Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items matching "Act" in title, tags, annotations or url

Group items matching
in title, tags, annotations or url

Sort By: Relevance | Date Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Mallory Huggins

Oops, I left my sexual orientation at home - 5 views

  •  
    I think that is crazy, why people think that some people would choose to be tortured everyday is beyond me. I mean come on. I think this issue should just resolve like now, yes I understand that in the bible it says that homosexuality is a sin. But God made you who you are. People have to understand that, obviously there is a plan, it just hasn't showed itself to everyone yet. Being Homosexual is a life, if a Heterosexual stepped into a Homosexual's life for one day they would understand that they go through so much crap constantly. I think if it was just passed as a law people would forget about it. And everything in the world would be a lot less hectic. P.S.... I love the translation at the bottom!! That is hilarious!! :D
  •  
    my whole view on this is that it is ridiculous. gay people should get their rights already.
  •  
    In all reality..... If Religion is your reason to say, "Being gay is not okay," then you really need to know your history. First, Christmas, if I recall the documentary that I watched not to long ago correctly, was a time for grown men to beat there wives, and go out and have "gay sex" with each other? So, if you denounce gay marriage because of Catholicism, or Christianity, you just denounced Christmas. Second, for those of you who are Hindustan, you have a celebrated holiday that is for 2 guys, and 1 girl, to "get it on." It's called Karma Sutra. Yeah, religion should not be allowed to interfere in America's choice to permit/deny gay marriage, and not just for those 2 reasons. (Those reasons being that the religions allow it themselves, yet say it is not okay.) Let's just read out constitution. We've all heard, "Freedom of Religion," before, right? Well, right there, religion should not be allowed to found a reason as to deny gay relationships. To add, let us look at the Declaration of Independence, "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Pursuit of happiness includes marriage correct? If so, define marriage Religion definition: The formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife. Actual definition: Marriage is a social union or legal contrAct between people called spouses that creates kinship. Just by out constitutional freedoms, and foundations, most of it points in the direction of gay marriage should be legal, which Jenny, is why I agree with you. As for being gay being something you can fix, don't think so. I don't see people changing there skin color. (Except Micheal Jackson, but we all still know that he was not as light-toned as that.) Do you see people choosing there eye color? Either that is one expensive (or failed) surgery, or it does not happen. I don't think you are capable of changing the way someone is born, (unless it changes your physical appearance, which does not change you
natefisher

Trump Vows to Remove Millions Living in Country Illegally - 9 views

  •  
    PHOENIX - Seeking to end confusion over his aggressive but recently muddled language on immigration, Donald Trump vowed Wednesday to remove millions of people living in the country illegally if he becomes president, warning that failure to do so would jeopardize the "well-being of the American people."
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    I feel like Trump is like a cyber bully in the fact that when he isn't face to face with Nieto he will say whatever he wants. But when confronted he is mild mannered, unlike when he is on TV giving speeches.
  •  
    What if foreigners need a place to stay, he can't just kick them out and accept no immigration, and avoid the question, "What about those who haven't committed crimes?" Well maybe if some foreigners have committed crimes, but not all of the crimes were that bad, and what if the immigrants are desperate, or need something, or again, a place.
  •  
    Trump wants to remove millions of illegals, but like the passage says what would he do with the ones the haven't committed a crime? The ones that have done crime should be removed, but the ones that haven't should continue living here.
  •  
    Trump said in his own words that when he becomes president he wants to exile the millions of illegal immigrants from the US and that if this succeeds he would change the world completely. Any illegal immigrants that are arrested will be deported as well.
  •  
    Trump said "We agreed on the importance of ending the illegal flow of drugs, cash, guns and people across our border and to put the cartels out of business," not all Hispanics bring drugs, cash, and guns across the border. Some come to America to get away from their country because we have more freedom. Kicking all of them out just doesn't seem fair. Also making Mexico pay for the wall isn't fair either. If America wants the wall then they should pay for it. When you go shopping and you want a shirt you don't make your friend or the cashier pay for it.
  •  
    "We agreed on the importance of ending the illegal flow of drugs, cash, guns and people across our border and to put the cartels out of business," (Trump). He acts and speaks as if every single foreigner brings trouble when they come, and he's wrong. Yes, there are those that cause trouble with guns, drugs, and money- but not every single one of them. He wants to deport all of foreigners who have "overstayed" their visa, even if they have caused no trouble or harm whatsoever.
Bryan Pregon

Iowa bill would let women sue doctor after abortion - 9 views

  •  
    "Iowa bill would let women sue doctor after abortion"
  • ...12 more comments...
  •  
    It is a women's choice to choose abortion but you have to make sure it's what you want. if you feel you made the wrong choice, you should deal with it because the doctors did what you wanted.
  •  
    I think that this is stupid because the article says that it's a difficult decision for the woman, and that they should get a recourse if they have mental health issues because of the decision. It's the woman's choice to have it done so why should she get money back for her mistake, the doctor has no choice in doing the procedure so they should not get sued for doing their job.
  •  
    It was the women's choice to get the abortion in the first place. Which means that they wanted the doctor to the procedure. It is NOT the doctors fault if you get an abortion and then feel bad about it. You should NOT be able to sue the doctor for emotional damage. I can understand physical damage only if the doctor did not do the procedure right and the physical damage is because of that. But emotional damage is total ..... Anyway, in the article it says "that many studies show that only a small percentage of women regret their abortions." Regret is NOT the same as emotional damage. Just because you REGRET something that YOU did does NOT mean that you can put all blame on the doctor because of a decision that YOU made. "Chelgren's emotional distress bill says a woman could sue the doctor who performed the abortion anytime during her lifetime." this means that you could have had an abortion 20 years ago and then sue the doctor. It doesn't even make sence and it is NOT the doctors fault for doing his or her job.
  •  
    I agree with Kelsi because it is the women's choice to have the abortion in the first place and its the doctors job to do the procedure. The doctor did not make the choice, the women did, the doctors are just doing their job. It's like suing a dog for peeing in the wrong place. It's just ridiculous. The only thing it will accomplish is putting abortion clinics out of business causing people to try aborting the child on their own which can cause a lot more deaths.
  •  
    I agree with kelsi, I don't think women should be able to sue a doctor for an abortion she choose. The doctor gives you a choose if you want an abortion. You can't blame the doctor of your mistake.Women have a choice and if they decide to have an abortion and if she regret later, then you have to deal with it.
  •  
    I agree with Sydney, this is ridiculous. It was the woman's decision in the first place, the doctor is just doing his job so I think it's unjust to sue them if they later regret their decision.
  •  
    I agree with Kelsi! The doctor is doing his job and I think that once a woman has made a choice to or to not to get an abortion, there should be a contract signed that before the doctor does the actual abortion the woman can not sue later in the future. Its not like the doctor is forcing you to get an abortion they are only doing it for the sake of the woman's decision.
  •  
    I agree with Sydney and Lauren. It was the woman's choice to get the abortion. Not the Doctor. They shouldn't be able to sue because they had a change of heart and thought they made the wrong decision.
  •  
    I think that when women choose to have an abortion they are giving the doctor permission to kill their baby. Its not the Doctors fault their just there to make sure you have the procedure done right. Everyone is aware of the emotion damage of losing a child.
  •  
    Its the woman's decision not the doctors. There just doing there job and if they could be sued for it then no doctor is gonna do it.
  •  
    Women should not have the right to sue the doctor for carrying out their act kill their baby, because with their body their choice saying, their choice, their consequence not the doctors.
  •  
    I don't think that women should be able to sue a doctor due to emotional distress after they gave consent to the doctor to go through with the procedure. If they have emotional distress they should blame themselves because they were the one who decided to have an abortion. Now if a doctor forced it then i can see why she would sue.
  •  
    i think that a women should not be able to sue a doctor for her choice of having an abortion
  •  
    I agree with Sydney, Lauren, and Landon. You made the choice of getting the abortion, and the doctor just did what you wanted. YOU should have made sure that it was the choice you wanted.
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.
russellboi

Obamacare Helped The Homeless, Who Now Worry About Coverage Repeal - 1 views

  •  
    Everyone expects Congress to change the Affordable Care Act. But no one know exActly how. The uncertainty has one group of people especially concerned - the homeless. Many of these people received health coverage for the first time under Obamacare. They're worried it will disappear.
Bryan Pregon

Bill C-309 | openparliament.ca - 18 views

  •  
    OK so it is not being proposed in the USA, but this bill recently introduced in Canada is pretty interesting. Think about the people in our country who protest, but don't want their identity to be shown. Would you support this bill or not?
  • ...12 more comments...
  •  
    link seems broken... try this http://openparliament.ca/bills/41-1/C-309/
  •  
    I think its a good law, people should be able to know who you are. If you really wanna protest, you shouldn't care.
  •  
    I believe that if you truly believe in the cause, then you should have to face the consequences, even if that means losing your job or your reputation and status.
  •  
    This bill makes sense. Public safety is at the forefront of this bill, if a protest gets violent or other harmful/unlawful acts occur the persons the are held responsible will be able to be identified. But looking at it from the other side, people might want to conceal their identity at protests, or the masks are part of their protest(example Anonymous). If this bill passes people will be made, if it doesn't pass other people will be mad. Who is the Canadian government ok will making mad?
  •  
    This bill should be passed because if you're risking yourself by already being there, you should have to show your face. Also, if the situation ever turned violent, that person wouldn't get away with it because their face wasn't exposed so they could be identified.
  •  
    I think that this bill should be passed because the police should have the right to identify anyone who is protesting. If you want to protest, protecting your identity shouldn't be a major concern because you would want people to know who you are, and what you are speaking out against.
  •  
    I think if you are going to protest, you are there for a reason, that you strongly believe in, so you should not want to hide who you really are
  •  
    It should be considered that this is a trade for security by means of liberty. Sacrificing freedom for a small degree of protection. If this bill passes, it could easily snowball to other things (this may be a bit of a reach) such as controlling what you can wear altogether just so that you can be identified at all times just in case you might be possibly considering intending to commit a crime.
  •  
    As said in earlier comments, I think that if you want to protest IN PUBLIC then the public has the right to know who you are. If you want you can protest in your house and no one needs to know who you are. But out side of you cant hide from the public if your are going to stand outside with a big sign and yell out things in front of people.
  •  
    I think this should be a bill that becomes a law.
  •  
    I see it as your there or your protesting for a reason so why hide it. If your protesting you believe something is ether wrong or right so why hide your believes. If you don't want to be seen or noticed here's an easy answer don't go!
  •  
    I think that you should be able to wear a mask, because if you're protesting something that you believe in, or don't believe in, than it is a personal matter and you should be able to conceal your identity from the public.
  •  
    I think it might be better if you have to register to be part of a protest but to have the list sealed unless things get violent
  •  
    I think that they should show there faces. Its there choice to go, so then show yourself, dont hide.
Lexi Raygor

Vint Cerf speaks out against the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) - 5 views

  •  
    seems like a double-edged sword.
Bryan Pregon

President Obama Signs the Honoring America's Veterans and Caring for Camp Lejeune Families Act of 2012 | The White House - 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."
Lauren Myers

China to soften its one-child policy slogans, but not the law itself - 2 views

  •  
    The Chinese government isn't getting rid of its one-child policy currently in place. It's just making it sound better. China's communist party newspaper, People's Daily, reports that the government will revamp its abrasive-sounding slogans surrounding the policy. People's Daily cites several examples of "harsh slogans," including those "which sometimes even threaten criminal acts."
ladasia

Family with epileptic son touched after stranger pays for dinner, sends kind note - 0 views

  •  
    Stranger pays for family's dinner leaving kind note : "God only gives special children to special people."
Abaigh Plummer

For Boston bombing victims, death penalty decision a 'step forward' - 0 views

shared by Abaigh Plummer on 31 Jan 14 - No Cached
maceep liked it
  •  
    Federal prosecutors say they'll seek the death penalty against Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, arguing that he acted in "an especially heinous, cruel and depraved manner" and lacks remorse.
  •  
    Going along with the Republican/Democratic Ideologies, Left-winged folks will probably be less for a death penalty, while Right-winged folks will probably more support it. At least that's what our notes say. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Bryan Pregon

Lost Jet's Path Seen as Altered via Computer - NYTimes.com - 0 views

  •  
    "The first turn to the west that diverted the missing Malaysia Airlines plane from its planned flight path from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing was carried out through a computer system that was most likely programmed by someone in the plane's cockpit who was knowledgeable about airplane systems, according to senior American officials."
  •  
    I think its a little suspicious that 2/3s of the plane's passengers were Chinese, yet I still believe there was a malfunction that occurred on the plane instead of an act of terrorism.
Lorenzo Beck

Is The Flight 370 Disappearance An Act of Terrorism? - 0 views

  •  
    People have been speculating that the known flight path made a complete U-Turn from its destined path, however, they talked about two men who forged or faked their passports to board the plane.
  •  
    It is amazing that in 2014 we can lose track of a plane with 200 people missing. The transponder being shut off(?) or broken seems the most confusing part.
Bryan Pregon

Classes Resume After "Hit List" Threat Closes Schools - 4 views

  •  
    "Burwell, Nebraska Public Schools after they were canceled so administrators could prepare new security measures in the wake of a threat mailed to City Hall."
  • ...9 more comments...
  •  
    I think that they should of shut school down for a while. They put a bunch of peoples lives in danger. Even if they checked their bags and what not, that doesn't mean they aren't considered dangerous.
  •  
    i Think that they should shut the school down until they take all the security measures possible to make sure something doesn't happen again
  •  
    It stinks that things like this keep happening. Why do people keep making serious threats to hurt other people at schools? What do they gain from that?
  •  
    They should have shut down the school for awhile. It should be taken with more precaution they should have taken even just a day or two to decide if what they are doing is enough to keep people safe.
  •  
    I feel like they have done everything right in this situation, there isn't a whole lot more they can do to help the cause. Closing school a little longer I feel wouldn't have a huge effect on the situation, yet it could help the students clear their mind and stuff.
  •  
    Safety measures should be taken and those who were addressed in the "hit list" should have extra protection seeing as they are targets of this threat.
  •  
    I agree with many comments here. It would seem that there must have been enough credible evidence to think that the person making the threat might act on it. Even though I posted the article, I think we can sometimes get over excited when hearing these sorts of stories... the fact is, schools are among the SAFEST places for us to be. There has been school violence (even locally), but those situations are thankfully very rare!
  •  
    It makes sense that the school is taking the measures needed to make the school a safer environment. No one should have to go to their job or their classes scared of being killed.
  •  
    School should have been closed for awhile until it was safe for everyone. They need to make sure that no one is in any sort of danger. The school should go through all the things wrong and find ways to fix it all.
  •  
    I agree that it is important for threats to be prevented, and I think what they are doing to prevent them may just be what is needed to be done.
  •  
    I think the steps they are taking are the right way to handle the situation. Everyone should be considered a suspect, you never know who could be behind the threats. The administrators and students safety should be their top priority.
Abaigh Plummer

Obamacare signup delayed -- for 2015 - 0 views

  •  
    Washington (CNN) -- After the many bumps, ruts and roadblocks the Affordable Care Act has run into, health officials in Washington have decided to delay open enrollment in Obamacare -- not this year, but a year down the road.
Bryan Pregon

California man pulled off plane in North Korea, detained, son says - 0 views

  •  
    Previously, the agency had warned U.S. citizens of the "serious risks" of travel to the reclusive country -- including arbitrary arrest for what would be innocuous acts elsewhere. But its last travel warning, issued on October 1, didn't include the stronger language advising against all travel.
Bryan Pregon

One JFK conspiracy theory that could be true - 1 views

  •  
    President John F. Kennedy greets supporters during his visit to Fort Worth, Texas, on Friday, November 22, 1963. This month marks 50 years since his assassination in Dallas, an event that jarred the nation and fueled a multitude of conspiracy theories about whether Kennedy was killed by a single gunman acting alone in the Texas School Book Depository.
jasminemarie16

Miriam Carey was the girl in the car at the Capitol shooting. - 1 views

  •  
    OK I want YOUR opinions on this issue... Was it appropriate for the capital city police shoot her once her car had crashed? She had no weapon, but were they acting to protect public safety? What is your view?
  • ...6 more comments...
  •  
    In my opinion, they shouldn't of shot her. I'm almost sure that the reason they had chosen to take this action is because they feared that she was trying to attack the white house. It's likely that if the thought that she might be targeting the government wasn't an assumption that had been made, she wouldn't of been shot. That represents inequality in our society, because had it been anyone else that seemed like a target, this person wouldn't of lost her life. Her car was already crashed, and no weapons were in her possession. Knowing that, how could she of been a threat to the public in any way?
  •  
    She tried to run her car into the white house. She knew what she was doing. She knew she would end up in jail or in trouble at least. If your going to do something stupid, and try to endanger several people's lives over something you can't control, then whatever happens, happens.
  •  
    I think she was using her vehicle as a weapon but I don't think that means that they needed to shoot her. I think she was crazy for having her kid in the car with her and they should have arrested her to then be able to question her for her actions now they'll never know.
  •  
    They shouldn't have shot her. They probably did it to avoid more paper work and hassle. Always looking for a reason to kill people who defy the government. Plus she wasn't the only one in the car. Talk about devastating.
  •  
    It was okay that she was shoot. Because what if she had a bomb. And she was a threat to national security that is why she was shoot
  •  
    I think they shouldn't have shot her.Especially since her one year old daughter was in the vehicle and probably witnessed the horror of her mom being shot and killed in front of her.
  •  
    No it wasn't right to do that. Yes they were trying they could of shot somewhere else on her that wouldn't of killed her but just got her to stop what she was doing.
  •  
    They should have shot her in the arm or leg just to stop her but to kill her in front of her kid is wrong. But she was also wrong for bringing her child with and putting her in a dangerous situation.
« First ‹ Previous 41 - 60 of 92 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page