TRUMP: Yes, He Even Branded A MAGAthread

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/exxons-rex-tillerson-is-top-candidate-for-secretary-of-state-1481318464
I shouldn't be this surprised but yet....

Building a bridge across the Beringer Strait.

Step 1: Flood with oil
Step 2: Build road across oil
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit

[Uiiop]

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-th ... raq-2015-3
The CIA didn't agree with the WMD theories back then so using that to discredit their apparent current claims isn't going to stick to facts.

[Greed and Death]

I do not know. Yes Christianity requires you help the poor I do not think it necessarily requires the govnerment be the tool for helping the poor. In their mind they feel where the govnerment fails individual effort may prevail.

And I am an atheist I can see their view. Buying contraception is a sin, and buying insurance that provides contraception for others is a sin. When you make a law requiring employers buy that for their employees do not be surprised when they fight you tooth and nail.

It's part of a compensation package. It's no different than when you pay them in cash and they go spend most of it on hookers and blow, and waste the rest.

Well they disagree. The supreme court disagreed, and given who won the election the supreme court will continue to disagree.

Setting all that aside if you want to go debate their religion with them be my guest, I am not religious I am not wasting my time. They made an accommodation request the question should be whether we can find a reasonable accommodation. Since Churches were already granted exemptions to buying contraception coverage for employees I see no issues granting a similar accommodation to Religious non profits (little sisters of the poor) or for religiously ran for profits.

[Greed and Death]

That's your opinion on what is sin, which differs from what evangelicals think.

That's not what I meant. I thought the evangelicals believed that just using it was sinful...I'm all for contraceptives.

I am an atheist I am not wasting my time telling them what their religion is.

[MERIZoC]

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-full-version-of-the-cias-2002-intelligence-assessment-on-wmd-in-iraq-2015-3
The CIA didn't agree with the WMD theories back then so using that to discredit their apparent current claims isn't going to stick to facts.

Still doesn't mean their claims hold any weight.

[Galloism]

It's part of a compensation package. It's no different than when you pay them in cash and they go spend most of it on hookers and blow, and waste the rest.

Well they disagree. The supreme court disagreed, and given who won the election the supreme court will continue to disagree.

Setting all that aside if you want to go debate their religion with them be my guest, I am not religious I am not wasting my time. They made an accommodation request the question should be whether we can find a reasonable accommodation. Since Churches were already granted exemptions to buying contraception coverage for employees I see no issues granting a similar accommodation to Religious non profits (little sisters of the poor) or for religiously ran for profits.

Well, I'd be ok with it, provided they were required to increase the cash compensation package to compensate for the lack of coverage required under law, then whether that person spends it on contraception or not is up to them.

Seems to dodge the ethical issue of "should I be able to control my employees lives" handily enough, and provided you made a slight tweak to the tax code on the subject, would work handily.

[Uiiop]

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-full-version-of-the-cias-2002-intelligence-assessment-on-wmd-in-iraq-2015-3
The CIA didn't agree with the WMD theories back then so using that to discredit their apparent current claims isn't going to stick to facts.

Still doesn't mean their claims hold any weight.

Well the way things work a lot of people use the "Credibility" of whoever says shit than what they got as evidence. Trump and his campaign having almost no idea what they're doing even when they're right on some level chose to attack the former badly.

Personally i'll wait and see if they offically go public with the same conclusions rather than listen to anonymous sources.

That really should apply to Trump pick for the record even when i linked stuff that's sourced from anons without criticism.

[Greed and Death]

Well they disagree. The supreme court disagreed, and given who won the election the supreme court will continue to disagree.

Setting all that aside if you want to go debate their religion with them be my guest, I am not religious I am not wasting my time. They made an accommodation request the question should be whether we can find a reasonable accommodation. Since Churches were already granted exemptions to buying contraception coverage for employees I see no issues granting a similar accommodation to Religious non profits (little sisters of the poor) or for religiously ran for profits.

Well, I'd be ok with it, provided they were required to increase the cash compensation package to compensate for the lack of coverage required under law, then whether that person spends it on contraception or not is up to them.

Seems to dodge the ethical issue of "should I be able to control my employees lives" handily enough, and provided you made a slight tweak to the tax code on the subject, would work handily.

I am sure the market will take care of that as a great many female employees opt to work at Walmart or some other retail job.

The Ethical issues were caused by the govnerment mandating employers provide insurance coverage, the solutions to those ethical issues should be at the cost of the govnerment. I mean come on of course in a pluralistic society such as ours of course mandates were going to create issues such as these, Individual or employer. You brushed off that ethics issue when the law was passed and continued to brush it off when it was challenged.

Now that you lost an issue and the election Trump has made that lose fixed in place for the foreseeable future you want to discuss the ethics issue. How about this for ethics, do not mandate people buy insurance, and do not mandate employers buy insurance for their employees. That way when you put a regulation in about contraception coverage being required in insurance, the accommodation then can be that you do not buy insurance.

[Geilinor]

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-full-version-of-the-cias-2002-intelligence-assessment-on-wmd-in-iraq-2015-3
The CIA didn't agree with the WMD theories back then so using that to discredit their apparent current claims isn't going to stick to facts.

Still doesn't mean their claims hold any weight.

So who do you think was behind the hacks? The hackers didn't even try to hide that they were operating from a complex owned by Russian intelligence.

[Ashmoria]

yeah

not that it was trump but it was a masterful feat to convince people that not liking to do yucky things like bake cakes for gay weddings interferes with their religious freedom.

too bad liberal don't have that kind of power.

I suppose that's the attitude that cost you the election.

no I believe it was the vagaries of the electoral college

there is nothing religious about cake baking.

[Galloism]

Well, I'd be ok with it, provided they were required to increase the cash compensation package to compensate for the lack of coverage required under law, then whether that person spends it on contraception or not is up to them.

Seems to dodge the ethical issue of "should I be able to control my employees lives" handily enough, and provided you made a slight tweak to the tax code on the subject, would work handily.

I am sure the market will take care of that as a great many female employees opt to work at Walmart or some other retail job.

Unfortunately, the market doesn't take care of that.

I recently looked to see what it cost to get a month's supply of the patch for a private individual. $139. For one month. That's the generic. Name brand would be over $200 per month (if for some reason you had a medical condition that didn't allow you to use the generic). Statement of benefits is a hell of a tool. (Of course, our insurance company doesn't pay near that much)

For a person working 40 hours per week at wal-mart making 8 bucks an hour, that's almost half a week's work. It's more than most people pay for electricity. Or gas. Or water and trash combined.

Pills are about $100 per month last I checked.

Yeah, this is an area where the market fails to correct.

My notion is, if your insurance doesn't cover contraception, you should be required to pay your employees an additional $100 per month as a result over and above their contracted salary/wage, and it's their choice on whether they get contraception or not. This way, your conscience is being protected, and they are not being stiffed out of the compensation they are owed under law.

[Gauthier]

I came across an interesting Article.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/vol ... 8d280e3522

It deals with how the evangelicals can vote for Trump.
The basic premise was that when you treat the accommodation in Hobby Lobby like it was the worst supreme court decision of our time, try to force the little sisters of the poor to provide contraception, and run someone off from their job for donating to a political cause tied to his religion you may find the evangelicals and the religious are against you.
And will hold their nose and vote for whoever is running to beat you.

They can also vote for him because they're the hypocrites we always knew they were.

Or they believe Trump is the Anti-Christ and making him President is Step One towards turning on Bat Signal For Jesus.

[Gauthier]

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-the-full-version-of-the-cias-2002-intelligence-assessment-on-wmd-in-iraq-2015-3
The CIA didn't agree with the WMD theories back then so using that to discredit their apparent current claims isn't going to stick to facts.

Another Trumpshit claim. Utter shocker.

[MERIZoC]

Still doesn't mean their claims hold any weight.

So who do you think was behind the hacks? The hackers didn't even try to hide that they were operating from a complex owned by Russian intelligence.

Russians hacked documents is a claim I'm perfectly fine with. Russians rigged the election is not, which is what most people are trying to imply by this. What Russia did is no different from regular activity, in which leaders of countries support one candidate or the other in a foreign election.

e: should be noted that there still isn't evidence for the first claim, even if it might be a legitimate one

[Aelex]

no I believe it was the vagaries of the electoral college

there is nothing religious about cake baking.

There is if you consider said wedding to be sinful if not downright blasphemous.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

(Image)

More Predicting:

"On that land shall darkness prevail and light expire, the future is already been written."

Xehanort knew what was going to happen here in the real world.

[Galloism]

So who do you think was behind the hacks? The hackers didn't even try to hide that they were operating from a complex owned by Russian intelligence.

Russians hacked documents is a claim I'm perfectly fine with. Russians rigged the election is not, which is what most people are trying to imply by this. What Russia did is no different from regular activity, in which leaders of countries support one candidate or the other in a foreign election.

To be fair, I oppose that even when WE do it.

And we do.

[Geilinor]

So who do you think was behind the hacks? The hackers didn't even try to hide that they were operating from a complex owned by Russian intelligence.

Russians hacked documents is a claim I'm perfectly fine with. Russians rigged the election is not, which is what most people are trying to imply by this. What Russia did is no different from regular activity, in which leaders of countries support one candidate or the other in a foreign election.

Most countries don't hack private campaign documents and release them to the public.

[Gauthier]

So who do you think was behind the hacks? The hackers didn't even try to hide that they were operating from a complex owned by Russian intelligence.

Russians hacked documents is a claim I'm perfectly fine with. Russians rigged the election is not, which is what most people are trying to imply by this. What Russia did is no different from regular activity, in which leaders of countries support one candidate or the other in a foreign election.

They hacked both parties but only leaked Democratic documents. Looking rather partisan.

[Greed and Death]

I suppose that's the attitude that cost you the election.

no I believe it was the vagaries of the electoral college

there is nothing religious about cake baking.

Those ones used in weddings are pieces of art. I think artist should have a bit of leeway about what they craft art for.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

no I believe it was the vagaries of the electoral college

there is nothing religious about cake baking.

There is if you consider said wedding to be sinful if not downright blasphemous.

Baking a cake is not the same as participating in gay weddings.

I mean, one could say that me being part of a red team on Trump Tower to test the network security at the site is the same as participating in Trump's sleazy tactics, but only if one chooses to deny any and all semblance of reality.

This is the same thing I see at people who refuse to bake cakes for a gay wedding. They've foregone their sense of reality entirely.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

no I believe it was the vagaries of the electoral college

there is nothing religious about cake baking.

Those ones used in weddings are pieces of art. I think artist should have a bit of leeway about what they craft art for.

It's still a job you were willing to take.

The fact that it is an artist doing the frosting is completely irrelevant to the point that it is a job.

[Ashmoria]

no I believe it was the vagaries of the electoral college

there is nothing religious about cake baking.

There is if you consider said wedding to be sinful if not downright blasphemous.

which is why it is a masterful bit of opinionizing that anyone would think that cake baking is religious.

[Ifreann]

So who do you think was behind the hacks? The hackers didn't even try to hide that they were operating from a complex owned by Russian intelligence.

Russians hacked documents is a claim I'm perfectly fine with. Russians rigged the election is not, which is what most people are trying to imply by this. What Russia did is no different from regular activity, in which leaders of countries support one candidate or the other in a foreign election.

The point is that Russia hacked the DNC and leaked what they found with the intention of helping Trump get elected. And Trump was elected. And hacked the RNC and didn't leak anything. And that's kind of concerning to people who like democracy and legitimate elections and heads of government not owing their position to enemy spies.

[MERIZoC]

Russians hacked documents is a claim I'm perfectly fine with. Russians rigged the election is not, which is what most people are trying to imply by this. What Russia did is no different from regular activity, in which leaders of countries support one candidate or the other in a foreign election.

Most countries don't hack private campaign documents and release them to the public.

Even if they did do that, it's not as if the election was undermined by it. Shady? Yes. Completely revolutionary and important? Nah.