Page 2 of 2

Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 8:14 pm
by Bet51987
Zuruck wrote:Fair enough Cuda...but when you talk of teaching religion in schools you're speaking of one certain teaching, Christianity. Do you want them to teach Islam in schools? No. When you say they should teach, you mean the same one you follow, which then establishes one religion in the public domain, where it doesn't belong. We all been over this before.

Might I ask, why such a big deal to have religion in schools? You are free to instruct your kids at all times, take them to church, whatever, why school as well?
TIGERassault wrote:Hmm... interesting...
Bee, I presume you mean forcing religion on children should be banned from schools, and not just teaching religion to those who are willing to listen, yes?

Myself, I think it should be up to the parents to decide if their child should have to participate in religious traditions.
...Which is what I've always seen in any school I've seen.
My objection is that religion in church is true religion which has deep meanings but religion in school does not because it wears a mask.

Under that mask is a virus called Intellegent Design whose sole purpose is to refute the theory of evolution.

Bettina

Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:01 am
by Jeff250
I think if it's done like a \"World Religions\" college course, it'll be OK. Unfortunately, considering I doubt the competence of high school teachers as a whole, it'll be particularly difficult to keep such a class nonbiased, and, in some parts of the country, I could imagine it devolving into a \"Why Christianity is Better Than All Other Religions\" course.

Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 7:33 am
by TIGERassault
Bet51987 wrote:Under that mask is a virus called Intellegent Design whose sole purpose is to refute the theory of evolution.
Don't worry Bettina, then men in white coats will be here soon.

Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:43 am
by Duper
Oh for Pete's sake Bettina. Any real microbiologist that's worth their salt knows that evolution is bad science. Modern science is punching holes in that theory left, right and indifferent. It's a theory, not gospel.

Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:02 am
by Lothar
I find it interesting that a topic on Bettina's voting habits would turn so quickly into a topic on evolution. There's 5 other topics she brought up, people!

Duper, modern science is NOT punching holes in evolution, despite what some people will tell you. And Intelligent Design is not developed enough to be taught in schools, despite what its proponents claim. On the other hand, Bettina, if you're looking for someone to make it ILLEGAL to EVER teach ID in schools, you're making a pretty big mistake. There's no point in singling out ID as requiring special attention; if it meets the standards of everything else taught in school, teach it, and if it doesn't, don't.

As for the other stuff: first off, Bettina, read the \"voters pamphlet\" you should've gotten in the mail (if you don't have one, try Google.)

Gay rights (allowed \"a union\"): in a lot of areas, both political parties will give you this. Your local Republican candidate might not, or your local Democrat candidate might decide \"a union\" isn't acceptable, they want \"marriage\" and won't accept anything else.

Stem cell research: Democrats are more likely to support federal funding for this than Republicans, but there's some support in both parties; see this article, which gives some specific house and senate bills at the end. (FYI: before Bush, there was NO federal funding at all. Bush allowed federal funding for existing stem cell lines, and somehow that got spun into \"Bush opposes stem cell research\".) Personally I oppose the idea, not because I have anything against stem cells, but because I have a lot against the government spending money.

Minimum wage raising: again, Democrats will generally support this. It's economically a bad idea, but it makes you feel like you're helping the poor, doesn't it?

Religion out of classroom: I don't know what area you're in, but in my area, religion wasn't allowed in the classroom. Don't know of any candidates who are currently making this part of their platform.

Internet not taxable: Republicans are far more likely to oppose taxes than Democrats.

Aside from the minimum wage increase, you may find the Libertarian party to your liking.

Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:35 pm
by Zuruck
Someone is going to have to explain to me why raising the minimum wage is bad economically. What is it...5.75 an hour? That is absolutely disgusting...I do not have a wife, I do not have any kids, and I make plenty more than that but sometimes things are tight. How in the world could you raise a family on that kind of money? Where would you live...what kind of schools will you be forced to send your kids to? When was the last time Congress didn't pass one of their increases??

As for voting Bee, vote your heart. I say that with a grain of salt because you're going to meet a lot of people that don't do that, they merely vote for the little letter after the name. Want my advice for this election? I would love to tell you to go third party but if you do that you're helping the GOP. Vote straight ticket Democrat...help get the evangelical lunatics out of office. Dems may not be the best answer in the world...but they will be far better than the current situation in this police state we live in now.

Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:58 pm
by Bet51987
I VOTED! :)

Not to say I wasn't nervous but I had thoughts of the curtain not opening where I would have to crawl out the bottom, or I made some mistake that would cause the gymnasium alarm to go off making me a spectacle... or even staying in there too long causing suspicion. :D

I can't wait to vote again. :)

Bee

Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:26 pm
by Aggressor Prime
I'm voting pro-life, republican, conservative, experienced, and Catholic (issues, not candidate's religion).

The biggest issue is affirmative action which the Vatican is against (I checked an article about it and they basically said it is wrong for positive discrimination to give different rights for different groups; going to school or getting hired for a job based on intelligence is a right), so I'm against it to naturally (along with the rest of the Republican party).

Too bad the congregation of U.S. bishops can't get their act together and follow papal authority. They are for affirmative action for some odd reason.

Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:25 pm
by dissent
Bet51987 wrote:I VOTED! :) ...

I can't wait to vote again. :)

Bee
Not a problem for those of us up here in the Chicago area....
heck, it's a tradition! :lol: