US Politics: 2017 Edition

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**whembly**

Verviedi wrote:
whembly wrote:
WrentheFaceless wrote:
feeder wrote:
Breotan wrote:
So, according to USA Today, it's looking like Mark Zuckerberg is being groomed to run for President.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/is-mark-zuckerberg-considering-white-house-run/ar-BBxV38C?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=spartanntp

What do you guys think about this? Is Zuckerberg a contender? Or is this just wishful thinking on the part of his cult of personality?

I hope not. He appears to be one of those "my morals for everyone" guys. Fine for optional social media, not fine for government.

Um, isnt "My Morals for everyone" A cornerstone of the Republican Conservative Christian platform?

No.

I would have laughed if this weren't so sad.

Laugh away...

Opposition to marriage equality,

Dead issue. Interesting, this is an attempt to try to bring down the whole of the GOP party. Yet, nary a peep that clinton and obama once opposed it.

opposition to abortion,

Opposition to abortion can be based on non-religions principles.

opposition to proper, science-based education...

lolwut

**Magister**

Creationism being taught as a viable alternative to evolution?

**Vash108**

Magister wrote:
Creationism being taught as a viable alternative to evolution?

Pence is all about that. He even gave a speech in the house of reps about his beliefs on creationism vs evolution

**whembly**

Magister wrote:
Creationism being taught as a viable alternative to evolution?

While not a Catholic (or all that religious myself), I send both my boyz to Catholic school.

They teach both Creationism AND Darwinism.

So, no... it's not an "alternative" where the kids aren't exposed to Darwinism.

**Magister**

Vash108 wrote:
Magister wrote:
Creationism being taught as a viable alternative to evolution?

Pence is all about that. He even gave a speech in the house of reps about his beliefs on creationism vs evolution

The man is evidently delusional. Good thing he's not got any influence in national politics!

..oh wait.

Any wanna bet on these

guys making an appearance in America in the next 4 years?

**Frazzled**

d-usa wrote:
So Florida AG Bondi is getting a job in the Trump administration? After getting a political donation from the Trump Foundation and a fundraiser after declining to investigate him?

At least he's not Hillary I guess...

As a reminder, daily facepalm for me from here on in.

**Vash108**

Magister wrote:
Vash108 wrote:
Magister wrote:
Creationism being taught as a viable alternative to evolution?

Pence is all about that. He even gave a speech in the house of reps about his beliefs on creationism vs evolution

The man is evidently delusional. Good thing he's not got any influence in national politics!

..oh wait.

Any wanna bet on these guys making an appearance in America in the next 4 years?

I mean they did put forth some questions to departments asking for who had involvement into LBGT support.

**A Town Called Malus**

whembly wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
whembly wrote:
WrentheFaceless wrote:
feeder wrote:
Breotan wrote:
So, according to USA Today, it's looking like Mark Zuckerberg is being groomed to run for President.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/is-mark-zuckerberg-considering-white-house-run/ar-BBxV38C?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=spartanntp

What do you guys think about this? Is Zuckerberg a contender? Or is this just wishful thinking on the part of his cult of personality?

I hope not. He appears to be one of those "my morals for everyone" guys. Fine for optional social media, not fine for government.

Um, isnt "My Morals for everyone" A cornerstone of the Republican Conservative Christian platform?

No.

Really? Then why does it want to abolish federal funding of abortion, if not outright make abortion illegal?

If you want abortion, pay for it yourself.

Abolishing federal funding of abortion <> abolition of abortion.

'Tis okay... it's a common mistake.

If you want armed forces, pay for it yourself. If you want HIV medication, pay for it yourself. If you want hospitals, pay for them yourself. If you want painkillers to allow you to move after an injury, pay for them yourself. And so on. Why should pacifists be forced to pay taxes to support a military which goes against their own beliefs?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
Magister wrote:
Creationism being taught as a viable alternative to evolution?

While not a Catholic (or all that religious myself), I send both my boyz to Catholic school.

They teach both Creationism AND Darwinism.

So, no... it's not an "alternative" where the kids aren't exposed to Darwinism.

Creationism has no place in a science class other than an example of a previous belief which was overturned by discoveries brought about by the scientific method, like the concept of the Earth-centric solar system, the luminiferous aether or aristotlean physics.

**whembly**

A Town Called Malus wrote:
whembly wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
whembly wrote:
WrentheFaceless wrote:
feeder wrote:
Breotan wrote:
So, according to USA Today, it's looking like Mark Zuckerberg is being groomed to run for President.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/is-mark-zuckerberg-considering-white-house-run/ar-BBxV38C?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=spartanntp

What do you guys think about this? Is Zuckerberg a contender? Or is this just wishful thinking on the part of his cult of personality?

I hope not. He appears to be one of those "my morals for everyone" guys. Fine for optional social media, not fine for government.

Um, isnt "My Morals for everyone" A cornerstone of the Republican Conservative Christian platform?

No.

Really? Then why does it want to abolish federal funding of abortion, if not outright make abortion illegal?

If you want abortion, pay for it yourself.

Abolishing federal funding of abortion <> abolition of abortion.

'Tis okay... it's a common mistake.

If you want armed forces, pay for it yourself. If you want HIV medication, pay for it yourself. If you want hospitals, pay for them yourself. If you want painkillers to allow you to move after an injury, pay for them yourself. And so on.

Nice strawman you got there... here's some

:
It's not a stretch to believe abortion is murder of an innocent to some people... and that they don't want their tax dollars funding such programs. However, in the US... there's nothing stopping the likes of Planned Parenthood from operating without federal dollars. So, if you support them, I'm sure they'll support your donation.

**whembly**

A Town Called Malus wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
Magister wrote:
Creationism being taught as a viable alternative to evolution?

While not a Catholic (or all that religious myself), I send both my boyz to Catholic school.

They teach both Creationism AND Darwinism.

So, no... it's not an "alternative" where the kids aren't exposed to Darwinism.

Creationism has no place in a science class other than an example of a previous belief which was overturned by the scientific method.

That's a crock of gak.

Even Pope Francis Says Science and Faith Aren't at Odds:

Word that Pope Francis on Monday said that faith and creationism aren’t at odds with one another may have shocked many Americans, but the comments don’t actually reflect any deviation from long-standing church teaching.

“The Big-Bang, that is placed today at the origin of the world, does not contradict the divine intervention but exacts it,” Francis said, speaking at a ceremony in the Vatican Gardens inaugurating a bronze bust in honor of his successor, Pope Benedict XVI. “The evolution in nature is not opposed to the notion of Creation, because evolution presupposes the creation of beings that evolve.”

Catholics often “risk imagining that God was a magician, with such a magic wand as to be able to do everything” when they think of the creation story, Francis said.

“God is not a demiurge or a magician, but the Creator who gives being to all entities,” he said.

Catholics have long accepted that the creation story as written in the book of Genesis in the Bible can stand along the scientific theory of evolution and that the two are not mutually exclusive.

“It should be non-news but it’s new especially for American Catholics because in America the debate on faith and science and the question of evolution is still very much a part of our day-by-day intellectual menu,” says Massimo Faggioli, a theology professor at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota. “This statement will be met with almost total indifference in Europe while in America it’s a completely different story.”

[READ: Middle East Sees Religious, Ethnic Hatred as Greatest Global Threat]

Rev. Paul Sullins of the Catholic University of America says that the Big Bang Theory was embraced by Catholics and most Protestants when it was first explained.

“The scientific idea that everything began at a moment of time is very consistent with the idea that there’s a personal creator God who spake the world into existence in a moment of time,” Sullins says. “The mythopoeic account that we read in Genesis is very consistent with the scientific account of the Big Bang.”

Modern Catholic teaching on evolution stems from the papal encyclical Humani generis of Pope Pius XII in 1950, a letter on Catholic doctrine dictating that evolution and Catholic faith are not necessarily at odds.

“The teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter – for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God,” the document states.

Creationism and evolution have been considered incompatible in American society, one which reads and interprets the Bible very literally. But Faggioli says the U.S. has a “Biblical culture,” which lends itself to literal interpretations.

“Americans know the Bible much, much better than Europeans but at the same time there is still in some churches more than others is this tendency to read the Bible literally, that God created the universe in six days,” Faggioli says. “That is not part of European cultural landscape anymore. In America it’s still part of that because [of a] fundamentalist refrain that is very, very visible.”

[ALSO: Catholic Church Backs Off More Inclusive Posture Toward Gays]

The Supreme Court has banned the teaching of creationism in public schools and several states require students to “crucially analyze key aspects of evolutionary theory.” The ability to teach intelligent design theory in public schools was also struck down by the courts.

“American public schools are essentially Protestant in character so anyone who went to a public school is going to have some background of being taught in a science class that there was this conflict between creationism and evolution,” Sullins says.

Maureen Ferguson, a senior policy adviser at the Catholic Association, says Francis’ ability to speak in a way that gets people’s attention leads his comments to make the headlines.

“Pope Francis has a real knack for expression Catholic teaching in very plain language, in the vernacular, but in very ordinary language,” Ferguson says. “And sometimes people have only heard perhaps the sort of more complex more theological explanations for things and are surprised to learn what that teaching is.”

The Pope, who took office after the surprise resignation of Pope Benedict, has consistently made news during his year and a half tenure. His comments on economics and social issues like divorce and gays in the church have made him popular worldwide as public opinion on those topics shifts.

I'm sure Manchu can eloquently chime in, but more boyz are not harmed in this...

**sirlynchmob**

whembly wrote:

Opposition to marriage equality,

Dead issue. Interesting, this is an attempt to try to bring down the whole of the GOP party. Yet, nary a peep that clinton and obama once opposed it.

Obama never did anything to oppose marriage equality though, and I remember the outrage from the GOP when he said he would not defend the "defense of marriage act"

but it never ceases to amuse me that the right wingers will take a life long stance agreeing with something a democrat said or did once, years or decades ago.

**Magister**

It's not really a strawman is it though? It'd be perfectly agreeable for a large number of people to stop paying for a military (for instance).

After all, shooting or bombing people is a murder, right?

**A Town Called Malus**

Why should abortion be treated any differently to any other form of healthcare and denied government funding?

Rastafarians believe that organ donation is wrong due to their belief that the body should be whole. So should organ donation therefore be denied government funding?

**jreilly89**

Whether you believe it or not, creationism should only be taught in private schools that don't receive public funding. Creationism does not deserve a place in public education.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Magister wrote:
It's not really a strawman is it though? It'd be perfectly agreeable for a large number of people to stop paying for a military (for instance).

After all, shooting or bombing people is a murder, right?

Only if you're a fetus. Once you're born, you're on your own.

**Co'tor Shas**

I mean besides the fact that it is already illegal for federal money to support abortions, and the fact that abortions are a tiny part of Planned Parenthood's functions, and they provide contraception and education to those less fortunate. If they really want less abortions they would make a plan to provide free contraception to people, and practical health education in schools.

**Frazzled**

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why should abortion be treated any differently to any other form of healthcare and denied government funding?

Rastafarians believe that organ donation is wrong due to their belief that the body should be whole. So should organ donation therefore be denied government funding?

Fun fact, find the power that permits the US federal government the power to mandate or provide
healthcare...

**Vaktathi**

whembly wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
whembly wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
whembly wrote:
WrentheFaceless wrote:
feeder wrote:
Breotan wrote:
So, according to USA Today, it's looking like Mark Zuckerberg is being groomed to run for President.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/is-mark-zuckerberg-considering-white-house-run/ar-BBxV38C?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=spartanntp

What do you guys think about this? Is Zuckerberg a contender? Or is this just wishful thinking on the part of his cult of personality?

I hope not. He appears to be one of those "my morals for everyone" guys. Fine for optional social media, not fine for government.

Um, isnt "My Morals for everyone" A cornerstone of the Republican Conservative Christian platform?

No.

Really? Then why does it want to abolish federal funding of abortion, if not outright make abortion illegal?

If you want abortion, pay for it yourself.

Abolishing federal funding of abortion <> abolition of abortion.

'Tis okay... it's a common mistake.

If you want armed forces, pay for it yourself. If you want HIV medication, pay for it yourself. If you want hospitals, pay for them yourself. If you want painkillers to allow you to move after an injury, pay for them yourself. And so on.

Nice strawman you got there... here's some :
It's not a stretch to believe abortion is murder of an innocent to some people... and that they don't want their tax dollars funding such programs. However, in the US... there's nothing stopping the likes of Planned Parenthood from operating without federal dollars. So, if you support them, I'm sure they'll support your donation.

many people believe the same of the military (not that I agree). Many people think nuclear weapons are inherently an unsafe existential threat and want no part in supporting their existence. Many people believe police or DEA or other law enforcement are no more than uniformed thugs and dont want their tax dollars supporting them. Many people think the IRS exists solely to perpetrate theft from common citizens on behalf of the government. Many people think that if you chose to smoke in your earlier years, they shouldnt have to pay for your organ transplant. We could go through that reasoning all day with just about every possible issue.

**Spinner**

whembly wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
Magister wrote:
Creationism being taught as a viable alternative to evolution?

While not a Catholic (or all that religious myself), I send both my boyz to Catholic school.

They teach both Creationism AND Darwinism.

So, no... it's not an "alternative" where the kids aren't exposed to Darwinism.

Creationism has no place in a science class other than an example of a previous belief which was overturned by the scientific method.

That's a crock of gak.

Creationism is not scientifically testable. By definition, it relies on faith in something you cannot analyze via the scientific method.

Study it in a religious class, or a philosophy class, or whatever. That's totally fine. It does not belong in a biology class as an 'opposite', 'companion', or 'alternative' to evolutionary theory.

**A Town Called Malus**

whembly wrote:

That's a crock of gak.

So the Bible does not say that the Earth was made in seven days? Or that God created vegetation on Earth before stars in the sky (including stars whose light has taken more years to reach us than the Earth has even existed)? Or that sea creatures and birds came into being around the same time? Or that creatures of the earth (such as reptiles) came into being after birds?

**Vash108**

Sounds like we have no problems with religion pushing its way into our lives. Wonder why we have the FFRF?

Now why would I think Pence has his eyes on pushing his christianity as an agenda?

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/03/26/indiana-governor-signs-religious-freedom-bill-into-law/
http://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2016/dec/02/gavin-newsom/pences-support-conversion-therapy-not-settled-matt/
https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/mike-pence-in-2002-condoms-are-a-very-very-poor-protection-a?utm_term=.aqLJ0vPaL#.krDqO6XaV
https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2009/07/17/religious-right-promotes-falsehoods-last-ditch-attempt-stall-federal-hate-crimes-bill

**Magister**

Frazzled wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why should abortion be treated any differently to any other form of healthcare and denied government funding?

Rastafarians believe that organ donation is wrong due to their belief that the body should be whole. So should organ donation therefore be denied government funding?

Fun fact, find the power that permits the US federal government the power to mandate or provide
healthcare...

Find the power that explicitly forbids them from doing so?

**TheArmorOfContempt**

whembly wrote:

I'm sure Manchu can eloquently chime in, but more boyz are not harmed in this...

I don't think you really understand what Christian Evangelicals are trying to introduce to the education system, but the guy is right, Creationism literally has no place in a SCIENCE class room. It is anti-science by definition.

**whembly**

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why should abortion be treated any differently to any other form of healthcare and denied government funding?

Because abortions isn't "healthcare" in today's climate (outside of true cases where a pregnancy can kill you). It's mostly an elective procedure for unwanted pregnancies.

FWIW: I'd be happy if we were like much of the European countries with strict limit at 12 weeks with counseling & waiting periods.

But hey, we can't be like Europe for some reason.

**Vash108**

whembly wrote:
but more boyz are not harmed in this...

If you don't want more boyz harmed, keep them away from priests.

**CptJake**

Magister wrote:
It's not really a strawman is it though? It'd be perfectly agreeable for a large number of people to stop paying for a military (for instance).

After all, shooting or bombing people is a murder, right?

No. The Constitution makes it a responsibility of the to defend the nation and gives them the authority to raise armed forces to do so.

Nice try though.

**sirlynchmob**

whembly wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why should abortion be treated any differently to any other form of healthcare and denied government funding?

Because abortions isn't "healthcare" in today's climate (outside of true cases where a pregnancy can kill you). It's mostly an elective procedure for unwanted pregnancies.

FWIW: I'd be happy if we were like much of the European countries with strict limit at 12 weeks with counseling & waiting periods.

But hey, we can't be like Europe for some reason.

they're to progressive for the states, they all have government run health care.

and FYI, no federal money is used for abortions, it's been that way for decades, but for some reason that myth is still around and planned parenthood is still demonized for it.

**Vash108**

TheArmorOfContempt wrote:
whembly wrote:

I'm sure Manchu can eloquently chime in, but more boyz are not harmed in this...

I don't think you really understand what Christian Evangelicals are trying to introduce to the education system, but the guy is right, Creationism literally has no place in a SCIENCE class room. It is anti-science by definition.

I think this is the one time I want to say "Amen!"

**CptJake**

Magister wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why should abortion be treated any differently to any other form of healthcare and denied government funding?

Rastafarians believe that organ donation is wrong due to their belief that the body should be whole. So should organ donation therefore be denied government funding?

Fun fact, find the power that permits the US federal government the power to mandate or provide
healthcare...

Find the power that explicitly forbids them from doing so?

Not needed. The constitution grants the Fed Gov't specific powers. It also says powers NOT granted remain with the states. It is a restrictive document, not a permissive one.

**Vaktathi**

whembly wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why should abortion be treated any differently to any other form of healthcare and denied government funding?

Because abortions isn't "healthcare" in today's climate (outside of true cases where a pregnancy can kill you). It's mostly an elective procedure for unwanted pregnancies.

Since when is healthcare just about preventing immediate death? Lots of surgery is elective. Doesnt mean it isnt "healthcare".

FWIW: I'd be happy if we were like much of the European countries with strict limit at 12 weeks with counseling & waiting periods.

But hey, we can't be like Europe for some reason.

It's like I'm looking at California firearms laws...but with "Abortion" copypasta'd over "firearms". Mandatory waiting periods, pointless paperwork requirements intended just to make things onerous, I'm seeing double I tells ya!

**A Town Called Malus**

whembly wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why should abortion be treated any differently to any other form of healthcare and denied government funding?

Because abortions isn't "healthcare" in today's climate (outside of true cases where a pregnancy can kill you). It's mostly an elective procedure for unwanted pregnancies.

FWIW: I'd be happy if we were like much of the European countries with strict limit at 12 weeks with counseling & waiting periods.

But hey, we can't be like Europe for some reason.

Well, most (possibly all) of those countries have socialised healthcare and so those abortions are free at point of care as the health system is funded through taxation. So you want a system where the taxpayer funds abortion with limits on when the procedure can be carried out.