Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items matching "legal" 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
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."
Jeremy Vogel

Iowa House GOP Seeks Gay Marriage Ban - 0 views

  •  
    An interesting look at how gay marriage is still a battle in Iowa.
  • ...7 more comments...
  •  
    See, how does gay marriage affect straight marriage? It has obviously been like this for quite a while.. Iowa has not Blown up or anything because of it. It is obviously a control issue. I still don't understand why it is SO important to get rid of gay marriage.
  •  
    re: Alex B - I think eating broccoli is 'disgusting' but I don't know that the government has any right to ban it. America is split 50/50 on this issue. I would welcome more people to give some opinions on this thread. I am interested to hear what are some of the reasons for differences in beliefs (rather than just personal preference) (maybe discussing rights and obligations of citizens/government)
  •  
    The battle on Gay Marriage isn't one of "morals" or "protecting the foundation of marriage". This is an argument about religious ideals (Which shouldn't be expressed in our country that prides itself on having a separation of church and state) and Insurance rates. I honestly believe that keeping away rights like this is is prejudice and is in the same ball park as racial segregation. Alex: Then don't look.
  •  
    i believe that it should be only men and women that can get married. thats how it was when my grandparents grew up and event my parents and thats the way i think it should stay. im not trying to be rude to any gay man or women its just my thoughts that men should marry women and women should marry men not marrying the same sex.
  •  
    It's legal to marry your cousin in 16 states but you can't marry somebody the same gender as you? Gay marriage has been going on for such a long time now, what issues has it caused? Did wanting to marry another man/woman cause World War 1? There are incestual relations in religious writing, but wanting to marry someone the same gender as you is a sin? I find that disgusting, they have no right to ban love. Peace.
  •  
    I could careless if you married the same gender as long as that person makes you happy then why does it even matter.
  •  
    im sorry, somebody got on my thing and put that. i didnt
  •  
    If you love someone and want to spend the rest of your life with them you should be able to. It shouldn't matter whether you're two males, two females, or even two potatoes, as long as you're happy.
  •  
    We should leave it alone. I dont know why its such a big concern when it has little affect on our lives. To each their own i believe..
Mallory Huggins

Hobby Lobby: The First Martyr Under Obamacare? - 0 views

  •  
    Someone posted this, but it wasn't possible to comment
  •  
    First point: I fail to see how denying a single cell the chance to go through mitosis is abortion. It's no more aware than bacteria. Also, the author is referencing the morning-after pill. For some reason there's a lot of confusion about how the morning after pill actually works. It prevents the egg from joining the sperm, or depending on where the woman is in her cycle, prevents the ovaries from releasing eggs. Contrary to what pro-life proponents apparently believe, conception does not happen immediately after having sex. If using the morning-after pill is abortion, we may as well call abstinence abortion. Secondly, "the mandate requires private citizens who are also employers to purchase private goods (health insurance services) with private money from non-government companies." This is clearly written by a sensationalist. What it really means is that a company has to use its own money to provide healthcare. (And everyone seems to be forgetting that employees don't just receive healthcare plans for free). There is a difference between being a private citizen and being an employer. Owning a public company and employing people is about as far from private as you can get. "Requiring private citizens to pay for abortifacients is more akin to requiring the Amish to use their own money to purchase weapons from a private gun dealer or be forced into bankruptcy. Or kind of like forcing anti-pornography legal scholar Catharine MacKinnon to buy pornography for her law students." This is simply ludicrous and shows that the author clearly doesn't understand what a business is. It's a corporation, it employees people, it isn't a private citizen. I will admit that if Hobby Lobby employed only people who were in complete agreement with the beliefs of the owners I would support them in their case. However, the reality is that many of Hobby Lobby's employees don't share the exact same beliefs as the owner. And it would in fact be illegal for Hobby Lobby to choose their employ
  •  
    ees because of their beliefs. And the last time I checked, in America we don't make people follow certain religions or beliefs. In fact, the law isn't supposed to be based in religion. I know it sounds shocking, but it actually isn't okay to force a religion on people, or to make everyone live in accordance with one belief system, which is exactly what Hobby Lobby, and everyone who argues against this provision in the new health care law, is trying to do. Lastly, the author says repeatedly that this law essentially discriminates against Christians, which is a complete lie. Christians is a broad term. There are Christians who believe in all kinds of birth control and then there are those who think all birth control should be outlawed. There are even Christians who get abortions. So, and this is a message to anyone who writes articles of this kind, stop saying just saying Christians. Tell the truth and call yourself a Fundamentalist. Saying Christians make it seem like the majority of people who believe in Jesus Christ agree with you, and they don't. You're a minority, and you need to accept that. And maybe read a little about how our government works. It's a majority rules system.
Bryan Pregon

Georgia high school to host first integrated prom - 4 views

  •  
    "Students at one south Georgia high school share classrooms and sports fields; but, they don't share the same prom." Welcome to 2013. How far have we come in fighting segregation... not far enough.
  • ...12 more comments...
  •  
    This is just wrong. The students are being segregated because of their race and color. Shouldn't racism be illegal? especially in schools!
  •  
    I think having separate dances based on color is just wrong. If they can attend the same school, games and classes, then they should also be allowed to attend the dances with their friends, no matter their color.
  •  
    I can't believe to this day that there are people separating blacks from whites in some kind of activity. They share the same class rooms and everything else. Why can't they attend the same prom together? It amazes me how people think that they need to separate prom by the color of their skin.
  •  
    I can't believe there is a school that integrated but yet they separate dances for the students? I think what the girls are trying to do is a good idea cause there isn't a good enough reason for the school to have separate dances.
  •  
    I didn´t know segregation still was a problem.. This is annoying they have seperate proms for the races. It blows my mind how one can dislike and discourage people of a different color and race. We are all human beings.
  •  
    I think the fact that there is still segregation at all means the government isn't doing its job. They need to crack down on stuff like this.
  •  
    Even now there's still a problem segregation. Having two different proms for whites and colored kids is crazy.
  •  
    I didn't know schools were still allowed to do this. I don't understand why they can play sports together but not go to dances together.
  •  
    I thought segregation was no more but guess I was wrong. It doesn't make sense that they can play sports and attend other activities but they cant attend prom together. This isn't right!
  •  
    They shouldn't be able to do that. Th government ordered desegregation for schools in the 50's with the rights movement.
  •  
    Oh gosh, I'm pretty sure it feels like a slap in the face to the people who can't go to the "white" prom because they are black. I didn't even know they still did that. Or the fact that they were allowed too. It doesn't make any sense to me that they can have sports together but not dances?! Boggles my mind.
  •  
    Its sad how their are still people out their that believe this is the right thing to do. I mean come on its a school dance they have these students do everything else together whats the point in separating them for a dance.
  •  
    I can't believe this stuff still exist. The football team is segregated but the prom isn't? What took so long?
  •  
    Is this even legal?
Jeremy Vogel

Iowa's Progressive History - 1 views

  •  
    "Iowa has always been at the forefront of civil rights issues. And although Iowa is located in the heart of middle America, it has always been more progressive than most of the states in the Union. Here are some examples:"
  •  
    i had no idea iowa was at the center of all these issue especially civil rights laws that they were the among the first to legalize
  •  
    Makes me proud of Iowa.
Jeremy Vogel

NRA's enemies list: Most of America - 1 views

  •  
    Question: What do George Clooney, Chaka Khan, the American Medical Association, Bon Jovi and C. Everett Koop have in common?
  • ...2 more comments...
  •  
    'One of my favorite lyrics by U2 says: "Choose your enemies carefully, 'cause they will define you." The NRA, like too much of the conservative movement, has chosen its enemies indiscriminately and seems defined in opposition to most of modern America.' haha yep
  •  
    i think it wont make a difference if america band guns or not, people will always find a way and when you take the guns away you'll be left vulnerable to robberies.
  •  
    i thin k the nar needs to stop making everyone an enemy so they can focus on how to get firearms still legal
  •  
    And I thought the NRA was crazy when their phone calls started with "I'm so-and-so, and I'm a gun-totin' Texan." Their list is both foolish and callous. Adding the American Trauma Society to their list? The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence? It almost seems like the NRA wants an increase in violent crimes, if you look at their list. Possibly an increase in violent crimes against women, as it looks like they've included every women's association in the US.
jessicavaldez

Lawyer says a man is recieving hate mail over the accusation of slapping a baby - 2 views

  •  
    Being intoxicated or aggravated doesn't give anyone the right to use racial terms towards anyone. And, they don't have the right to slap a child, either. I think this man deserves hate mail.
  • ...9 more comments...
  •  
    Slapping a child is never okay, and being intoxicated is not an excuse for it either. This man deserves more then just hate mail.
  •  
    I wouldn't be surprised if he got more than just hate mail, Just because your intoxicated gives you no reason to slap a baby. That baby didn't deserve that.
  •  
    That guy is crazy, he slapped a little kid in front of a bunch of people, and called it the N-word. He's lucky he's just getting hate mail and nothing more.
  •  
    just because a baby is crying it does not give anyone the right to slap a baby
  •  
    I think that this story is a great reminder that our behavior has consequences. He has already been fired from an executive position in his company and has been publicly ridiculed. This in in addition to any sort of legal punishment that he might be facing. His decision to have maybe just one more drink before he boarded the plane was a bad decision with far reaching consequences!
  •  
    Of course he is being sent hate mail he slapped a baby. What kind of person does that?
  •  
    If what he is being accused for actually happened he deserves time in prison because for one racism is a terrible thing people don't get to choose what raise they are going to be they are born into it. For two no one in their right mind should every hit a child.
  •  
    i agree with all your comments it isn't right to slap a child becuase it's crying and it's not ok to use racial terms to anyone it's not cool.
  •  
    it all depends on the terms of which he did or did not some might say he did in fact slap the baby while others would say he didn't because of the accusation that he did in fact hit the baby but what it all comes down to is that no matter what you still have no right to hit a kid under any circumstances no matter what so he might deserve hate mail or he might not but not racist comments seriously what the f#^5 don't be racist
  •  
    This story is interesting..if he was intoxicated of any sort, that doesn't make it okay to use the language he supposedly did or hit a child. That's why I don't think it should be allowed to have alcoholic beverages on a plane. People take advantage of it, and you never know what could happen..much like what he's being accused. I think he deserves the "hate mail" he's getting!
  •  
    Is not right to slap a baby,because he/she is just a little baby who doesn't know nothing yet.
Bryan Pregon

Raid! National Guard, State Police descend on 81-year-old's property to seize single pot plant - 8 views

  •  
    "Margaret Holcomb said she was growing the plant as medicine, a way to ease arthritis and glaucoma and help her sleep at night. Tucked away in a raspberry patch and separated by a fence from any neighbors, the plant was nearly ready for harvest when a military-style helicopter and police descended on Sept. 21."
  • ...4 more comments...
  •  
    She had one plant and they had to raid her whole property, that might be a little extreme
  •  
    It is ridiculous that they just come in and do all of this over ONE plant used to ease arthritis and such.
  •  
    All of that for just ONE plant, wow. Might be a little over the top.
  •  
    Its surprising that they went through the troubles of deploying a helicopter and wasted very expensive fuel just to seize some marijuana plants when they could have just drove to the houses and told them what was up and took the contraband.
  •  
    Its just a plant and everyone is freakin out about it, ridiculous
  •  
    Maybe she needs a marijuana card, but she has arthritis and glaucoma, and they seem to be overreacting to any marijuana anywhere, but people do need legal cards. I hope she will be able to grow another plant, use it well and be able to pay for it.
Bryan Pregon

6 outrageous things Philippines president has said - 32 views

  •  
    "Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is known for his outspoken comments and controversial governing style."
  • ...12 more comments...
  •  
    This is not a very professional thing to say especially about the president
  •  
    This "leader" is insane, he's making threats to our people and taking simple manners of politics to a new level of crazy. For example on the controversy about illegal logging he said "cut the trees and I cut your heads." Like who says this publicly about another country. This was just one of many things this man has proclaimed about Obama.
  •  
    I think that the Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is sort of exaggerating his points to look tougher than he is, especially when he backs away from his statement about the president.
  •  
    What was said by President Rodrigo Duterte was very unprofessional. It calls his ability to maintain the Philippines into question. He says very inappropriate things, and does things that shouldn't and/or aren't legal.
  •  
    Honestly he shouldn't even be president if this is the crap he's going to pull! Rape and drug cartels are illegal and it won't get stopped cause when you are involved in that you make bank. A lot of his comments remind me of Trump all the sexual remarks especially.. Makes me sick.
  •  
    He shouldn't have talked about the president like that especially in an interview. It looked very unprofessional for someone big like him to say that.
  •  
    This guy should not be president. He is immature and childish. All his comments on important topics are crazy and not professional.
  •  
    I think that the comments of the President Rodrigo Duterte are very inappropriate, because he's a leader and he should be an example for the other people, but he is acting like a baby, insulting people without any sense.
  •  
    Obviously this guy is a crazy cannibal and should not be in a leader position if he can't be an adult and level headed about things. He seems to get angry very quickly and that's not a good characteristic of a good leader.
  •  
    The comments by the President are outrageous. A government official should not be saying that to news media knowing that this will get out. He acts like a little baby. He is asking to get shwacked.
  •  
    Just like Trump he uses his words to try and gain power but instead Duterte used choice words that insulted the president and because the cancellation of their meeting the president of the Philippines had somethings to say that he would have done and he put his words into scenarios that made him disrespectful and should not be a president if he acts like that.
  •  
    this dude is a savage. He is a crazy little guy and i would be scared to visit or live in the philippines
  •  
    It was a very unprofessional thing to say, especially about a fellow leader. Even if you disagree with someone that was taken out of hand.
  •  
    That Philippines President Duterte needs to loosen up, he has bad thoughts about everyone, and says them out loud, whether they're a common citizen or a leader, and he's proving himself to be dangerous to others. He said, "You drug pushers, hold-up men and do-nothings, you better go out. Because I'd kill you." He also raped a woman of her dignity after she was dead saying, "What a pity...they raped her, they all lined up. I was mad she was raped, but she was so beautiful. I thought, the mayor should have been first." He called both President Obama and the Pope something inappropriate.
Bryan Pregon

A Saudi woman tweeted a photo of herself without a hijab. Police have arrested her. - The Washington Post - 19 views

  •  
    "Late last month, she tweeted a photo of her outfit, and the post circulated through Saudi Arabia, drawing death threats and demands to imprison or even execute the woman. On Monday, police in the country's capital of Riyadh said they had arrested the woman"
  • ...19 more comments...
  •  
    I know it is their culture to where a hijab but the woman should get freedom. They shouldn't be forced to wear the hijab all the time in public. It's a disgrace towards women. What she did was her belief and I think other women in Saudi Arabia don't want to wear their hijab all the time but they are too afraid of what will happen to them. Now that she has done it maybe other women will follow in her footsteps.
  •  
    I understand that wearing the hijab is important to this religion and this country, but isn't it going a little far by arresting her? What they are trying to prove is that the country has a power of fear over it's citizens, mostly it's women citizens. This shows the importance of how religion and state should be separate because if it was, she wouldn't have gotten arrested.
  •  
    I agree with Landon now that she took off her hijab maybe other women will follow in her footsteps
  •  
    I agree with Landon because, the woman shouldn't have to wear something they don't want to wear all the time.
  •  
    Nobody should be told what to believe or how to dress. This woman was simply expressing herself but was arrested for moral disagreements.
  •  
    Landon got it right by saying she should get the freedom to wear whatever. And no woman or man should be disgraced by what they wear
  •  
    I agree with Lauren on that people should have the freedom to dress how they want
  •  
    I agree with Lauren. The women should express herself in anyway she wants.
  •  
    This seems nuts. Like a spoof of middle eastern living on youtube. Does not seem real that a lady would be threatened with death and imprisoned for wearing a dress and coat. this is very different from my reality. I obviously think she should wear what she wants, it think the real issue is understanding that there is a large number of people that do not feel the same way.
  •  
    She should have the freedom to dress how she wants and maybe others will follow her by dressing how they want.
  •  
    I think she is brave to stand up for what she believes in, many women there are too scared to throw out the head scarfs and put on something that they feel nice in. I think she should be let free and allowed to wear whatever. There is no legal dress code there it's just considered taboo which is wrong.
  •  
    I agree with Landon because this woman is now facing death all because she wanted to make a statement for women.
  •  
    Unfortunately for the Arabic culture this is illegal and is shamed. With our culture this would be welcomed because people are allowed to show their skin, but with them its shamed and its not going to change.
  •  
    I think it is unfair, sexist, and probably uncomfortable for the women. (Besides the constant torture, rape, imprisonment, etc etc that happens in saudi) they are being punished for wanting to be equal and expressing themselves.
  •  
    I think that the woman is trying to promote change however she did not do it in the right way. Her actions were wrong because if its just her doing it than it won't have as much of an impact as it would if 20 or more did it. However if she really wanted to not wear them than can she just move to a different place so she can. I will admit arresting her is silly and doesn't solve anything, it could promote not wearing them by arresting her if you think about it.
  •  
    I agree with Kim that she's trying to promote change, but I also understand that there are morals that the country believes women should follow. Instead of just her breaking the moral she should have gotten other women to join so there would have been more of an impact and something could have changed.
  •  
    I think that even though it does not seem right, that is what the country believes and she knew that something was going to happen.
  •  
    I think it's her freedom to dress how she wants and she shouldn't be forced to wear the hijab
  •  
    I think that people have the right and free from what they want to wear only that it is not inappropriate to offend people depending also if they are in a place such as black people or other people of different ideologies and have some message discriminating That is a different way but for the rest, there is always freedom of expression and of being able to dress as one always wants and when one does not in a bad way.
  •  
    I know it is their culture but the woman should get freedom, shouldn't be forced to wear the hijab all the time in public. It's a disgrace, you should be able to do/wear what you please.
  •  
    It is so crazy how around the world women are held to higher or even lower expectations when it comes to, education, clothing, physically beauty and intelligence. How is it even possible to imagine a world where the clothes you wear lands you into jail? There is justice that needs to be served her to have an innocent women in jail. There has to be something that is done for the world when it comes to woman suffrage. The hard part isn't going through with a plan to do that, the hardest part is finding a plan-- to do just that.
xolson974

Trump Vows 'Major Investigation' of His Claim of Voting Fraud - 0 views

  •  
    WASHINGTON - President Trump reiterated his false claim that at least 3 million illegal immigrants cast ballots for Hillary Clinton, calling on Wednesday for an investigation into voter fraud, even though his own legal team has argued that no such fraud occurred.
Bryan Pregon

New wrinkle in pot debate: stoned driving - 23 views

  •  
    This women is given a medical drug. When she drive's when she's is still high? So if she is getting medical weed and they make a law stating that you can not be "high" or drugged up before driving. Then why doesn't the government give them transportation, sure buses work if you live in the city, or taxi's. But why should she have to pay when the hospitals are giving it to her.
  • ...9 more comments...
  •  
    Or maybe instead they should just not drive. if smoking marijuana impairs you to the point to where your incapable of driving then don't drive, its not the governments responsibility to provide transportation to someone who chooses that as a medicine. and yeah the hospital gave it to her, but the hospital gives people a lot of other drugs that have warning labels stating not to drive and use heavy machinery. so why should the government have to provide transportation when people know that using that medicine might not allow them to be able to drive?
  •  
    Why Shouldn't they? there handing it out? Right? So if the government made the decision to give out marijuana to those who would like to have because of health problems then they should take Responsibility for the people there giving it to . Plus people wouldn't listen any ways, people drive under the influence all the time. No matter what its going to happen, that's why I think that the government should keep tabs on people who have medical drugs and make sure there safe, and make sure there not hurting someone else.
  •  
    if people wouldn't listen, then there is no point for the government to pay to transport someone around who would just abuse it in the first place. and keeping tabs on all of the people who use medical marijuana or any drug that could impair you would take a ridiculous amount of time and money that our government probably isn't willing to do. if someone wants or needs that medical drug then they should be responsible for their actions while using it not the government.
  •  
    Then why make a laws and expect people to follow this one. It's pretty evident that nobody listen's anyways. So enforcing the law by keeping tabs might save people's lives and save them from injury? So how would that be a waste of time? And yes the thought is unrealistic but, I was just throwing out an idea.
  •  
    i think its ok to be given the drug for a medical problem and to be able to drive, but if its worse then being drunk and then driving afterwards then you shouldn't be able to drive and be under an influence of a medical use of drugs. they should have special ways of transportation.
  •  
    I believe it's impossible to be too dough'd to drive!
  •  
    I think that yes government should provide the transportation if your under medication that you should not be driving or using heavy machinery. Then there is also the thought of who is to say that some one won't just get high and say its hospital medication? It will always be a battle no matter what happens. you could have the government provide the transportation but the only way you can use it is by providing proof by like wearing a I.d. bracelet or having to keep the container with you. Then there are still ways that people will get around like taking other peoples bracelets or containers or them expiring. So there is almost no way to decide and make it possible! Not everyone is going to follow the laws or ever will!
  •  
    i dont think it really matters wether they make it legal or not, people will still abuse it just like alcohol. they can set an age limit on it, but you still see 9 yearolds getting their hands on cigaretts even though ur supposed to be 18. and as far as transportation goes, i dont believe the government will provide transportation. if you choose to smoke pot, then its ur problem wether to drive or not. i dont think its a big deal if you smoke a bowl or two and then drive to the store, but can the police actualy tell or test you for thc? argue all you want i say let people be free and smoke whatever plant they want wether its tobacco or marijuana, its a natural god given plant.
  •  
    There's no reason that the government should use the money, that we don't have, to provide transportation to someone who doesn't need it. Does she need marijuana? Clearly, she may however, that does not constitute the necessity to have someone pay for her to get around. Maybe, she should try taking the bus.
  •  
    I believe she should not be driving while under the influence. Even if she is prescribed the drug, there should be warnings and other precautions taken to prevent accidents.
  •  
    Maybe she should try cocaine I heard that works too.
Jeremy Vogel

Virginia deputy fights his firing over a Facebook 'like' - 3 views

  •  
    A Virginia sheriff's deputy has been fired for liking his boss's political opponent -- on Facebook.
  • ...3 more comments...
  •  
    I think that facebook is becoming a problem. Its beginning to take over peoples lives and now its affecting peoples jobs just because of liking something your boss doesn't approve of. Something needs to change about that.
  •  
    That judge is wrong. Freedom of expression is allowed to be shown through a political campaign, and in no way should he be fired because he is stating an opinion on facebook, something that is protected in our first amendment.
  •  
    This case is complicated because working as a deputy is a government job, but to me this case is more about work law than freedom of speech. Here an excerpt of an article on the Iowa Dept of Labor Q/A page: Q. Can my employer fire me without a reason? A. Yes. Iowa is an "employment-at-will" state, meaning that an employer or employee may terminate the relationship at any time, for any reason, or for no reason at all. You may have grounds for legal action if the employer fires you: 1. based on sex, race, color, national origin, religion, age, pregnancy or physical or mental disability; 2. for certain "whistle blower" actions such as filing OSHA complaints. 3. contrary to an applicable employment contract; 4. for attempting to comply with applicable government regulations, such as health codes in restaurants This case is in Virginia (not sure about their laws) but in Iowa I feel like the deputy would be out of a job.
  •  
    A person has the right to like whoever they want on Facebook.
  •  
    I feel like the deputy should be able to "like" whatever he wants, on facebook or not. I don't think it is right for him to be fired just for liking it.
Janeth Cano

Why be against same sex marriage? - 37 views

  •  
    A student from ISU stands up for same sex marriage as he tells his story. Very powerful!
  • ...30 more comments...
  •  
    This student's name is Zach Wahls and this was a very powerful speech. Here is another link for the story with some more details http://goo.gl/LfiKK . I also know that he did a reddit AMA recently but I can't find a link right now.
  •  
    "marriage- ... 3) an intimate or close union" i think that if you asked a random person on the street what they thought marriage was this would be close to what they said, so why WOULD we be against it?
  •  
    If they are together the same as a man and a women are, why shouldn't they get the same benefits? I mean their relationships generally last longer then "legitimate" marriages so why shouldn't they be treated the same? By not allowing them to get married, are you doing anything? Besides denying them the benefits of that little piece of paper...such as lower insurance rates, higher health benefits, what happens if their partner dies? Then simply because they weren't ALLOWED to be married, the living partner does not get their belongings unless it is in the written will, they wont get any of the insurance money because that only goes to family, so if they are just "dating" they don't get any money to help them through the hard times...I think they should allow same sex marriage simply because if they are going to be together whether or not you allow them to get married, they should get the same benefits as everyone else.
  •  
    I don't mean to start a fight or anything like that, I just don't think it's right in the biblical sense. I am very close minded about this topic, and can't seem to change and I don't plan on it. I can see where people come from, but I bet some of those people don't believe in God, or the bible. It even states it in the bible that is wrong.
  •  
    I am glad to see opinions on both side of this issue in the comments. Discussion groups like these can easily turn into arguments with little information on either side. 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/BFKIo
  •  
    I don't think that religion can play a part in what marriage is in today's world. Marriage now in the eyes of our government is a way for 2 people to share benefits that the government gives them.
  •  
    casue it sthe same sex it shold not be
  •  
    this is a hard question to answer. I believe very strongly that gays have the right to be together and form a union, so i think that marriage is all well and good, but there is another issue. No matter what the dictionary says what the definition of marriage is, it doesn't take superiority over the bibles definition, which clearly states marriage is only to be formed between a man and a woman. Some say that the bible was not very clear on that, and that it is up for debate, but if one looks at leviticus 18:22 it states "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." I don't think it is abominations, but the concept of christianity, and judaism does, which is where it gets tricky. Does the government have the right to force the church to do things against their belief such as allowing gays and lesbians to marry? quite frankly i don't think so. Its not like the pope can just say, hey gays are ok now. It would be blasphemous. the only way gays would be allowed is if God himself came down from heaven and made it publicly known that he has changed his mind on the concept. If i was lets say jewish and had my own resteraunt, and i didn't serve pork due to my belief that pork was a dirty meat, would you go to the mayor and convince him to force me to change my rule even though its against my religion, and causes the lord to look down on me with disdain? I dont think you would because its preposterous. So i believe we need to meet in the middle. Make a union that gives gays all the same rights and privileges as regular marriage, but make it a different term than marriage, or at least make it known that the church is not ordaining it. The trick is not to force people to do things against their will, but to find new methods to do things so that we can all co exist without such petty argument.
  •  
    I just think people come up with poor excuses for gay marriage not to eligible..
  •  
    they do, but many people are scared of change. its going to change i believe, but its going to take time.
  •  
    I think that if a gay couple want to be want to be married, why can't they? There isn't a negative effect of a gay marriage, and you can see from the young man in this video that they can be just the same as a straight marriage. Infact I think that man was in more successful than any of us coming from opposite sex parents would be at that age. I also think that they provide a better family life for their children as well. His family seemed alot closer than most families today. So theres no reason a gay couple can't be married. Sure you can say that its wrong because its against Gods will and all, but being gay isnt a choice. Its who you are. God created man, and if being gay is really as terrible as they say it is, then God wouldnt have made them gay. And to the guy who says people that are for gay marriage aren't christian or don't belive in God, guess what? I go to church, believe in God, and I am for gay marriage. Who's to say that gay people can't have the same rights as straight people? The only difference is the gender we prefer. Why should gay marriage be outlawed and ridiculed? Where has prejudice ever gotten us?
  •  
    I do not think religion has anything to do with marriage. After all atheists can get married can't they? Also if you have read the entire bible there are more things that god has said is wrong then gays, and i guarantee everybody has done something god has said is a sin. It is up to the people getting married whether they want their marriage to be religious or not. If we let religion be a part of our everyday lives we would go insane with all of the "rules" the bible states. Who is to say that gays shouldn't have the right to get married? If that is the case then maybe we should limit what straights can do.
  •  
    Dakota, If you look at Americas past there has always been prejudice. And in the end it united America. Look at the way people treated colored folk, or women for that example. There has always been prejudice in the past and there will always be in the future. People are going to voice their opinions no matter how ignorant or naive they are.
  •  
    I am against gay marraige but I also think that people have the right to chose what they want. they can make their own choices and I will make mine. I have friends that are gay and I have no problems with them or the way they act. I may not like it but im not going to hate them for it.
  •  
    i actually have read the whole bible, and i spent 7 years of my life in a private christian school. it doesn't matter if you stole an orange or killed a man, a sin is a sin. what you dont understand is that god weighs all sins the same, and quite frankly if i really should tell the truth gay people are going to burn in a pit, just as that guy with the orange will if they dont change their ways and repent. The church is like a private club, and they say gays cant marry. end of story. they dont care if your not christian, they care about anatomy. anything else people want to ask questions about so i can answer them? or how about making false statements i can shoot down? listen unless we find an alternate to marriage, we should not and i will not stand up for gay marriage. perhaps if it was termed differently and done done in the name of god, i would just say more power to them. no matter how much you want to, you cant change the laws in the bible and call them legitimate.
  •  
    "broxton anderson " so your saying that the homosexuals need their own form of union instead of marriage? I thought that most marriages were now legal constructs with religious ceremonies being a personal choice? Does anyone else think this touches on separation of church and government? Should there be a true separation between the phrases "civil union" and "marriage" or is there already and some of us just can't see it yet?
  •  
    From a biblical point of view God made women for man and man for women, not man for man and women for women! #RealTalk
  •  
    yes it should be a "true separation" that way it removes itself from religion which leaves religions no room to complain. I feel that a civil union should give ALL the same benefits as marriage to. must people truly complain so much over two words? its the same thing, just a different name, and can prevent millions of wasted arguments.
  •  
    for those of you that say it is wrong according to the Bible, what happens if you were gay? It's not like you can change how you feel...and if "God" created all people "equal" why shouldn't they actually be treated equal? And i honestly think that simply because gays are the minority, they are being picked on...it's wrong...so why would "God create" people just to send to the deep south? ...just a thought
  •  
    Broxton Anderson- You have read the bible, yet you chose to use the most uncredible source in the bible. Using Leviticus is ridiculous. Leviticus also states that it is okay to own slaves and that if one performs the act of beastiality, that person is to be murdered and so shall the animal. It also states that you may not speak to a women on her menstrual cycle and it is also forbidden to touch pig skin and for men to cut their hair. You are completely fine with ignoring these very radical notions, but when it comes to gay marriage you instantly are against it? Seems to me like there is a lot of hypocrisy in your ways. I am a Catholic, but I fully accept the institution of gay marriage. I myself am not gay, nor do I plan on becoming gay. Leviticus is outdated and does not apply to our modern lives. Do not pick apart the bible and try to sound as if you know the way people should be. Anyone can misquote the bible. If you have a problem with homosexuals, keep it to yourself. They have just as much rights as everyone else in this world and should not be denied rights such as being married. A few men who disliked gay people have started this constant circle of quoting Leviticus in order to make their way sound just. If anything, they are doing more wrong by corrupting the bible to use it to justify their personal views.
  •  
    Same goes to Jay Cook. Talking on something you do not understand, or even researched, makes you arrogant and naive. If you are so fine with not allowing gays to be married, then you should be put back into slavery. Fair trade, yes? From a biblical view?
  •  
    I compltely agree with you^ Most people that are against gay marriage claim to say they are against it mostly because its against the bible while over half of them have no idea what they are talking about and likly havent read the bible. I think people should be able to marry who they wish the gender should not matter.
  •  
    It's too bad the bible is a bunch of tall tales exaggerated, can't trust religion for anything, it's a petty excuse for any argument.
  •  
    From an evolutionary stand point homosexual relations don't have an impact other then thinning the human gene pool. Not that I'm against gay rights, but since everyone dismisses religion I thought it would be important to note that in the commonly held belief of evolution, unless a person has offspring, it's as if never existed. Just some food for thought...
  •  
    Obviously what he is saying that from the stand point of evolution. He wasn't saying the homosexuals provide nothing to their societies.
  •  
    If you think about it the bible states go forth and populate, and that's the premise of evolution....
  •  
    Yeah thats a good point but maybe thinning the human population isnt all a bad thing. Also have you even considered how many children gay people adopted from other countris and places were they probably would have not had a good chance in living a good long heaalthy life. I dont understand how people can be so one minded about things. What if you were gay and wanted to marry a person you loved and you couldnt because judgmental people didnt approve?
  •  
    I'm cool with gays as long as they don't try and make a move on me.
  •  
    I agree with Brittany, everyone as a human being has their rights
  •  
    i totally agree with riley its peoples life and they have their own rights
  •  
    Thinning the gene pool is a bad thing. Genes that don't get passed are lost, and it could have devastating effects. Also I never said they don't contribute through adopting. I said that in the eyes of evolution ANYONE who fails to pass on genes is nonexistent.
  •  
    I believe Brittany said the human population, not pointing out simply the gene pool. The human population rate needs to slow down. It's increasing at a ridiculous rate and with adoptions instead of births it will decrease slightly. However, more people need to understand that everyone has a right as an individual and if a man-man or woman-woman couple wants to get married or adopt children or have their own, I say let them.
Ryan Edmondson

Apple Inc - 0 views

  •  
    Re "Apple execs grilled over tax strategy," Business, May 22 Unbelievable, stunning, incredible that members of Congress have the audacity to bring the chief executive of one of the most successful companies this country has ever seen to grill him on Apple Inc.'s tax strategy (which, by the way, is perfectly legal) so they can try to wring more money out of him.
nlarsen15

Dumb Starbucks! - 3 views

shared by nlarsen15 on 14 Feb 14 - No Cached
maceep liked it
  •  
    Here's a very entertaining commercial about one of America's latest coffee shops! Dumb Starbucks! Sound off on what y'all think and the legal validity behind it!
desertratt

Is enforcing the law even legal? - 1 views

  •  
    Yesterday afternoon in Detroit, via ABC affiliate WXYZ: We're told the ICE officer was serving the warrant to 19-year-old Terrence Kellum as part of task force investigation. Police say he was allegedly wanted for armed robbery. The task force was known as "D-FAT" which stands for Detroit Fugitive Apprehension Team.
claireboes

Two doctors fight for their own choice of how to die - 7 views

  •  
    It seems weird to think that it could be legal soon to plan your own death...
  •  
    Well if they are already going to die, it's their choice. Obviously don't give to people who aren't in chronic condition. I personally would love to have this choice instead of waiting months watching myself die. They have a right not to suffer
  •  
    I understand where he is coming from. Having a rare killing cancer in your body, you can't do much. If the cancer does return and it's non curable I don't see why you would have to sit and wait to die.
desertratt

Baltimore Has a History of Illegal Arrests. No Wonder Freddie Gray Ran from the Cops. - 5 views

shared by desertratt on 06 May 15 - No Cached
desertratt liked it
  •  
    When the cops chasing Freddie Gray caught up with him, they had a problem: He had not done anything illegal. They solved that problem the way cops often do: They picked a charge after the fact. According to Marilyn Mosby, the state's attorney for Baltimore, that charge, carrying a switchblade, was legally unfounded.
« First ‹ Previous 41 - 60 of 76 Next ›
Showing 20 items per page