[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

President Elizabeth Warren - hayduke2 - Oct 17, 2019 - 11:02am
 
Democratic Party - R_P - Oct 17, 2019 - 10:55am
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Oct 17, 2019 - 10:54am
 
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl? - westslope - Oct 17, 2019 - 10:49am
 
Graphs, Charts & Maps - R_P - Oct 17, 2019 - 10:24am
 
Climate Change - westslope - Oct 17, 2019 - 10:15am
 
Trump - R_P - Oct 17, 2019 - 10:10am
 
Ideology and large breasts - westslope - Oct 17, 2019 - 9:57am
 
Things You Thought Today - Red_Dragon - Oct 17, 2019 - 9:36am
 
KEF LS50 Wireless + Mac Mini + ? + RP FLAC = paradise - BillG - Oct 17, 2019 - 9:33am
 
sounds like... - Proclivities - Oct 17, 2019 - 9:25am
 
Amazon Echo/Alexa stream not working - jarro - Oct 17, 2019 - 8:42am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Isabeau - Oct 17, 2019 - 8:07am
 
The Obituary Page - Isabeau - Oct 17, 2019 - 6:06am
 
Race in America - miamizsun - Oct 17, 2019 - 4:46am
 
Suggestion: Americana Mix - sirdroseph - Oct 17, 2019 - 1:34am
 
Counting with Pictures - yuel - Oct 17, 2019 - 12:11am
 
Regarding dogs - kcar - Oct 16, 2019 - 10:20pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - Prodigal_SOB - Oct 16, 2019 - 6:07pm
 
Live Music - R_P - Oct 16, 2019 - 1:11pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - KurtfromLaQuinta - Oct 16, 2019 - 12:29pm
 
What Did You See Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Oct 16, 2019 - 12:24pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Oct 16, 2019 - 10:31am
 
Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest - Red_Dragon - Oct 16, 2019 - 9:47am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - ColdMiser - Oct 16, 2019 - 7:13am
 
New Music - mary_strain - Oct 16, 2019 - 7:02am
 
Google Inc. - miamizsun - Oct 16, 2019 - 6:56am
 
• • • What Makes You Happy? • • •  - Red_Dragon - Oct 16, 2019 - 6:50am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Oct 16, 2019 - 6:12am
 
Things for which you would sell ManBird's soul - miamizsun - Oct 16, 2019 - 4:23am
 
Favorite Quotes - sirdroseph - Oct 16, 2019 - 2:12am
 
MANBIRD: appropriate or not? Dicuss. - SeriousLee - Oct 15, 2019 - 6:35pm
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - SeriousLee - Oct 15, 2019 - 6:30pm
 
What did you have for dinner? - R_P - Oct 15, 2019 - 4:27pm
 
Visual DNA – Another fine time-waster .... - haresfur - Oct 15, 2019 - 4:00pm
 
David Bowie tribute show.... - Proclivities - Oct 15, 2019 - 1:54pm
 
Vintage Vinyl - ScottFromWyoming - Oct 15, 2019 - 12:43pm
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - GeneP59 - Oct 15, 2019 - 9:14am
 
Ask the Libertarian - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Oct 15, 2019 - 8:26am
 
Syria - sirdroseph - Oct 15, 2019 - 8:24am
 
Words that should be put on the substitutes bench for a year - miamizsun - Oct 15, 2019 - 6:21am
 
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc) - miamizsun - Oct 15, 2019 - 4:35am
 
The All-Things Beatles Forum - Steely_D - Oct 14, 2019 - 3:54pm
 
King Crimson - Steely_D - Oct 14, 2019 - 3:51pm
 
HomeKit HomePod AppleTV - Steely_D - Oct 14, 2019 - 3:33pm
 
Manbird's Episiotomy Stitch Licking Clinic - KEEP OUT - miamizsun - Oct 14, 2019 - 1:12pm
 
kurtster's quiet vinyl - miamizsun - Oct 14, 2019 - 12:43pm
 
What are you listening to now? - SeriousLee - Oct 14, 2019 - 8:35am
 
'Til Death - miamizsun - Oct 14, 2019 - 7:54am
 
Immigration - ScottFromWyoming - Oct 14, 2019 - 7:24am
 
Anti-War - sirdroseph - Oct 14, 2019 - 7:04am
 
Political Humor Images - buzz - Oct 14, 2019 - 6:18am
 
Living in America - miamizsun - Oct 14, 2019 - 6:05am
 
When I need a Laugh I ... - miamizsun - Oct 14, 2019 - 5:27am
 
We are all hostages of 9/11 - Ohmsen - Oct 13, 2019 - 1:14pm
 
Name My Band - Ohmsen - Oct 13, 2019 - 10:25am
 
Thanks RP! - Ohmsen - Oct 13, 2019 - 9:11am
 
Remembering the Good Old Days - FourFortyEight - Oct 13, 2019 - 8:25am
 
Poetry Forum - Antigone - Oct 12, 2019 - 4:28pm
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - haresfur - Oct 12, 2019 - 1:40pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - BillG - Oct 12, 2019 - 10:44am
 
Eclectic mix not working - BillG - Oct 12, 2019 - 9:22am
 
Celebrity Deaths - miamizsun - Oct 12, 2019 - 7:07am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - haresfur - Oct 12, 2019 - 2:18am
 
RP is not available Echo - WestMidsMatt - Oct 12, 2019 - 1:57am
 
Roku Update Wishlist - BillG - Oct 11, 2019 - 7:36pm
 
Lyrics That Remind You of Someone - buddy - Oct 11, 2019 - 6:41pm
 
Which Five Guests? - buddy - Oct 11, 2019 - 6:37pm
 
Top Lists - R_P - Oct 11, 2019 - 4:02pm
 
Canada - westslope - Oct 11, 2019 - 8:28am
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Isabeau - Oct 11, 2019 - 6:49am
 
Outstanding Covers - rhahl - Oct 10, 2019 - 6:22pm
 
5 words for Barack Obama - miamizsun - Oct 10, 2019 - 4:13pm
 
Tech & Science - miamizsun - Oct 10, 2019 - 4:06pm
 
• • • Clownstock • • •  - Proclivities - Oct 10, 2019 - 1:47pm
 
Index » Regional/Local » USA/Canada » Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 68, 69, 70  Next
Post to this Topic
emeraldrose63

emeraldrose63 Avatar



Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 5:37pm

 kurtster wrote:

I think that either South Carolina or Mississippi comes in last, not sure.  Its all crazy.

Priorities are messed up for sure.
 

Where's the list that you are referring to please. I'd like to see it..
hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 5:32pm

From Steven Colbert: "Better watch the cows, they may be secret mooooooooooo-slims!"
triskele

triskele Avatar

Location: The Dragons' Roost


Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 4:35pm

 BluEyes wrote:

Looking for Schlabby! Limited navigation online with my cell phone ;( we are in Lawton now and will be in OKC on Saturday.

 
he sent you a pm!

triskele

triskele Avatar

Location: The Dragons' Roost


Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 4:35pm

 kurtster wrote:

I think that either South Carolina or Mississippi comes in last, not sure.  Its all crazy.

Priorities are messed up for sure.
 
ayup

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 3:09pm

 triskele wrote:

but state question 744 (i think that was the number), to designate more of the state's budget money for schools and teachers' salaries, in order to bring OK up to the standards of neighboring states, was overwhelmingly voted DOWN.  80% of ballots cast were NO.  OK is ranked 49th in the country, not sure who is 50th, as far as the education system.
 
I think that either South Carolina or Mississippi comes in last, not sure.  Its all crazy.

Priorities are messed up for sure.

BlueHeronDruid

BlueHeronDruid Avatar

Location: planting flowers


Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 3:06pm

 kurtster wrote:
Oklahoma Question 755 passed overwhelmingly.  Is it an unnecessary law ?  Evidently not as its margin of victory is very revealing.
Question 755 (International Law)
Result Votes Percentage
 Yes    695,568            70.08%
  No296,903     29.92%      
Total votes992,471      100.00%     
Voter turnout %


 
Popularity does not equal necessity!

BluEyes

BluEyes Avatar



Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 3:05pm

 triskele wrote:

but state question 744 (i think that was the number), to designate more of the state's budget money for schools and teachers' salaries, in order to bring OK up to the standards of neighboring states, was overwhelmingly voted DOWN.  80% of ballots cast were NO.  OK is ranked 49th in the country, not sure who is 50th, as far as the education system.


 


Looking for Schlabby!

Limited navigation online with my cell phone ;(

we are in Lawton now and will be in OKC on Saturday.
triskele

triskele Avatar

Location: The Dragons' Roost


Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 2:56pm

 kurtster wrote:
Oklahoma Question 755 passed overwhelmingly.  Is it an unnecessary law ?  Evidently not as its margin of victory is very revealing.
Question 755 (International Law)
Result Votes Percentage
 Yes    695,568            70.08%
  No296,903     29.92%      
Total votes992,471      100.00%     
Voter turnout %


 
but state question 744 (i think that was the number), to designate more of the state's budget money for schools and teachers' salaries, in order to bring OK up to the standards of neighboring states, was overwhelmingly voted DOWN.  80% of ballots cast were NO.  OK is ranked 49th in the country, not sure who is 50th, as far as the education system.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 3, 2010 - 8:16pm

Oklahoma Question 755 passed overwhelmingly.  Is it an unnecessary law ?  Evidently not as its margin of victory is very revealing.
Question 755 (International Law)
Result Votes Percentage
 Yes    695,568            70.08%
  No296,903     29.92%      
Total votes992,471      100.00%     
Voter turnout %



kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 2, 2010 - 9:00pm

  • In a poll conducted by SoonerPoll.com, 49 percent of voters polled stated that they were for the measure. The poll surveyed likely registered voters in the state, which included 385 Democrats, 340 Republicans and 31 independents. The margin of error was reported to be 3.57 percentage points and was commissioned by the Tulsa World.<9>
Date of Poll Pollster In favor Opposed Undecided Number polled
July 16-21, 2010SoonerPoll.com49%24%27%755

Two measures aimed at illegal immigration received even greater approval. State Question 751, which would make English the state's official language, was favored by 85 percent; SQ 746, to require photo identification to vote, was favored by 83 percent.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=19&articleid=20100805_16_A9_Amswhr19725





And


State Question 755 has received national attention, and Duncan has been interviewed about the proposal by several national news outlets.

However, the proposal appeared less controversial among Oklahoma legislators. House Joint Resolution 1056 passed the Oklahoma House of Representatives on an overwhelmingly bipartisan 82-10 vote and cleared the Senate on a bipartisan 41-2 vote.

Duncan has predicted the measure will receive similar overwhelming support from voters. Recent polling indicates the measure will pass, although many citizens remain uncertain. A poll conducted July 16 to 21 for The Tulsa World found that 49 percent of likely voters supported State Question 755, while 24 percent opposed it and 27 percent were undecided.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Aug 30, 2010 - 4:55pm

 kurtster wrote:
Perhaps this is an intent that Oklahoma Question 755 is well suited for:

Just heard on the radio, no not Rush, that the US State Department has submitted Arizona's 1070 to the United Nations for review for possible Human Rights violations.  WTF ?

This is an internal affair undergoing an internal Constitutional review. 



 
Great.  Just great.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Aug 30, 2010 - 4:44pm

 cc_rider wrote:

Isn't that one of the reasons WW I got so out of hand?
 
Ayup.  'Zactly what George was talking about.

islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 30, 2010 - 4:40pm

 kurtster wrote:


No, definitely not good for our country either.  Besides, I love women. 

Probably overkill because The US Constitution already guarentees a seperation between Church and State, which Sharia Law is clearly not in keeping with that.  That would be a State endorsement of a particular religion.

But you never know, cause most politicians wipe their posterior with the Constitution.
 
I'm not quite sure which components you are referring to, but the first amendment says:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.".

It rightly says that Congress (the State in this case) doesn't support or interfere with any religion directly. People can gather up under any peaceful cause they want and complain to their representatives without interference.  Seems pretty reasonable to me. Sharia, like many other sets of "God's laws" has many different interpretations depending on if the followers are modernist, fundamentalist, evangelical...
cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 30, 2010 - 12:55pm

 oldslabsides wrote:
What I'm uncomfortable with (so was George Washington, BTW) is foreign policy dominated by treaties and alliances.
 
Isn't that one of the reasons WW I got so out of hand?

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 30, 2010 - 12:50pm

Perhaps this is an intent that Oklahoma Question 755 is well suited for:

Just heard on the radio, no not Rush, that the US State Department has submitted Arizona's 1070 to the United Nations for review for possible Human Rights violations.  WTF ?

This is an internal affair undergoing an internal Constitutional review. 


Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 10:52am

 kurtster wrote:
We don't live within the country with laws based on international treaties.  I know of no example.  Treaties only affect interaction when dealing with another country.  The example that we choose to live with less nukes does not affect our day to day life.  All of our laws governing domestic activity have so far been based on the US Constitution.

The purpose of our Constitution as I see it is to maximize the rights of the people or individual and minimize the role of the government in interfering with those rights.  Introducing anything new from foreign and religious sources to our legal system will only dilute the rights of the individual and strengthen the State. 

For the most part that's true—international treaties have only indirect effects on people's behavior within a state*. Which makes the OK proposition both pointless and in violation of Article 6 of the US Constitution.

*One of the few areas where state law gets involved with treaties is in regard to extradition, tho usually the impact is the other way around—the state law can interfere with exercising a treaty.

winter

winter Avatar

Location: in exile, as always
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 10:35am

 kurtster wrote:

We don't live within the country with laws based on international treaties.  I know of no example.  Treaties only affect interaction when dealing with another country.  The example that we choose to live with less nukes does not affect our day to day life.  All of our laws governing domestic activity have so far been based on the US Constitution.

The purpose of our Constitution as I see it is to maximize the rights of the people or individual and minimize the role of the government in interfering with those rights.  Introducing anything new from foreign and religious sources to our legal system will only dilute the rights of the individual and strengthen the State. 

I'm happy that 80% of Sharia Law is in harmony with our Constitution.  To allow the other 20% to take hold for the convenience of a particular religion is not acceptable.  If it is allowed, then it applies to all of us, not just the believers.  There is no (longer a) place for seperate but equal in this country, especially justice systems.  Sharia Law within the United States can adapt to our legal precendents, it cannot be the other way.  A Constitutional Amendment of this kind, strengthens the original intent of our Constitution, it does not minimize individual rights, it strengthens them.  To argue against this is similar to the argument used to argue against the ERA Amendment.

 
I don't know of any specific examples, but I'm confident that there are any number of commerce treaties that have significant impact on businesses and individuals here in the US. If we sign a treaty that says we won't impose the death penalty, that would preclude any state from imposing the death penalty. If we sign a treaty that says we will no longer manufacture lead-based paint, then none of the states get to give any of their pet manufacturers a pass on the Pb. A treaty specifying we will sell stealth technology only to our NATO allies means companies that manufacture stealth components have some pretty significant restrictions on their sales and marketing.

Again, I'm not in favor of Sharia law or any kind of "separate but equal" justice system in the US. We all need to be held to the same standards. I'm saying that the existing separation of church and state enshrined in the Constitution already covers that. I'm saying that we don't need to keep proliferating laws to cover situations already covered under existing law. And I'm saying that logically if you're going to pass a law excluding one specific set of religious traditions from our judicial system, you need to exclude them all or it's discriminatory. You can't say "your religious traditions are unacceptable for our system of justice, but mine are okay".

So instead of saying "Sharia law is not to be used for judicial decisions" and "Buddhist law is not to be used for judicial decisions" and "Jedi law is not to be used for judicial decisions", it's easier and fairer to stick with "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

I don't see how adding redundancy to the already burdensome body of law in this country is going to maximize my rights.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 10:14am

 winter wrote:

My point is that we already live under international laws in the form of treaties - we have for over 200 years. It's not news, and those treaties are signed by the President and ratified by the Senate. Our representatives get a say in them. If they don't find them in the best interests of the US and its people, they don't commit us to them. If we disagree with our representatives on that, we elect someone whose views and values are more in line with our own.

And I'm not opposed to Judeo/Christian values per se any more than I'm in favor of Sharia law. I'm opposed to murder, lying, theft, etc. (I'm a little less comfortable with keeping the Sabbath or having no gods before God, but that's me.) I'm saying that you can't say "Sorry, Muslims, your religious laws are out. Only ours are acceptable." Either all religions (and irreligions) are equal in the eyes of the law, or they're not. If you're going to rule one out, you have to rule them all out.

I'd leave out the specific exclusion of Sharia law just like I'd leave out the specific exclusion of Buddhist law or Zoroastrian law or rabbinical law or Catholic law. Keep it simple. Interpret the laws of the US and the state as written - that's the job of a judge. You can't list all possible stuff to exclude ("also judges should not use dice to make decisions, or flip coins, or employ any other methods of chance - oh, and Ouija boards and Tarot cards are right out"), so it doesn't make sense to me to start.
 
We don't live within the country with laws based on international treaties.  I know of no example.  Treaties only affect interaction when dealing with another country.  The example that we choose to live with less nukes does not affect our day to day life.  All of our laws governing domestic activity have so far been based on the US Constitution.

The purpose of our Constitution as I see it is to maximize the rights of the people or individual and minimize the role of the government in interfering with those rights.  Introducing anything new from foreign and religious sources to our legal system will only dilute the rights of the individual and strengthen the State. 

I'm happy that 80% of Sharia Law is in harmony with our Constitution.  To allow the other 20% to take hold for the convenience of a particular religion is not acceptable.  If it is allowed, then it applies to all of us, not just the believers.  There is no (longer a) place for seperate but equal in this country, especially justice systems.  Sharia Law within the United States can adapt to our legal precendents, it cannot be the other way.  A Constitutional Amendment of this kind, strengthens the original intent of our Constitution, it does not minimize individual rights, it strengthens them.  To argue against this is similar to the argument used to argue against the proposed ERA Amendment.


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 9:19am

 winter wrote:

I know. (Although wasn't it Washington who allied us with the French during the Revolution?)

You and I disagree on that point. But you knew that already.
 
Yes, it was.  However, George did make exception to his principle concerning temporary alliances in time of war - as distinct from long-term alliances like say, NATO or the UN.

(former member)

(former member) Avatar



Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 9:17am

 buzz wrote:

The issue is that we elect state and federal legislators to represent us in the law making process. In theory, they are accountable to the citizenry. Would you really be comfortable with unknown people in The Hague creating the laws you live under? The upside of this would be that we could cancel that pesky election day. It would no longer be necessary.
 
Yes, our laws are based on Judeo/Christian values. Would you prefer that your daughter live in a country whose laws are based on The Ten Commandments like ours is, or a country like Iran, with Sharia Law?
 
There have been instances lately of judges wanting to use International Law in place of US law when making decisions. 

 
I'd prefer my daughter live in country with laws based on logic, reason and equality not any religion.  Too bad Vulcan is a made up place.  Gene Roddenberry was way ahead of his time.  Christianity, while its current practitioners are not as blatant about it, is just as misogynistic as Islam.  Ever been a girl in a christian community?  Its not a very equal place to be.  That is one of the reasons I reject organized religion.  I got tired of being told I was lesser because I had a uterus.  At least I think I have one, I've never actually tested the theory.

When was the last time you voted for someone who did as promised?  I've always referred to elections as choosing the least of the evils.  I wish we could execute reform guaranteeing us the right to a lobbyist free government; politicians who do as they are asked to by those they represent; justices who rule based on law and reason instead of their own personal agendas.  It's bizarre that we even have to vote on this in any state.  Why wouldn't ruling be based on our own laws?  But then again, how many rulings are based on deals, agendas, personal views and political alliances?

I know, I know.  I 'm a dreamer.

Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 68, 69, 70  Next