and do more research of how we should help others.
  •  
    I think for a country like India it's more complicated then just going into a lockdown. They have a population much higher than countries that have been able to successfully have lockdowns which makes it inherently much harder. On top of this India socioeconomic makeup make up is substantially poorer than countries that have had lockdowns as well. For a lot of India's population a lockdown just isn't viable, and you can see this in what happened in America as well where poorer people worked through lockdowns and because of this in poorer areas COVID spread easily. However this is a large portion of India's population, so this is an area where America needs to start exporting our extra vaccines since we have already had major success in our vaccine roll out and this is a grave situation
  •  
    I think India needs to go on a heavy lockdown. It's important that they take a lot of precautions because the virus could spread more than it already is and prevent another world lockdown from happening and keep other people safe. It would also help their numbers go down and to keep the threat of it spreading contained.
  •  
    India should go on lockdown right now when they can before it gets even worse for the people/
  •  
    With the severity of COVID in India, I think they need to come up with a strategic plan to control the virus. Whether that means a heavy lockdown or something else it's important they do something now before it gets even worse. They are in a terrible place right now with the amount of COVID cases and I don't think anyone wants to know what it will be like if it continues to get any worse.
  •  
    India definitely needs a lockdown right now. With COVID cases rising so drastically, this is the best possible thing for them to do to hopefully slow the spread of the virus.
  •  
    Understandably the severity of COVID-19 is extremely high, but India is also a third world country that relies heavily on their work force to bring in any kind of revenue for their government. In a country like India the governments respect for the residents is slim so while they should go into lock down I don't believe they will.
  •  
    They definitley need a lockdown as soon as possible. That could be a huge mess for India if covid isn't solved. I do think the US could provide aid I don't see why we couldn't?
  •  
    They should go on lockdown, it'd benefit them so things don't get worse. They are suffering and need as much help as possible so we should help them.
  •  
    I do believe they need to go into lockdown very soon so they can try to help keep themselves safe.
  •  
    I think they should go into lockdown to make sure everyone is safe.
  •  
    I think they should go to lockdown since covid is very bad there.
Bryan Pregon

Iowa confirms first child death from COVID as schools reopen - 17 views

  •  
    I think it is terrible that the family lost their child due to Covid, but then again this is only one out thousands of kids to actually die. Unfortunately people are going to die from this but I think it is best if we try to get back to normal as fast as we can.
  • ...11 more comments...
  •  
    It is scary how big this virus has become and how deadly it can be to anyone. I think we need to keep trying to stay safe and help others be safe and healthy too. Especially how it was a young child that passed due to Covid is scary.
  •  
    This is very horrible and I think for this reason a lot of schools are closing. It's hard to keep everyone safe when everyone is itching to get back to normal. We have to remember this is kinda real and even tho it stinks we have to try to keep everything normal.
  •  
    I agree that its awful that a child passed due to the virus but I disagree when people say that they're just one of the many to come. Although unfortunately, it's true, we should use that as a reason to slow down the reopening of schools and other places. Our safety and health should always come before numbers on a chart.
  •  
    This is the scary part about going back to school when there is a pandemic going on, you don't know what's going to happen, I think this is why most schools are closing and doing online because they want to keep everyone safe and still have them "in school".
  •  
    that is really sad, but this is a new situation for everyone and there are no previously written guidelines for how to handle it so in reality things like this are expected until we know how to fix the problems. it's all trial and error
  •  
    This is so awful and terrifying. because we all going to school 2 or 3 in week and maybe someone have a Corona and when i think that, we all have to wear mask and we should do social distance until Corona is end.
  •  
    The worst thing that could happen to anyone is to lose family, That can be the worst of the pains. Also I don't think it is right to say that is was one from many to come. This is sadly true, this is not near a good think honestly they should've waited more to re open schools. I would rather keep people safe and alive then get an education!
  •  
    It's terrible that this is all happening, Hopefully people listen to the guidelines that people set to stay safe and we can all get back to normal life soon. -Khuntley170
  •  
    This is probably the worst-case scenario as we begin going back to school here in Iowa. The fact that this happened to a child is beyond belief. It is so scary to go to school when you are not sure if you are truly safe. We have had up to four cases here at AL, and it is only growing which is probably the scariest part.
  •  
    I think it's terrible how a young child died from Covid, now his family has to mourn his death. Though there are many other cases just like this one of children dying from this virus yet schools around the country are being reopened ignoring these deaths. Not only that but opening schools could cause an impact on the spread of the virus.
  •  
    I really think that this is terrible, that this and a bunch of cases like this happening in multiple states all over the country. I believe we might have opened too early to really guarantee the safety of these children and kids in class. Of course, we want to go back to normal, but we can't if we don't try to distance ourselves and make an attempt to prevent it spreading. Just because it doesn't hurt YOU doesn't mean it won't hurt others.
  •  
    this is bad because a young student died. but there is a lot of children who haven't died this kid is the first young kid to die due to Covid. and even though this is terrible we have to think of the majority and not just go off of one kid that died.
  •  
    This is definitely scary and unthinkable, especially being so close to "home". There are a bunch of cases like these happening, which is sad. I honestly think we opened too early. With having online school available in Iowa now, I don't understand why we did not use that to our advantage to keep us all safe, and work from home.
Bryan Pregon

Justices will soon decide whether to take up same-sex marriage appeals - CNN.com - 7 views

  •  
    I'm not sure if we as a society, are prepared for such a big idea to be handled. The Justices are going to, if they take up the case, make some major leaps and bounds for the community, or pretty much end same sex marriage. If the court does take up the case, I am going to want to follow it extremely closely.
  • ...13 more comments...
  •  
    I think that it is time for the Supreme Court to rule on this issue. This is an issue that is important to a minority group that has never really been ruled on by the Supreme Court. I personally want to see how the Court applies the Loving v. Virginia case to one or all of the cases they may hear. I just don't expect anything until after the election in November because it has become an important issue this election cycle. Payton I don't think that the Supreme Court could end same-sex marriage. Marriage licenses are left up to each individual state and I can't imagine any possible outcome that would result in the Supreme Court taking away a State's right to issue a marriage license to whoever they want to grant a license to. I can see them saying there is no right to marry at the federal level or that the Federal Government doesn't have to recognize same-sex marriages but I don't see them telling states that they can't issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple if the state wants to.
  •  
    Jeremy, what I am saying is that same sex marriage, if ruled against, will have almost no chance of reversing the choice for a very long time. Based upon our constitutional values though, I doubt that they will rule in favor of those that oppose same sex marriage though.
  •  
    I'm still like . . . trying to figure out why exactly some people hate the idea of gay marriage so much and want to make sure that it's not legal. I mean, even if it's for religious reasons, like their religion doesn't support gays and lesbians, it's not like they would be getting married in their church or that they even want to. It doesn't affect those against gay marriage at all. It really only affects gays and lesbians and it makes them happy.
  •  
    I think whatever the outcome and effects of the ruling will be a new direction in our lives as Americans. I'm interested in how this will effect us in the future.
  •  
    http://gaymarriage.procon.org/ I know I got a little confused about why some people think same sex marriage marriage is bad and I found this to be very helpful in understanding it.
  •  
    I, myself, do not agree with gay marriage, or being gay at all. But that is my personal beliefs. I don't want people to try to tell me that I'm wrong, because I'm not saying I am right. I know this is a big issue in the U.S and it does need to be addressed, but I do think it is more of a state issue. As for gay marriage, it will probably be passed to be legal, and that's fine because it really doesn't affect me, I am straight. But from a conservative viewpoint, here is why some don't agree with gay marriage, not just because of religion. It is because it defeats the whole sacredness marriage was and still is meant to be. To me it is for man and wife. Not man and man or woman and woman. I am not intending to offend anyone at all, if someone wants to be gay, then be gay. I will not discriminate, I just will not support it, because I don't agree with it.
  •  
    You do realize that times have changed, right? And there are a lot of things that have changed as times have gone on, like gender roles, for example. It used to be that women were raised to do all the housework and mothering and such because "things were meant to be that way". Meanwhile, men were raised to fight and work on the farms because "things were meant to be that way". Now women, while payed less, are allowed to have jobs and have gotten the right to vote, but even so still have to fight to gain and keep other rights. Honestly, unless you're white, straight, and male, you haven't really gotten rights until sometime in the late 19th /20th century, and for some in the 21st century. Also, how would a homosexual relationship ruin the sacredness of marriage? When you really consider it, marriage isn't all that sacred, especially these days because there's money and materialism involved, and then of course sex too. Of course, sex is okay so long as you're married, but if you're not married and you've had sex, it's considered immoral, according to society. And even though people these days marry for love, those things are still involved in it. And if marriage is sacred, then why are divorces allowed? Aren't sacred things supposed to be protected no matter what? Divorce obviously doesn't protect marriage. It just ends marriages. If marriage was considered sacred then divorces wouldn't be allowed, and divorce is necessary at times.
  •  
    I think that if a man and a woman hate each other but still have more rights to get married than two homosexuals who actually love each other, then we should definitely legalize it!
  •  
    Whoa, I never said anything about the roles of men and women, sex or divorce. I was stating my opinion on gay marriage, and I will continue to do so in this comment. Again, not intended to offend anyone, just my take on what I think about gay marriage and being gay in general. Kirstina, you just proved my point for me that being gay isn't right by saying it depends on how people are raised that changes how they will be like when their older. So are the way people are raised now, affecting if they are gay or straight? If someone were told tell me that people are born gay, I would say they are wrong. (I'm bringing this up because that is probably what you and many viewers believe) Here's why, when you're a little kid, you don't think about which gender you like. You think about having friends with whoever and don't even know about how to take friendship further than that, as a child. There is no gene in your body that makes you gay.Plus, no one that says they're gay, knows until they are teens or older. That is because they observe how others are, think about how they are treated by the opposite gender and make their decision. And why are there all of the sudden so many gay people? Why weren't there any back then? Not because it wasn't allowed, because it wasn't not allowed, it was just unheard of. It's (to me) because it isn't natural. It is a life CHOICE that people have made for their OWN reasons. Some for attention, some to fit in, some because they can't find someone of the opposite sex that is interested in them and some for reasons I don't know. People are put on this Earth to make more people, just like animals are here to live, provide for people and make more animals. Two men or two women physically cannot make more people. Man and man and woman and woman are not meant to be together. What is and/or was meant to be can't change. Because whatever is meant to be is just meant to be and you can't change that, no matter what time in history it is. Gay marriage d
  •  
    Gay marriage does ruin the sacredness of marriage because a married couples are supposed to stay together, reproduce, carry on the human race, and be a happy family. I know, sounds a little far fetched in this modern day, but if America could go back to that, this country would be so much better off. I'm not saying divorces don't happen, or are wrong because my parents are divorces and my mom is remarried and that doesn't make them bad people. But I am saying that they made a mistake somewhere and did, in turn affect the sacredness of marriage. Divorces should not be illegal, but people should think twice before getting married. Also, I'm not trying to squash the dreams of gay couples, or tell anyone that I'm right and their wrong, that is not my intention.
  •  
    Alex I would just like to point out a few things you may have over looked or may not have known. The first thing is that there aren't "all of the sudden so many gay people?" There have been homosexual and bisexual people throughout history. One example is the first gay couple to be joined by Civil Union in the world, in Denmark, in 1989 and had been in a relationship 40 years prior to their Union. The reason we don't hear much about homosexuality in history is because it used to be a crime that if found guilty of being homosexual you could be put to death or thrown in jail for it (the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has more information on this particular subject). It is reasonable, then, to believe that homosexuals would keep their homosexuality to themselves as to protect themselves from violence. Another thing you seem to overlook is that there are heterosexual couples who "physically cannot make more people," for one reason or another without using alternative methods such as surrogates and/or in vitro fertilization. that still enjoy the benefits and legal aspects (such as inheritance and the right to hospital visits and end of life decisions for their spouse) of marriage. These same options are also available for Same-Sex couples and they have the option to have children that are the biologic child of one of the parents just like families where one of the parents is infertile. Homosexual behaviors have also been observed in natural populations in a large number of other animals have shown homosexual behaviors while observed in their natural habitats and also in unnatural locations such as zoos. So to say that homosexuality is unnatural ignores that these observations have been made in the "natural" world. The finial thing that you brought up was about when people form, or in your words "choose", their sexuality. The American Psychological Association says that a persons sexual orientation can start to form in middle childhood and early adolescence a
  •  
    Alex . . . you totally missed my point with me saying how people used to be raised. This is what I said: "And there are a lot of things that have changed as times have gone on, like gender roles, for example. It used to be that women were raised to do all the housework and mothering and such because "things were meant to be that way". Meanwhile, men were raised to fight and work on the farms because "things were meant to be that way". Now women, while payed less, are allowed to have jobs and have gotten the right to vote, but even so still have to fight to gain and keep other rights." I was merely giving that as an example of how times have changed and how things have changed. If women and nonwhite races can get rights over time, then why can't homosexual people? That doesn't seem fair. Marriage has now become a legal thing, and even if you don't want to, you have to accept it as it is - a legal thing that's nowhere near sacred. So what's so bad about gays having the the same legal rights to get married and all the legal things that come with it? Also, at dinner tonight, my dad told me that marriage used to be a property thing. Women/wives used to be considered property and not human beings. African Americans became slaves of the American white people, and therefore were also property. Now slavery is illegal, and marriage happens between two people who love each other and are willing/want to be legally bound. Also, therefore marriage has never been sacred. I also agree wholeheartedly with what Jeremy said.
  •  
    Guys, Alex gave her opinion, she even said in her that is her personal belief, and that she didn't want anyone trying to tell her that she was wrong. She stated her opinion, you don't have to kill her through a website, It is her opinion, lay off.....
  •  
    I am glad to see opinions on both side of this issue in the comments (lots of good information in many posts and "food for thought"). Thanks for being respectful in your comments! To continue the discussion, Americans are almost equally divided on gay marriage. Here is the most recent poll data to see how we have changed our opinion since 1996... http://goo.gl/yUIP3
  •  
    In all reality, gay marriage being a possibility to be legalized, is very interesting. Our constitutional founders, from what many anti-gay's claim, say that the founders were all religious, and did not support gay marriage. The problem with that is the constitutional wording, freedom of religion. Another issue is separation of church and state, this the facts Mr. Pregon gave are interesting, but can we say the religion is a reason as to why gay marriage should/should not be legal? Something funny, although probably irrelevant, is the idea of a church for the gay community to worship as they please, and is accepting of gay marriage. Form some sort of religion out of this, and by that, the gay community can simply do as they please, and get married as they want just by the basis of our constitution. I don't know why, but that thought just came to mind.
Emili Davis

Man sues over ¨ugly baby¨ - 4 views

  •  
    This is crazy how could someone sue their wife for having an ugly baby? I don't think the court should allow this to even be a case..
  • ...9 more comments...
  •  
    This man is disgusting. He married his wife for 'love'? If he really did love her, he would have been able to get past the way their daughter looked. Why this was a case is beyond me..
  •  
    I don't think you should be able to sue someone for having an ugly baby. It's not anyone's "fault", and if it were, the blame could not be placed SOLELY on the mother. I don't think this guy has a legitimate reason to sue his wife, and obviously he is a little disturbed. I don't think the courts should even allow this to be a case.
  •  
    This is nuts!
  •  
    Thats the most ridiculous thing to sue over and the worse thing was that he won. He has to remember that half of that baby's DNA is his.
  •  
    Its sad that people are so concerned about appearance. He has no right to discourage the child. This shows people will go to extremes to keep a good reputation.
  •  
    This is just wrong. He can't blame the mother, the baby is his just as much as it is his mother's. Besides it's not like she chose for the baby to be ugly!
  •  
    This is just down right awful. How could someone be so cold? He is so concerned about appearance that he can't even love his own child. And the fact that the court agreed with him and gave him 12 hundred dollars is just wrong.
  •  
    How could someone say that about their own child. However, it was wrong of the mother to not mention her surgeries, but if he really did ever care about her, he would not have said such things.
  •  
    who sues heir own wife for having a ugly baby ..... does he know that baby is his just as much as it is his mother's. He is mostly suing himself !
  •  
    This is wrong because a lot of baby's are not cute when they are born but at the same time some are.
  •  
    Lololololol. What? Just because the woman is "ugly" doesn't mean the baby's appearance is entirely her fault. It was his sperm along with her egg. His DNA and hers. Wouldn't that make him partially responsible? This case shouldn't have even been allowed to go to court.
deahnna

For 22 Years, Caught in a Murder Case's Tangled Web - 0 views

  •  
    Two boys were convicted of a murder charge, but were they really the killers? The case is full of problems, holes, and errors made by the detective on the case.
  •  
    The detective on the case is probably doing all this protect the real killers. Its abuse of power yet again.
  •  
    Detectives shouldn't have the right to just arrest whomever without concrete evidence.
Bryan Pregon

US asks top court not to take case on NSA cyber-snooping - FRANCE 24 - 1 views

  •  
    "President Barack Obama's administration is urging the Supreme Court not to take up the first case it has received on controversial National Security Agency cybersnooping."
dylan_root1

Man in Isolation in Possible Hawaii Ebola Case - 3 views

  •  
    A man is being treated in isolation in Hawaii for what health officials say is a potential Ebola case, local ABC affiliate KITV reported Thursday, though he could be sick with some other ailment. Authorities stress that they are being especially cautious amid concerns over the deadly virus, two days after the first confirmed case in the United States was identified in Texas.
  •  
    Not good.
  •  
    WE'RE ALL SCREWED RUN FOR YOUR FREAKIN LIVES
Bryan Pregon

Supreme Court's blockbuster term: Cases to watch - CNNPolitics - 0 views

  •  
    "A full-strength Supreme Court will take the bench Monday for what could be the most consequential term in decades, as the ideologically split justices consider cases as diverse as religious liberty, immigration, cell phone privacy, voting rights and possibly the legality of President Donald Trump's controversial travel ban."
ataylor074

Derek Chauvin case: George Floyd honored in Minneapolisahead of trial - 17 views

  •  
    What do you guys think about this?
  • ...11 more comments...
  •  
    I think that they're doing an amazing job at peacefully trying to get justice for George Floyd, they mentioned a group called Mother's Love who were standing outside of the trial I think and were handing out flyers and offering emotional support.
  •  
    I'm glad that the trial is finally underway. I just wonder how they found unbiased members to make up a jury? You'd have to be living under a rock to have not heard about this case and formed some kind of opinion. While I do believe the officer is in the wrong, he still deserves the right to a fair trial, and I'm wondering how fair this trial will be since it's such a public matter and so personal to so many.
  •  
    I'm glad the trial is finally happening, I wonder if the person who shot George Floyd will be guilty
  •  
    I believe that George Floyd had an extremely unreasonable death and he didn't get his deserved rights. I also believe that a remembrance should be in order to remind us that we have protection against things like this.
  •  
    The continuous protest throughout the trial is something that is going to keep the light on this important issue. The trial is going to stay focused on and true justice will be served for George Floyd.
  •  
    I'm glad that they found the person that killed George Floyd guilty.
  •  
    I'm glad that they found the person that killed George Floyd and found guilty.
  •  
    It is good that he was convicted of all the crimes charged against him. I couldn't imagine the outcome being different.
  •  
    I'm glad that justice was served and that Derek Chauvin was convicted of all the crimes against him. Let's just hope that other people like George Floyd will get their justice too.
  •  
    I'm glad he was actually found guilty since there have been many times before where justice hasn't been served and they go free but this is good progress.
  •  
    It's good that he was found guilty, he 100% was guilty. George Floyd didn't have the greatest past but that was no reason enough for him to be murdered.
  •  
    I think it's good that he was finally found guilty. I'm glad that some justice was served in this case unlike many many others that deserve it.
  •  
    I think it's good that finally after a year Chauvin was finally found guilty, finally some justice.
Bryan Pregon

Reynolds: New Iowa COVID-19 restrictions start at midnight - 9 views

  •  
    I think this is for the best. The rising in Covid cases in Iowas and the midwest alone is ridiculous. I believe that these restrictions are for the betterment of getting the virus under control. Everyone needs to follow this limitation if we ever want to better next year. From the looks of it, this pandemic might continue for more than a year if we don't abide by the rules they are giving to help us.
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    I think that it's good that we got new restrictions, but I don't think people will follow them for very long.
  •  
    I think it is good there are more restrictions being put in place, but I don't think it will help anyone, because people are still going to big gatherings.
  •  
    I think the new regulations needed to be put into place to help decrease the covid cases. I think that the governor was justified for wanting to put a mask mandate in. People in Iowa were not being and so I feel that now was a good time to put restrictions in.
  •  
    This is definitely for the best, cases are rising quickly and people weren't taking it as seriously as before. I hope people will do these things to save not only themself, but other people as well.
  •  
    hopefully, this helps the cases go down
  •  
    I feel we need these new restrictions I think they are helpful and now people might take it more seriously
Bryan Pregon

Petition for Texas to secede from US reaches threshold for White House response - U.S. ... - 5 views

  •  
    We should all know this is not going to happen. This is more of a state tantrum about wanting their state rights back. Personally I agree completely with the states that are doing this because the federal government is way past the boundary. The federal government is in place to protect us from others not are self's.
  • ...15 more comments...
  •  
    it says clearly that andrew johnson made it so no state for any reason could secede from the union,their will be another election in 4 years o if everybody would just relax and chill everything will be fine
  •  
    I think this is just a way of Texans and those other states to show their frustration with the government
  •  
    There are now three other states; Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana, that have reached the required 25,000 signatures on We the People to prompt a response from the White House. I am just waiting to see how the White House will respond to any of the four petitions.
  •  
    they must think that they can do it better then the normal government. so if they think they can and if the fail they fail if not then good for them.
  •  
    i think the white house will respond with a no
  •  
    i think there only trying to do this because there mad that Obama won , and that he will lead the state in to bigger dept.
  •  
    If the proclamation says the states can't separate they would need to rewrite it and make a new set of laws, also what would happen if they fail at a new government? would they just want the US of america to take them back?
  •  
    I think that this will never happen. Although they might not believe that being apart of the U.S. benefits them, It truly does.
  •  
    it would never happen but it will be interesting to see if any changes happen in response to this
  •  
    I don't think this is going to happen but it is still pretty scary that people are that mad at the government. I think that people always blame the government when they are not happy. If we didn't have the government we would be in more trouble than we are in now. Yes our economy is getting hard and we need more jobs. But some people are lazy and should not make the government pay for everything.
  •  
    I believe that Texas would do well in its own government, but it would be better to keep the 50 states.
  •  
    Texas is probably just upset with the turn out of the election therefore just trying to create their own government to get what they think deserve.
  •  
    I'm not sure if the point of the article is, "Why Texas wants to Secede." I'm moreover focused as to, if it will happen, and if it is a right of the state to leave the Union. Personally, I would say it is the right of a state to decide if they want to secede. Let us look at the tenth amendment. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The state has over 80k people who signed a petition asking for a secession. If this is the majority, our 10Th amendment would likely give the state the right to secede, as long as 50.1% of the population wished to secede. (Doubt that they actually have a majority that wishes to secede.) In English: The 10Th amendment grants the states the right to secede if the majority of its population sees fit. This is caused by the lack of detail in the constitution. The lacking detail being whether or not the states have the right to secede. (Founding father: Let's put state secession here next to gay marriage and abortion!) Anyways, as long as the majority of Texans wish to secede, I doubt there is any way that the United States could actually tell them they could not, at least not without some sort of conflict.
  •  
    I have to be . . . not serious here. Just a word of advice to the states who want to secede, based on what happened in the Civil War: If you secede, you won't succeed.
  •  
    Payton I think the Supreme Court has already decided in Texas v White that States can't unilaterally secede from the government. They have the right to secede through revolution or by asking the other States and getting their permission. At least that's how I read the ruling. Unless there is a newer ruling on secession then Texas v. White. "When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States. Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law."
  •  
    Jeremy, what am I trying to state, is that states do have a right to secede, because we are not in a perpetual agreement to join the union. It was perpetual during the Articles of Confederation, the supreme court ruled that they have do not know if the constitution. "It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words." English: The Articles of Confederation declared it to be a perpetual union. The Articles of Confederation no longer exist. The supreme court literally state that they are going by ground of the Articles of Confederation, a.k.a. not a valid ground to take a stance upon. Now, if we look in history. plessy v. ferguson was a supreme court case that was overturned. This case can be overturned. Also, Jeremy, your understanding is correct on most of it. But from what the case as a whole states, under the Articles of Confederation, what you states is Valid. The Court ruled this with the usage of the Articles of Confederation. (Personally, do not think you should be able to do that, and that the courts ruling is a mistake.) Finally, I am simply stating the states have a right to secede if they want to, this is because the constitution, and not the articles of confederation, is vague about the idea of secession, applying the 10th amendment, the states should have a right to secede if they have a majority of people, unless we plan to be a hypocritical society that has already forced others to use the policy in which most people want to deny.
  •  
    I think this in an interesting topic. The idea of states attempting to secede from the union is mind blowing. We know our government is faulty and far from flawless... but in comparison to others, we find it to be the strongest. We defend such a government, yet there are states that want to withdraw from it! I would actually like to look into this topic a little more, so I can understand all factors in the state's decisions!
Megan Frush

Supreme Court weighs gay marriage cases - 2 views

  •  
    "No matter which case the court chooses, the same issue will be front and center - whether legally married gay Americans can be kept from the range of benefits that are otherwise extended to married couples."
Cara Ireland

The evolution of the nation's 'first gay president' - 4 views

  •  
    I think people deserve to marry who they want to marry.
  • ...3 more comments...
  •  
    I agree with Emmali... for instance I want to marry Jessica Alba. We deserve to have our love recognized, but my wife won't let us get married.
  •  
    I think she means if two people love each other they should be able to get married whether they are the same sex or not.
  •  
    In all seriousness to the issue, the title refers to a Newsweek Headline of Obama being the "First Gay President" because he has thrown his support behind the same sex marriage movement. We will see how far his leadership on this issue goes. Later this month the US Supreme Court will decide a case of whether states can keep same sex couples from marrying http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2012/2012_12_144
  •  
    I think the title of the article is misleading, but I do agree with Emmali and Mr. Pregon. The people deserve to live how they want.
  •  
    I think that this topic is a hard one to talk about. In my opinion people do not choose who they love, love just happens. I guess that in some cases love just finds what most government officials along with a large percentage of the world would define as the "wrong" person. People deserve to be who they are and love who they want.
1 - 20 of 180 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page