Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged signs

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Bryan Pregon

School asks deaf preschooler to change his sign language name - 3 views

  •  
    Sometimes it seems when rules are too rigidly enforced, silly situations like this make me wonder, - maybe re-word the rule rather than asking a person to change their name...
  • ...8 more comments...
  •  
    asking a little kid 2 change his name is ridiculous. the boy has a right 2 his own name just like any person does
  •  
    I think asking a young child to change his name just because they think it looks like a gun when its simply his hand sign to represent his name is ridiculous. It is an actual sign to represent his name and is no way a threat to the other children or staff. Kids that little don't even think of things as weapons like that.
  •  
    that is crazy that they would ask him to change his name just because of a school rule
  •  
    that is stupid that a school ask a family just to change the kids name just because of a rule, even though the sign is approved by the S.E.E. And the school also does not have the right to ask the parents to change the kids name when it is the parents right to name their own kid.
  •  
    I personally think the the school is being ridiculous. He's just a kid, he's not gonna know what a gun is.
  •  
    That's his name, his identity. They have no right to tell him to change it. He's a child and I see no problem with him and his name sign when it's registered and causing no legitimate harm.
  •  
    This rule seem very unfair. He has already been saying his name this way for three years. He has no other way to communicate, he can only use his hands. Which i think is ridiculous, they don't make hearing (i don't know how else you would describe them) people change how they say their name. It also doesn't seem to represent a gun in any way, in my thoughts, so it should be fine.
  •  
    I also find it to be unfair because it's his name, so he shouldn't have to learn or make a new name.
  •  
    I agree with th Grand Island resident Fredda Bartenback,what little kid would think some harmless sign would be a gun?
  •  
    He uses the sign language sign for hunter, as in a person who goes out and hunts. He turned it into his name sign by crossing his fingers instead of leaving them flat. While I agree that the school over reacted and he shouldn't have to change it, I think the idea of him "Having to change his name," is a little bit of of a loaded statement. His name will still be Hunter if he changes his name sign it will just be expressed differently. Also according to my mom, who works very closely with many deaf people every day, he may choose to change it later in life once he gets older because this name sign was chosen by his parents and he might not like it.
Bryan Pregon

Biden calls to restore Voting Rights Act, signs order to expand access - 29 views

  •  
    "President Joe Biden on Sunday signed an executive order aimed at helping to ensure all Americans have the right to vote by increasing access to voter registration services and information."
  • ...22 more comments...
  •  
    This is important to ensure the right to vote is extended towards everyone,and it gets more people out there to vote. These are important thing when we pick a new leader to represent the country as a whole.
  •  
    Most people don't think that voting is important but it is and it is good that the president signed an executive order to see if more people will vote
  •  
    In my opinion, this new executive order is amazing. According to the article, "Every eligible voter should be able to vote and have that vote counted. If you have the best ideas, you have nothing to hide. Let the people vote."(konish) I totally agree with it because it's time for new beneficial changes and reformations.
  •  
    One of the peoples greatest defenses against corruption in our government is our ability to vote.
  •  
    Extension of the right to vote to everyone who possibly can is the most important thing in maintaining democracy so this is a very good thing
  •  
    It's good that Biden has put in place this new executive order. It's important that everyone who is eligible to vote should have the opportunity too.
  •  
    i agree that if we did not have our right to vote then we would lose our best defense against corruption.
  •  
    I think giving more people the ability to vote is great. Hopefully this attempt to bring the voter count up works and more people can voice their opinion on who they think is the best fit for our country.
  •  
    I think this is good because, everyone should have a right to vote, if we were not able to that would not give us a choice to anything.
  •  
    Biden says that if we allow everyone to vote, it will repair and also strengthen the democracy party. I think it is a pretty good idea, it would mean everyone will have more benefitions.
  •  
    This is a good thing because I think that having more people experiencing the "American" life will have good input on who to vote for.
  •  
    This is a good thing for Biden because congress will restore the voting rights for Americans, and I think by doing that he will have more people experiencing life, and maybe the people will have good input on him so they will vote for him for the next presidential election again.
  •  
    I think this executive order is amazing for our country. All people should have the right to vote, and this executive order is making it easier for them.
  •  
    this is good because they can't pull any more tricks or try to get people not to vote anymore, which equals fair elections in the future.
  •  
    it's important and good that biden signed this act because it makes sure everyone votes and the voting count raises.
  •  
    I think that Biden signing this bill helps ensure that Americans can exercise their right to vote and that it will help the voting count to increase.
  •  
    It's really important that Biden signed this act because it makes sure everyone votes and the voting count raises.
  •  
    I think it's good that Biden signed this bill because it will give more people the opportunity to vote.
  •  
    I think this will be beneficial considering all the sneaky tactics that they've been using to get people not to vote, so this will help make voting fairer and give more opportunities to people.
  •  
    I do believe that it does so happen to be a good thing that Mr. President Joe Biden has signed this act so that more people will have the chance to vote.
  •  
    I think this is a good idea, we need more people voting if they can.
  •  
    I like how voting is continuing to be a bigger issue people are bringing up because people living in America should get a say in who controls the government, regardless of who they are.
  •  
    I think this was a really good move and America should be grateful he's doing something beneficial.
  •  
    I think it is good Biden is doing something to make voting better for everyone, especially for us since were going to be able to vote next election
Bryan Pregon

40 Best Signs From The "Restore The Fourth" Rallies - 1 views

  •  
    "40 Best Signs From The "Restore The Fourth" Rallies More than 100 rallies were held across America to protest the NSA's surveillance of ordinary citizens."
Bryan Pregon

Boehner signs on to 'Obamacare' after delay, tweet - 0 views

  •  
    WASHINGTON (AP) -- Being speaker of the House doesn't make it any easier to sign up for health care coverage using the troubled federal website. Just ask John Boehner. The Ohio Republican says he had to re-start the process several times while spending four hours trying to sign up at HealthCare.gov.
Bryan Pregon

Branstad signs laws restricting wages, workers' compensation - 2 views

  •  
    "Gov. Terry Branstad has signed into law a ban on local governments raising the minimum hourly wage and another law changing Iowa's workers' compensation system."
  •  
    I think it was reasonable for Gov. Terry Branstad to place a law on banning minimum wage increase. We have a good minimum wage that meets the circumstances of living in iowa. It's not nearly as expensive as other big cities like Chicago or San Diego. I also think it was good he took into account the workers' compensation.
Melissa Diaz-Aguilera

Juvenile Justice: Too young for Life in Prison? - 10 views

  •  
    I feel like you should be able to charge juveniles as adults. I think it would be absurd to just let kids away with committing crimes, especially the one this kid did. If an adult did something like this no one would even think twice about arresting them, why is it different in this case? I think that he needs to be put behind bars and he needs some sort of counseling because obviously something is not right with him. It might also help to know what kind of background the kid has, to see why he did it. There has to be a reason.
  • ...27 more comments...
  •  
    If we as a society won't allow juveniles, sixteen year olds in particular, to vote or to sign their name to a legal contract and the justification for that restriction is because they aren't "mature enough" or that they "don't/won't understand" the lasting consequences then how can we expect them to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime? If sixteen year olds are old enough and mature enough to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime then shouldn't they also understand the lasting consequences to the things I mentioned above?
  •  
    I agree with Jermey, we need to not set a double standard. We need to rehabilitate young offenders, because if you are not a hard criminal before you go to prison for 20 years of one of the most impressionable times of your life, you will come out of it as one. These are kids that probably grew up in broken homes, and this was the only path they were going to take, because it was the only one they saw. So lets rehabilitate, and give them productive lives, not ones that are going to keep the cycle going.
  •  
    I agree with you for the most part Natalie. Although if it's a really small crime and the juvenile is unarmed, then they should go to juvenile court. But for crimes bigger than that example, they need to be charged as an adult would be charged. There's actually this reality TV show (that I can't remember the name of) where, in each episode, a group of kids who are on the streets and in gangs, etc. are taken into a jail as a form of rehabilitation, and they go through a day of being in jail and they also hear stories from people who are in jail at that time, and they always say that one doesn't want to end up in jail. I think there was one particular episode where a girl went with her mother to watch her mother plan a funeral for her. It's pretty interesting, and it does seem to help a lot.
  •  
    Jared, I understand what you mean by some kids growing up in broken homes and having bad lives growing up BUT you always have the option to not go down that road. You have the option to try to better yourself and make something of yourself. Although most people don't do that, they don't always pull a gun on a cop. That is a serious offense and I feel like you guys are so focused on the fact that he's our age that you're blinded by what he did. Jeremy, I don't understand what you're saying. I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me so if you could maybe clarify that would be great. Thanks. Kirstina, I do get what you're saying. Most kids need to see what can happen but this kid is plenty old enough to know right from wrong.
  •  
    I realize that, but the people that are the most likely to pull a gun are the ones that have the most messed up life beforehand in most cases. We should try them as children, and try to rehabilitate them. Before your 18, and move, a large part of what you do, and know is influenced by your parents, and other senor figures in your life, and even friends Until you reach adulthood, its hard to be your own person, especially in the environment that generates this type of person. There is the odd person in there that is just a bad person, and it is all there fault, but we need to try to rehabilitate them as a child, not as an adult.
  •  
    Jeremy, there's a major difference between crime and legal contracts. They don't have anything to do with each other. Sentencing teens like adults is important because it protects us. It's a safety issue. Plus it tells other kids, "You break the law, you get in huge trouble." And they don't allow people under 18 to sign contracts without parental consent to protect them from making stupid decisions.
  •  
    Natalie I'm sorry for the confusion. I was replying more to the article then directly to your post. To clarify I disagree with your position about putting juveniles into adult court that commit violent crimes. At least with the current system we have in place. Kirstina I know there is a major difference between committing a violent crime and signing legal contracts/voting. That's my entire point. If a sixteen year old is not mentally mature or responsible enough to understand the long term consequences of voting then they most definitely aren't mature or responsible enough to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime like shooting at a police officer, an act that take far more mental maturity to fully understand when compared to voting. As long as our society wants to say that sixteen and seventeen year olds aren't mature enough to understand the consequences of something like voting then how can we expect them to understand these violent crimes that they commit. I'm all for placing older teens in adult court when they commit an adult crime but only if they aren't subjected to an unfounded and unreasonable double standard. Either sixteen year olds are on the same maturity level as adults or they aren't.
  •  
    i think it is totally understandable because it shows that this kid is planning on doing crimes in the future.
  •  
    i think that they did the right thing by arresting him if you are 16 then you are old enough to realize that shooting a cop isn't a good idea and you will have a punishment for it
  •  
    Natalie i agree with your point of view on this article. If he is 16 he already knows what he is doing. We are all in high school and know well the consequences if we did that. I also agree with what you said about his background. It seems like this is a record and he already knows the consequences. So in my opinion he should be charged for adult crime.
  •  
    I believe this kid should get charged as an adult because like they said in the article. He is a threat to society and to himself.
  •  
    I agree with Natalie, everyone in the right mind should know shooting at someone; especially a police officer is wrong. And know their will be consequences to follow. So yes, juveniles should be charged as an adult depending on the circumstances.
  •  
    I agree with charging juveniles as adults. People should know the right from wrongs at an early age and receive the consequences though an understanding of what they did wrong.
  •  
    I agree with Melissa, people should know the difference from right and wrong, they definitely know the incentives for doing wrong as well.
  •  
    Jeremy, I don't quite understand where you stand on the issue. You said that you realize there's a difference but then you said, and I quote, "Kirstina I know there is a major difference between committing a violent crime and signing legal contracts/voting. That's my entire point. If a sixteen year old is not mentally mature or responsible enough to understand the long term consequences of voting then they most definitely aren't mature or responsible enough to understand the lasting consequences of committing a violent crime like shooting at a police officer, an act that take far more mental maturity to fully understand when compared to voting." You're contradicting yourself there and in your original comment.
  •  
    Obviously there is something wrong with society if we have mere teenagers pulling out weapons and assaulting people to the point of felony. I think that the punishment is completely fair for such a sick individual. Criminal behaviors are not taught, but learned so he had to have learned this from someone he knew or a parent with a criminal record. Either way, what he did was wrong and he deserves to be behind bars.
  •  
    I agree with charging minors as adults because this article is one of many where the felon was a minor. I did research over this in another class and i found many articles where they were charging a minor with adult charges because of how brutal the murders they committed where. Like i argued in my other paper "is your loved one's life any less valuable just because they got murdered by a minor"
  •  
    http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/03/sport/football/dutch-linesman-killed-football/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 Here's another case of teenagers committing violent crimes. They beat this man to death. There were two 15 year-olds and a 16 year-old.
  •  
    they should charge minors as adults because they will be out in the streets again and doing more crimies. its there own fault that they get charged thats why they should face charges alone.
  •  
    I think if you do the crime, you pay the time whenever the government wants you to.
  •  
    i say same charge for everyone no matter what
  •  
    if you're willing to make the decision to break the law and commit a serious crime with the consequences of an adult then you should definitely suffer the same consequences no matter your age.
  •  
    if anyone commits a crime they should be charged the same no matter what age
  •  
    I agree with the idea that no matter your age, if you commit a serious crime, you should suffer the consequences. Say a teenager decides to murder someone... Just because they're a minor, should they be charged with a lesser offense than an adult would have? NO. If you are willing, capable, and have the mental capacity and audacity to commit such crimes, you deserve prison and whatever other punishment you receive.
  •  
    Great discussion guys! Here is some more food for thought. People who do bad things need punishment, but there is plenty of scientific evidence that teenage brains are in a state of development that doesn't excuse bad acts, but can help explain it. http://goo.gl/MXEAd Ask yourself if you are the "same person" you were when you were 5 years old? I can tell you, you will make decisions differently when you are 25, and probably 65.
  •  
    This is a good point i have to say. That's why I think we need to do our best to reform kids, not just punish them. Make it clear that their will be consequences, but try them as hardened, adult criminals is not the way to do it.
  •  
    This is an extremely touchy subject. It's hard to lay out things like this without stepping on toes of other controversial subjects like voting age and military eligability
  •  
    You both make a good point, but when a kid gets charged with a felony, he obviously has done wrong. Sometimes you do bad things, but its not as bad compared to other things. Though when you get older, you can continue to do bad things, and the bad things can turn into crimes, etc. Sometimes charging teens as adults is the way to go, even if it doesn't seem fare. Maybe not fore life, but two years, or even one, wont do any harm.
  •  
    I think if someone did crime, they should be punished no matter their age. so make them realize how bad it is.
Bryan Pregon

More than 500 law professors sign letter calling Trump actions impeachable | TheHill - 0 views

  •  
    "More than 500 law professors have signed an open letter calling President Trump's conduct impeachable the day after Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said that committee chairmen should begin drafting articles of impeachment. "
Bryan Pregon

Tennessee governor signs bill increasing punishments for certain protests | TheHill - 0 views

  •  
    "Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee (R) quietly signed a bill into law ramping up punishments for certain kinds of protests, including losing the right to vote."
Bryan Pregon

Congress Is Quietly Abandoning the 5th Amendment - Conor Friedersdorf - The Atlantic - 2 views

  •  
    a specific law that has passed both the Senate and the House, and is presently in a conference committee, where lawmakers reconcile the two versions. Observers once worried that the law would permit the indefinite detention of American citizens, or at least force them to rely on uncertain court challenges if unjustly imprisoned.
  •  
    Personally I believe that the NDAA for 2012 should never have been signed. I also think that it is a little late to try and fix this because people in Congress have already agreed that they want to permanently detain American citizens without trial and now are just trying to save face by "opposing" it. After all the author of that amendment, Senator Feinstein, voted for the NDAA for 2012. What really confuses, and kind of angers me, is that Obama said when he signed the NDAA for 2012 he didn't want that part in the law but he was signing it anyway (I don't have a quote but I'll find one). Now he is trying to defend indefinite detention of citizens in court after a federal judge found it unconstitutional. Another interesting article about this is this one. It shows that even people who generally would work together disagree about this bill: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/ndaa-indefinite-detention_n_2326225.html
Bryan Pregon

President Obama Signs the Honoring America's Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Famil... - 1 views

  •  
    Second, the law prohibits protests at military funerals in the two hours immediately prior to and following a military funeral -- a measure, the President said, that will ensure that our servicemembers get laid to rest with "the utmost honor and respect."
Bryan Pregon

Obama signs bill to end partial shutdown, prevent debt ceiling crisis - CNN.com - 3 views

  •  
    "It's over, for now: Obama signs bill to end partial shutdown, hike debt ceiling"
  •  
    i think the government is becoming to corrupt and that with the shut down they are showing weakness and that it could be a start of a possible war between the countries
Bryan Pregon

White House proposes arming teachers, backpedals on raising age to buy guns - CNNPolitics - 33 views

  •  
    What are your thoughts on the gun control debate. It will be 1 month tomorrow that Parkland FL school shooter killed 17 and seriously wounded 17 others. Has the outrage become "yesterdays news"? How do the POLITICS of this issue make solutions difficult to reach?
  • ...26 more comments...
  •  
    I personally think that arming teacher would be a huge risk but yet could be a life-saving moment. Just think about it if a student would happen to go crazy in our school they would know that every teacher is armed with a gun so they'll do anything to get a gun from a teacher but yet if they tried anything a teacher could end up saving kids lives. I'm kind of in the middle. Also not selling guns to teenagers I mean that's crazy look what happened in Florida!!! I wouldn't want that to happen in our school. Checking their background and mental state I agree on, I just don't understand why this world and this generation needs to be holding guns to protect themselves I mean that's sad.
  •  
    I think that arming teachers would be a great idea, but schools shouldn't feel this unsafe. I believe that this outrage has kind of became yesterdays news the first couple of weeks there were a lot of controversy but has died down for the past 2 weeks. Solutions are hard to reach because not everyone agrees on one solution so whatever the government decides to do not everyone will be happy with the end result. I think that everyone should just be happy that the government is trying to solve this problem and they shouldn't freak out until they see a change.
  •  
    I believe there needs to be more limitations to those that obtain guns. Guns have become an unnecessary evil that many have taken advantage of greatly. The outrage has not yet become "yesterday's news" because many are still fighting and protesting for more effective gun laws. Many survivors from the Parkland shooting are coming forward and sharing their stories about the actions that took place inside their school and how horrifying the event was. They are still coming forward and still fighting to show everyone what it is like from their perspective. The politics of this issue make solutions difficult to reach because they many times propose an idea to prevent conflict in the future, but they do not follow through with the potential idea.
  •  
    I think that even if we try to have teachers have guns in school it will be a major problem. I think some teachers will be against it and students will be scared to come to school knowing their teachers have guns. I think the only thing schools can do to prevent this from happening is better security like more officers at the schools. The Parkland shooting won't be yesterdays news because many people are affected by this.
  •  
    Its very easy to get a gun. Guns should be legal just stricter tests and background checks.
  •  
    I feel that increasing the minimum age to buy firearms isn't really gonna make a change in what is happening because I feel that people are still going to find a way to get this firearm. i feel that politics are making this difficult because everyone has there own opinion on what to do and how it should be done. but this isn't something that should become "yesterday's news" we should be figuring out ways to make the school the safest it can be
  •  
    Honestly, I don't think we need teachers with guns, that is taking it a little too far, like that if they hit the wrong person or get angry at a kid and lose it and kill or injure a kid. I think we just need to have better protection in schools, and also we need to be aware of signs before things happen. Most times when there is a shooter they end up posting about it before it happens or will show signs that they might do it, and we just brush it off when we should be focused and do investigations if someone is on facebook bragging saying they are going to do it. We also need to have better plans for when a shooter does come, instead of sitting in a corner and hoping they don't come to you, we should figure out how to get out or something else instead of being sitting ducks.
  •  
    I don't really have a side that I'm 100% for I think no matter what happens there is always going to be someone who isn't happy which is going to lead to more conflicts.
  •  
    I think there should be some way to check mental health before buying a gun and stronger background checks. Maybe arm a few teachers that are capable that way its almost as if you have another cop in the school. I belive they need to find a compromise to make everyone happy and stay safe.
  •  
    I do think that students and their families shouldn't feel unsafe while going to school so I think that schools should either have more armed security or teachers should have guns. I do think this is kind of dying down and it isn't being talked about as much as it was 2 weeks ago.
  •  
    So... solve the problems of gun violence... with more guns? This is the White House's big plan. Because we have a Conservative cabinet, they do not support putting more restrictions on guns. This is why there is such a big debate. Others want more restrictions so this does not happen.
  •  
    I believe that there are many causes of a school shooting and because there are so many aspects to it, it then becomes difficult to fix. Sure you can make the buying age older but, then they will resort to other weapons which would just put a band-aid on the problem. Maybe more security would work? In the Flordia school shooting, there was a police officer there, there was protection but, somehow it still happened. I 100% believe that something needs to be done but, it's going to need to be more than just 1 thing that changes.
  •  
    Arming teachers is not a good idea, people who have witness school shootings do NOT want to see more guns in their school. Kids want to feel save in school.
  •  
    I think we just need better protection in schools and we must also be aware of the signs before things happen.
  •  
    I agree with limiting the ability to have guns. the parkland shooting will never be yesterdays news, its important to know about it so there can be prevention from this happening again. There are way more shootings going on around the world everyday that not as big as the mass shooting, but to just know that people are getting shot back to back because of the unnecessary presents of guns, that frightening and shows that we need a change. I also think teachers should NOT have access to guns. People may think they have the ability to carry guns, and believe that they can be smart with them, but i disagree.
  •  
    I think arming teacher would be a great idea, but like most people are commenting kids and teachers should not feel this unsafe in a school building. I think more security on schools is required to make teens and children safer. Yes, raising the gun purchase would help, but there is always still a way for people to get their hands on a weapon if they wanted to do harm to others. In the end, there are too many crazy and unsafe people out there and I think if they wanted to damage they could find a way I think the ultimate solutions are taking more precautions at schools.
  •  
    I agree with Taylor Nickerson, guns should be more restricted since they have become more dangerous than they should be. Nobody should feel unsafe going to school, or anywhere really. You're supposed to feel safe at school, with others. Guns and weapons as deadly as these shouldn't be so accessible, or easy to get. They should have a higher age restriction and make sure that they're going to use them properly and not going to harm others.
  •  
    i think the government shoulf take care of these things before it get out of hand and people get hurt. to them it take people dying or having a tragic thing happens for them to take initiative to do something about it. for example like sucide theres no posters up right now it there but then a week later someone commitis and then thats what is covering the walls poster after poster about bullying can lead to death. sucied pervention. stop things early
  •  
    I honestly think it would be a huge risk to arm teachers with guns but it could also be a good thing. The reason i think it would be bad is because i personally have been in a class where a teacher can't control themselves and freak out on students. Now if you armed teachers and they have a little "break down" they have easy access to and weapon and all those children in the class are in major danger. But there are positive things about arming teachers like if there was a person in the building trying to kill kids, the teacher could easily go and kill the shooter before he kills innocent kids. So there are good things and bad things about but i still don't know if i personally would feel safe knowing teachers have guns and easy access to them.
  •  
    i belive that what trump is saying "That we should arm teachers with gums and have them trained" evan if it's for the selfish reson of wanting to protect your self, is something good that could happen to all the schools in the US and it would stop school shooters a lot quicker
  •  
    I believe that It could be a good or bad thing because student can fear going to school knowing teachers have them but it can also be good if someone is in the school and protect students.
  •  
    I agree with Noah Lybarger with what he's saying that people will still find a way to get them. I personally believe that politics are making it hard because everyone has their own opinion and there are a lot of ideas on how to fix it, some that might work and some that won't, but they are completely different from each other. I feel they should raise the age and do a more thorough background check before the sale of firearms. Also a good idea to protect schools themselves is raising the security and maybe having more police officers around, making it a place where everyone feels safe. On the other side if it was made illegal to have a weapon, but just likes drugs and even all the way back to when alcohol was illegal, people that want to do harm like that they would find a gun somehow (just like people find drugs) would be able to find it and making it illegal to get a weapon would make the person that found one even more dangerous because people would be more defenseless than we are now.
  •  
    I do not believe that teachers should have guns because I think that that would just cause more problems and violence. I think that we need to add more restrictions for guns and I think we need to ban semi automatics to the public because there is no reason for it. I believe that honestly there would be more violence and deaths if teachers were to have firearms in school.
  •  
    I don't think that arming teachers would be a good idea, because I don't think there is a single teacher I have had that would have the willpower to shoot a person. Many school shootings are done by young people, and it would take a lot out of someone to shoot them, is this really what we want to do to our teachers?
  •  
    I believe that teachers having guns isn't going to improve safety for a school by much. What happens when a kid doesn't listen in class so the teacher pulls the gun on the student threatening them? Or worse, what if a student got a hold of one of these guns? We need to add more restrictions to guns and when they can be solicited to you because getting a hold of weapons at the mere age of 19 only seems to more endangering. There would be so much less violence if there were more restrictions to guns.
  •  
    I believe that arming teachers with a gun,would be a good idea. Because that could make the school much safer.
  •  
    Marissa: I agree with the idea that there may be students who could get their hands on the firearm, and it is a point I hadn't thought of before.
Bryan Pregon

Trump signs bill ending shutdown, official says - CNNPolitics - 0 views

  •  
    "Trump signs bill ending shutdown, official says"
jourdanpfiouts

Trump Signs Memo Implementing Ban On Transgender People Enlisting In The Military : The... - 9 views

  •  
    "President Trump has signed a memo implementing his new policy on transgender people serving in the armed forces."
  • ...9 more comments...
  •  
    So what is the difference between a Transgender already serving and a Transgender trying to enlist to serve their country? They're still humans, and they still have the same rights as everyone else. "The only exception is for transgender service members already in treatment."
  •  
    @mason_mower Transgender individuals that are currently in the military can stay, but no money will be spent on any medical costs for them. I agree, anyone should be allowed to serve their country, considering they are mentally and physically capable, no matter their identity.
  •  
    I wish I could understand the logic coming from this. Discrimination is just wrong.
  •  
    It's interesting that while campaigning in 2016, Trump stated ""Thank you to the LGBT community! I will fight for you while Hillary brings in more people that will threaten your freedoms and beliefs.", but now he has become a person that threatens their freedoms and beliefs. His main reason for banning transgender people is the cost of surgeries and other care. Saying that the military was being burden by "tremendous medical costs." However, a study in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2015 put the number at of transgenders at 12,800 and the cost of care at $4.2 million to $5.6 million and concluding that "doctors agree that such care is medically necessary." And that the cost of care for transgender people is only a tenth of the cost of the annual $84 million dollars the military spends to treat erectile dysfunction.
  •  
    This is a big step backwards for the trangender community. makes me sad
  •  
    "The privacy of service members must not be infringed. This means that no soldiers, including those who identify as transgender, should be allowed to use the sex-specific facility of the opposite sex. When it comes to barracks, bathroom, showers, etc., the privacy of all service members must be respected. Given the nature of military living quarters, it is unclear where soldiers who identify as transgender could be housed." One of the reasons I don't believe transgender should be allowed to serve in the Military.
  •  
    @stocktonthomsen Although I understand your concern Stockton, many transgender individuals are completely comfortable being housed in the sex specific facilities of the opposite sex. Considering some of them have stalls or something along those lines, the transgender individuals could change clothes and use the restroom/bathing facilities without exposing inappropriate parts. Also, considering the large military budget we have, we could afford either building separate barracks for the transgender individuals, or at least adding stalls to certain barracks so the individuals can wash up and use the restroom in peace.
  •  
    Also, why does the gender matter of the person fighting? As long as they are capable of fighting, it should not matter. They want to fight for their country, so let them. @stocktonthomsen
  •  
    "As far as the actual psychological issues at play, it used to be called gender identity disorder; now they call it gender dysphoria. The idea that sex or gender is malleable is not true. I'm not denying your humanity if you are a transgender person; I am saying that you are not the sex which you claim to be. You're still a human being, and you're a human being with an issue then I wish you Godspeed in dealing with it in any whatever way you see fit, but if you're going to dictate to me that I'm supposed to pretend, I'm supposed to pretend that men are women and women are men, no. My answer is no. I'm not going to modify basic biology because it threatens your subjective sense of what you are." -Ben Shapiro Desiring to be trans is ridiculous
  •  
    @stocktonthomsen I do not trust your quote source, as he is not an expert in the field of biology/psychology. Fun fact: Brains have actually been scientifically proven to be genderless. If you want to bring up biology, I'd like you to know that it is possible to be a female bodied individual with three X chromosomes, a female bodied individual with one X chromosome, a male bodied individual with two X chromosomes and a Y chromosome, a male bodied individual with one X chromosome and two Y chromosomes, etc. And what happens when a transgender individual actually has the bottom surgery? What then? Do you seriously want to say that they are still women (if they were born female) or that they are still men (if they were born male) even though they have the sex organs for the opposite sex? Would you still say they should be in the barracks of the sex they were born with? Would you still say that person should use the bathroom of the sex they were born as? If you really want to convince me that I should not serve in the military because of my gender identity, you need to bring in stronger arguments and better sources.
tsilva588

Fact Checking Biden's First Week in Office - 7 views

  •  
    Thoughts on this?
  • ...2 more comments...
  •  
    I think they have been alright. At least, according to this article, he isn't spreading too many lies. Only 3 out of 20, which isn't the best, but could definitely be worse.
  •  
    Bidens first week can be monumental if you're on the left-leaning side, President Biden has changed a lot of bills backed by Republicans that were signed during Trump's term in office. But if you're on the right-leaning side his first week in office has been a clear sign of what his presidency will fulfill. Whether the Pipeline or 30+ Executive orders he's signed off on. I feel as if bi-partisanship will be quite difficult during this administration.
  •  
    As someone who identifies as a leftist and a progressive, I think that Biden has done a very good job but there will always be more that I think that he should do. Compromise with the Republicans in Congress isn't an option right now.
  •  
    Biden has done a pretty good job so far but there are obviously further steps he needs to take but it's early on and he's at least going down the right path as of now.
Holly Jensen

Preacher Phil Snider gives gay rights speach - 0 views

  •  
    This is totally great. I think it made a great comparison between racism and being against gay marriage. I highly recommend watching this.
  • ...7 more comments...
  •  
    I watched this and I really liked it. I give him credit for being a preacher and going against all other preachers by speaking on behalf of gay marriage.
  •  
    It just goes to show that you can't let one person represent an entire religion.
  •  
    Religion though, should not influence the policies of government upon gay marriage. Just a side note, I laugh at images of people going to his protest, and raising a sign that says, "god hates signs," or "He's gay"
  •  
    Exactly. Our country isn't ruled by religion its ruled by the people and their choices.
  •  
    I agree also, religion should stay out of politics, the only reason people think being homosexual is wrong is because it says so in the bible. Gay couples who get married aren't hurting anyone or anything, I really think that this even being an issue is absurd.
  •  
    I agree that one person can not represent an entire religion. One can represent their own easy because it is their personal belief on said subject. I give him props for being a willing person to speaking his views on gay marriage. The bible does not exactly say that it is not okay to be homosexual. It says its not okay to lay with someone of the same sex if I remember right. So I feel the physical part is viewed as not ok, wile the mental area should be taken in mind as well.
  •  
    Every time someone "interprets" the bible it's like they are trying to "play God". They all try to say this is what God thinks and this is what He believes is wrong. I mean we should all be able to interpret it our own way and not try to make others believe in our interpretation, especially if it portrays God as "against" his own creations.
  •  
    Religion is based off of your own personal faith and beliefs and with so many different versions and beliefs you can't let one person say what it means and stereotype that religion. You also have to consider the fact that things change with time, people evolve and so do thoughts. Like Snider showed in the video, we once thought that racism was right and accepting other nationalities was against their religion.
  •  
    As I have said before, religion should have no influence when it comes to government policy. As for the bible, I could point out many things wrong with the bible, and the idea that Christianity not supporting gay relationships. I will not, simply out of the urge as to not ruin peoples views on religion. What I will say, is that the bible should also have no say on our government as well. Religion should, and is, also limited in the US, contrary to popular belief. Religion has been limited to 1st, no human sacrifice. (We don't need them crazy beheading Aztec's coming in and just start slicing peoples heads off right?) Second, separation of church and state. That right there means religion is not allowed to say, "You can't be gay, ban gay marriage." (And oddly, it still managed to happen.) I'm really looking forward to the supreme courts ruling on this, as long as they decide to take the case.
xolson974

Tuesday is the deadline for what may be the last Obamacare enrollment period - 0 views

  •  
    If you haven't signed up for health insurance through the Affordable Care Act, you are running out of time. You have until Tuesday, Jan. 31, to apply for 2017 coverage through state and federal marketplaces. More than 11.5 million people have signed up for insurance through the exchanges as of Jan.
bwest01

Beneath Hillary Clinton's Super Tuesday Wins, Signs of Turnout Trouble - 1 views

  •  
    Hillary Clinton set out 10 months ago to inspire and energize the Democratic Party, hoping to bring together the rising American electorate of black, brown, young and female voters into a durable presidential coalition. But buried beneath Mrs. Clinton's wide-ranging and commanding victories on Tuesday night were troubling signs of a party that has not yet rallied to her call.
Bryan Pregon

Civil rights groups blast Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court nominee, in letter to senators - ... - 0 views

  •  
    "More than 100 civil rights groups signed a letter Wednesday asking senators to oppose Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, saying they feared he would work to cut off their access to the courts."
Allie Moats

Atheists' road signs attack faiths of Romney, Obama ahead of Democratic convention - 3 views

  •  
    Just as the city of Charlotte, N.C., gears up to host the Democratic National Convention, an atheist group is mounting a billboard campaign attacking the religious faiths of President Obama and GOP challenger Mitt Romney.
  • ...1 more comment...
  •  
    I think that they made a good point to keep religion out of their decisions they make for the US because there are so many people of different religions in our country. But they came across really offense and offended people of those religions. They had a good idea just not a good way of going about it.
  •  
    I find it rather hypocritical of the Christian Pastor to say it's never appropriate to insult another person when Christian ad campaigns quite frequently do just that. Objectively, this ad campaign is no more offensive than many campaigns launched by fundamentalist Christians. I fully agree with Silverman's quote, "We are not a Christian nation; we have never been a Christian nation and we never will be," although I would change it to say that we are not a religious nation. Religion needs to be taken out of political discussions, and people who try to bring it into politics need to wake up and realize that Church and State are separated and they can't force their beliefs onto other people.
  •  
    Had I been in Cullinan's position, I would have handled the request the same way he did because, morally, I believe it is wrong to advertise something that is expected to, and probably intended to, offend a group of people based on their religious beliefs. However, freedom is speech IS a huge component in our society. Whether we like to think it is or not, our government can't be, and isn't, based purely on morals.
1 - 20 of 73 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page