GOP rep discovers terrifying fact: That non-Christians exist

[Wamitoria]

Source?

http://www.navytimes.com/prime/2009/06/ ... y_062109w/

Only applies to the Naval Academy, and your link clearly says that violates federal law.

[Miss Defied]

This thread has a bad case of ADD

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

http://www.navytimes.com/prime/2009/06/ ... y_062109w/

Yeah there's nothing here that has anything to do with what you said.

Here's another.

SCOTUS had to shut this down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger

[Genivaria]

Yeah there's nothing here that has anything to do with what you said.

Here's another.

SCOTUS had to shut this down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger

Yes, as you said it was struck down. So how is this relevant?

[AiliailiA]

When someone is fired for their religious beliefs (Hindu/Wiccan/Christian whatever)
A person is turned down for a auto loan because of their skin color.
A person is refused as a applicant for an apartment because they are foreign.

Seriously I could go on for days. But I don't want to waste my time. If you want to go through life believing that to be true, be my guest.

I think is someone wants to fire a good employee from their business, they should be allowed to crash their own business and bankrupt themselves. Companies that act irrationally don't survive if they keep it up.

Ah, drop the subject of "rights" altogether. Everybody look at the pretty fairy.

Denying someone service to your restaurant, while denying them the opportunity to buy a burger from you, is bad yet should not be illegal. The government should not be allowed to discriminate. Private people, however, should be allowed to make stupid business decisions.

How about if they're only IN business because the government is paying them?

Like for instance with a school voucher.

[R Ev0lution]

You honestly don't think there's demand for a business completely free of [insert ethnicity here]?

Not enough of a demand to survive on more than a supremely local basis. In which case, oh well, just go drive another 2 miles.

You really, really, really never took any classes that covered the history of the African-American Civil Rights Movement in the United States, did you?

[The Steel Magnolia]

How the hell did this turn into a debate on affirmative action?

[Death Metal]

How the hell did this turn into a debate on affirmative action?

This is SPARTA NSG.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

This thread has a bad case of ADD

Yeah, we've covered about four topics by now. Surprised we haven't been shut down yet.

[Norstal]

So, how about them AIDS?

Really though, not sure what to talk about. No one to debate this issue with...

[The Steel Magnolia]

This thread has a bad case of ADD

Yeah, we've covered about four topics by now. Surprised we haven't been shut down yet.

I've literally been following this thread from the beginning, and I have to say.

I'm impressed.

[Veladio]

Yeah, we've covered about four topics by now. Surprised we haven't been shut down yet.

I've literally been following this thread from the beginning, and I have to say.

I'm impressed.

Yawn Its calmed down quite a bit haha

[Revolutopia]

While we discuss merits, preventing private discrimination has lead to things like affirmative action and colleges bringing on minority members with 3.2 GPAs over majority kids with 4.0 (note, before anyone jumps down my throat I don't think white kids are smarter.), when obviously the 4.0 deserved it.

That is not how Affirmative Action works, if you are going to demonize something get the basic idea correct.

[AiliailiA]

Hodges voted for the House bill the first time. On March 22 2012.
Then it went to the Lousisiana Senate, and as far as I can tell the Senate "amended" without changing one word.
Then it came back to the House, to be concurred in, on April 5, then to the Governor who signed it on April 18.

Now here's an odd thing. The newspapers reported the final house vote (concurrence) as being very close: 51 to 49. This was apparently very controversial since 51 is not a majority of the Louisiana House (that's 53). But the voting record NOW shows concurrence by 60 to 43.

This is rather disturbing. If Hodges says she voted for it, that's supported by the first (House Bill) vote. But was she one of the 9 Representatives who seem to have had their voting record changed since April 5 (concurrence, last touch by the House) ... or eleven reps for that matter: did she change from Yea to Nay with cover from 10 others?

If so, isn't it rather disturbing that the House can not-legally-pass a bill, then round up the numbers later?

Of course you may suspect that I just have the voting record wrong. I'm still only half-sure about this, so here are two sources for the voting record:

Votesmart March 22 2012 House bill HR976 62-43 Hodges Yea
http://votesmart.org/bill/votes/39076
Votesmart April 5 2012 Concurrence Vote 60-43 Hodges Nay
http://votesmart.org/bill/votes/39262

Legiscan March 22 2012 House bill HR 976 62-43 Hodges Yea
http://legiscan.com/gaits/rollcall/176739
Legiscan April 5 2012 Concur in Senate Amendments 60-43 Hodges Nay
http://legiscan.com/gaits/rollcall/182603

[Wikkiwallana]

Education should not be a for profit endeavor. It is far too important.

Fine but it should be paid through bonds.

Again, hell no.

[Wikkiwallana]

Order? Structure? Community? Cooperation? I fail to see the evil here.

All of those things are achieved by the individual, the state is an entity.

It is impossible for an individual to achieve community and co-operation, by definition.

[Wikkiwallana]

No. Force is not necessary to violate civil rights. No. Just. No.
LOL what are you reading that makes you think this is so?

Name an example violating rights without force?

Redlining.

[Wikkiwallana]

But they aren't. So it's a violation of people's civil rights.
Without force, I remind you.

They aren't, for a dumb reason.

here's an example.

Two diners open up, one is white's only, one is integrated.

Integrated and white's only fight over white consumer base, while integrated gets everyone who isn't white. The integrated one makes money, while the racist one loses it, and goes out of business.

History showed it tended to be the other way around, depending on where you where.

[Wikkiwallana]

Certainly, I've told told I'm quite a cunning linguist and a master debator, skills I find are valuable in any organisation. I can also work long hours for little pay.

LOL.
I'm actually a retired bartender, so ....

And I made up that other stuff up anyway.

So give him sex on the beach followed by a screaming orgasm, it's all he wanted in the first place.

[Farnhamia]

They aren't, for a dumb reason.

here's an example.

Two diners open up, one is white's only, one is integrated.

Integrated and white's only fight over white consumer base, while integrated gets everyone who isn't white. The integrated one makes money, while the racist one loses it, and goes out of business.

History showed it tended to be the other way around, depending on where you where.

Particularly since, depending on where you were, segregation was enforced by law.

[Ifreann]

Holding a woman against her free will and having a child? Today they call that a Traditional Family.

You lie.

I don't see what all this about slavery is. Many great men had slaves. Caesar, Alexander, Muhammad (Sallallaahu 'Alayhe wa Sallam). Immanuel Kant, Charles Darwin, and Karl Marx all saw different races as inferior. Up until recently, that was the correct knowledge.

You seem to have written "correct knowledge" where you meant "popular opinion".

[Xsyne]

Note the presence of the word "Christian". It's a goddamned quote.

What. Are. You Talking. About?

As a landowner he played a role in governing his local Episcopal Church; in terms of belief he was inclined toward Deism and the moral philosophy of Christianity.
In a private letter to Benjamin Rush, Jefferson refers to himself as "Christian" (1803): "To the corruptions of Christianity I am, indeed, opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence..."[197]

That was the part I was talking about. Not the actual part that was a part of the quote.

The reason that quotation marks are present around that use of "Christian" is because it is a direct quote from the text. This is basic English grammar.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Not enough of a demand to survive on more than a supremely local basis. In which case, oh well, just go drive another 2 miles.

You really, really, really never took any classes that covered the history of the African-American Civil Rights Movement in the United States, did you?

That only existed due to the GOVERNMENT helping.

I.E Jim Crow Laws, Ferguson vs Plessy, etc.

[Wamitoria]

You really, really, really never took any classes that covered the history of the African-American Civil Rights Movement in the United States, did you?

That only existed due to the GOVERNMENT helping.

I.E Jim Crow Laws, Ferguson vs Plessy, etc.

No. Many businesses in the north were segregated despite the absence of laws that forced them to do so.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

That only existed due to the GOVERNMENT helping.

I.E Jim Crow Laws, Ferguson vs Plessy, etc.

No. Many businesses in the north were segregated despite the absence of laws that forced them to do so.

I don't doubt its plausibility, but source?