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

Looting & vandalism isn't protest - sirdroseph - Oct 31, 2020 - 4:14am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - sirdroseph - Oct 31, 2020 - 4:11am
 
2020 Elections - ScottFromWyoming - Oct 31, 2020 - 4:04am
 
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
 
Outstanding Covers - ptooey - Oct 30, 2020 - 5:40pm
 
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
Post to this Topic
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.

winter

winter Avatar

Location: in exile, as always
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 9:15am

 oldslabsides wrote:

What I'm uncomfortable with (so was George Washington, BTW) is foreign policy dominated by treaties and alliances.
 
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.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 9:13am

 winter wrote:

Fair enough. (EDIT: Although I can't see how we could get along without it short of having fifty separate countries with fifty separate foreign policies. If you're going to let the federal government handle international relations and foreign policy, you can't let each state decide which treaties it won't follow.) But you can't just ignore it any more than you could, say, the Second Amendment.

Or, in my state's case, the Fourteenth.

 
What I'm uncomfortable with (so was George Washington, BTW) is foreign policy dominated by treaties and alliances.

winter

winter Avatar

Location: in exile, as always
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 9:09am

 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. 

 
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.

buzz

buzz Avatar

Location: up the boohai


Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 8:54am

 winter wrote:

Is there really that much of a danger of judges imposing Sharia in Oklahoma?

And I hope for their sake they don't have the Ten Commandments or any other overtly Christian symbols around the courthouses. Christian law is okay, but Islamic law is out? Hmm. Could be seen as discriminatory.

The international law bit throws me a little. Article 6 of the Constitution specifies that duly authorized treaties entered into by the federal government take precedence just after the Constitution and before any state laws.
 
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. 
winter

winter Avatar

Location: in exile, as always
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 8:45am

 oldslabsides wrote:

Never did care much for article 6.
 
Fair enough. (EDIT: Although I can't see how we could get along without it short of having fifty separate countries with fifty separate foreign policies. If you're going to let the federal government handle international relations and foreign policy, you can't let each state decide which treaties it won't follow.) But you can't just ignore it any more than you could, say, the Second Amendment.

Or, in my state's case, the Fourteenth.


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 8:34am

 winter wrote:

Is there really that much of a danger of judges imposing Sharia in Oklahoma?

And I hope for their sake they don't have the Ten Commandments or any other overtly Christian symbols around the courthouses. Christian law is okay, but Islamic law is out? Hmm. Could be seen as discriminatory.

The international law bit throws me a little. Article 6 of the Constitution specifies that duly authorized treaties entered into by the federal government take precedence just after the Constitution and before any state laws.
 
Never did care much for article 6.

winter

winter Avatar

Location: in exile, as always
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 8:09am

 kurtster wrote:

Good for Oklahoma.  This should be the United States' next Constitutional Amendment.

Oklahoma International Law Amendment, State Question 755 (2010)


The Oklahoma International Law Amendment will appear on the November 2, 2010 general election ballot in the state of Oklahoma as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment. The measure would require that courts rely on federal or state laws when handing down decisions concerning cases and would prohibit them from using international law or Sharia law when making rulings.<1><2>

 
Is there really that much of a danger of judges imposing Sharia in Oklahoma?

And I hope for their sake they don't have the Ten Commandments or any other overtly Christian symbols around the courthouses. Christian law is okay, but Islamic law is out? Hmm. Could be seen as discriminatory.

The international law bit throws me a little. Article 6 of the Constitution specifies that duly authorized treaties entered into by the federal government take precedence just after the Constitution and before any state laws.

HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 20, 2010 - 5:53am

 Manbird wrote:

That depends on what the stone-throwers consume to provide their bodies energy to throw the stones. And how did they get to the stone-throwing site? Walk? Ride donkeys? Drive a 1969 Ford Galaxy 500? Are the stones man-made? Were they transported there or do they occur naturally in the immediate area? 

{#Lol}
See,these are the words from a thinking man !
{#Yell}Manbird for President and Chief of UN !

Manbird

Manbird Avatar

Location: Oroville, Ca
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 19, 2010 - 6:34pm

 kurtster wrote:

You know, you are quite right about that.  It is carbon neutral.  Perhaps, I was too hasty.
 
That depends on what the stone-throwers consume to provide their bodies energy to throw the stones. And how did they get to the stone-throwing site? Walk? Ride donkeys? Drive a 1969 Ford Galaxy 500? Are the stones man-made? Were they transported there or do they occur naturally in the immediate area? 


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 19, 2010 - 6:18pm

 buzz wrote:

cant we just make one little exception for honor killings? and maybe just one more so we can stone people to death. it is way more green than electrocution.

 
You know, you are quite right about that.  It is carbon neutral.  Perhaps, I was too hasty.

buzz

buzz Avatar

Location: up the boohai


Posted: Jun 19, 2010 - 6:14pm

 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.
 
cant we just make one little exception for honor killings? and maybe just one more so we can stone people to death. it is way more green than electrocution.
katzendogs

katzendogs Avatar

Location: Pasadena ,Texas
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 19, 2010 - 6:14pm

 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.

  NFL

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 19, 2010 - 6:09pm

 buzz wrote:

what? you dont think Sharia law is a good thing?
 

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.
katzendogs

katzendogs Avatar

Location: Pasadena ,Texas
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 19, 2010 - 6:07pm

 buzz wrote:

what? you dont think Sharia law is a good thing?
 
That is a tough question.

buzz

buzz Avatar

Location: up the boohai


Posted: Jun 19, 2010 - 5:56pm

 kurtster wrote:

Good for Oklahoma.  This should be the United States' next Constitutional Amendment.

Oklahoma International Law Amendment, State Question 755 (2010)


The Oklahoma International Law Amendment will appear on the November 2, 2010 general election ballot in the state of Oklahoma as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment. The measure would require that courts rely on federal or state laws when handing down decisions concerning cases and would prohibit them from using international law or Sharia law when making rulings.<1><2>
 
what? you dont think Sharia law is a good thing?

katzendogs

katzendogs Avatar

Location: Pasadena ,Texas
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 19, 2010 - 5:06pm

 kurtster wrote:

Good for Oklahoma.  This should be the United States' next Constitutional Amendment.

Oklahoma International Law Amendment, State Question 755 (2010)


The Oklahoma International Law Amendment will appear on the November 2, 2010 general election ballot in the state of Oklahoma as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment. The measure would require that courts rely on federal or state laws when handing down decisions concerning cases and would prohibit them from using international law or Sharia law when making rulings.<1><2>

  UhOh.


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 19, 2010 - 4:29pm

Good for Oklahoma.  This should be the United States' next Constitutional Amendment.

Oklahoma International Law Amendment, State Question 755 (2010)


The Oklahoma International Law Amendment will appear on the November 2, 2010 general election ballot in the state of Oklahoma as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment. The measure would require that courts rely on federal or state laws when handing down decisions concerning cases and would prohibit them from using international law or Sharia law when making rulings.


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