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

2020 Elections - R_P - Oct 31, 2020 - 1:54am
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - Oct 30, 2020 - 8:59pm
 
Things You Thought Today - Manbird - Oct 30, 2020 - 7:48pm
 
Trump Lies - Manbird - Oct 30, 2020 - 7:45pm
 
COVID-19 - Manbird - Oct 30, 2020 - 6:57pm
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - Manbird - Oct 30, 2020 - 6:47pm
 
Looting & vandalism isn't protest - R_P - Oct 30, 2020 - 6:46pm
 
Outstanding Covers - ptooey - Oct 30, 2020 - 5:40pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Oct 30, 2020 - 4:37pm
 
Joe Biden - R_P - Oct 30, 2020 - 3:32pm
 
Trump - Steely_D - Oct 30, 2020 - 2:55pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - GeneP59 - Oct 30, 2020 - 1:28pm
 
KarmaKarma Sweepstakes - kcar - Oct 30, 2020 - 1:27pm
 
Things that piss me off - Isabeau - Oct 30, 2020 - 12:47pm
 
Name My Band - Isabeau - Oct 30, 2020 - 12:45pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Oct 30, 2020 - 9:52am
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Ohmsen - Oct 30, 2020 - 8:36am
 
What the hell OV? - oldviolin - Oct 30, 2020 - 7:28am
 
Happy Halloween Yall! - sirdroseph - Oct 30, 2020 - 7:21am
 
codec - Ohmsen - Oct 30, 2020 - 6:04am
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - sirdroseph - Oct 30, 2020 - 5:39am
 
Message To Lucky - miamizsun - Oct 30, 2020 - 4:30am
 
The Dragon's Roots - miamizsun - Oct 30, 2020 - 4:24am
 
Media Bias - miamizsun - Oct 30, 2020 - 3:56am
 
Automotive Lust - R_P - Oct 29, 2020 - 9:10pm
 
Have you planned your Halloween costume yet?? - miamizsun - Oct 29, 2020 - 6:34pm
 
Canada - haresfur - Oct 29, 2020 - 3:41pm
 
Two questions. That's it. I promise. - kcar - Oct 29, 2020 - 3:39pm
 
Supreme Court: Who's Next? - R_P - Oct 29, 2020 - 3:05pm
 
Questions. - pigtail - Oct 29, 2020 - 10:49am
 
Photos you have taken of your walks or hikes. - Antigone - Oct 29, 2020 - 6:05am
 
NEED A COMPUTER GEEK! - miamizsun - Oct 29, 2020 - 4:20am
 
Can't sleep - westslope - Oct 28, 2020 - 10:07pm
 
The Obituary Page - ScottN - Oct 28, 2020 - 9:49pm
 
Add a "Modern mix" - darrio - Oct 28, 2020 - 6:59pm
 
what the hell, miamizsun? - oldviolin - Oct 28, 2020 - 6:10pm
 
Today in History - miamizsun - Oct 28, 2020 - 4:27pm
 
HALF A WORLD - oldviolin - Oct 28, 2020 - 8:53am
 
TWO WORDS - rgio - Oct 28, 2020 - 6:57am
 
Baseball, anyone? - miamizsun - Oct 28, 2020 - 4:31am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Oct 27, 2020 - 7:21pm
 
how do you feel right now? - kurtster - Oct 27, 2020 - 6:23pm
 
VTuner drop Radio Paradise’s main mix? - BillG - Oct 27, 2020 - 3:56pm
 
Environment - Ohmsen - Oct 27, 2020 - 2:39pm
 
Recommended documentaries - Ohmsen - Oct 27, 2020 - 2:33pm
 
Republican Party - Steely_D - Oct 27, 2020 - 1:28pm
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Oct 27, 2020 - 11:45am
 
Great guitar faces - GINRUSH - Oct 27, 2020 - 11:27am
 
david bromberg - Antigone - Oct 27, 2020 - 6:09am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Oct 26, 2020 - 7:27pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Oct 26, 2020 - 4:59pm
 
::odd but intriguing:: - miamizsun - Oct 26, 2020 - 4:42pm
 
New Zealand - R_P - Oct 26, 2020 - 3:09pm
 
Favorite Quotes - westslope - Oct 26, 2020 - 2:04pm
 
Films you're excited about. - oldviolin - Oct 25, 2020 - 7:06pm
 
Rock Movies/Documentaries - KurtfromLaQuinta - Oct 25, 2020 - 6:29pm
 
Philosophy (Meaty Metaphysical Munchables!) - oldviolin - Oct 25, 2020 - 3:02pm
 
Quick! I need a chicken... - oldviolin - Oct 25, 2020 - 2:54pm
 
How's the weather? - haresfur - Oct 25, 2020 - 2:25pm
 
What's that smell? - Antigone - Oct 25, 2020 - 9:49am
 
De onde você ouve a Radio Paradise? Cidade/Local no Brasil - crishtiane - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:33pm
 
RPeeps I miss. - KurtfromLaQuinta - Oct 24, 2020 - 9:51pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Oct 24, 2020 - 5:01pm
 
The Dragons' Roost - Red_Dragon - Oct 24, 2020 - 3:53pm
 
More reggae, less Marley please - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:22am
 
What The Hell Buddy? - oldviolin - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:17am
 
Lyrics That Remind You of Someone - oldviolin - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:10am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Oct 24, 2020 - 10:09am
 
Music Videos - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 9:50am
 
Ambient Music - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 9:41am
 
Live Music - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 9:11am
 
The 1960s - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 9:03am
 
The war on funk is over! - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 8:57am
 
Play the Blues - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 8:56am
 
Prog Rockers Anonymous - Ohmsen - Oct 24, 2020 - 7:40am
 
Index » Regional/Local » USA/Canada » Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 75, 76, 77  Next
Post to this Topic
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 5:55pm

 BluEyes wrote:

I cannot access those from the phone. We are stuck in a huge traffic snarl as the graduates are returning to Fort Sill. We will try to get on the computer in the motel lobby but that will be an hour or so.

 
{#Dancingbanana}

BluEyes

BluEyes Avatar



Posted: Nov 4, 2010 - 5:54pm

 triskele wrote:

he sent you a pm!


 


I cannot access those from the phone. We are stuck in a huge traffic snarl as the graduates are returning to Fort Sill.

We will try to get on the computer in the motel lobby but that will be an hour or so.
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.


Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 75, 76, 77  Next