America - The Official Thread

[DK]

whoops, double post

 

[BobK]

What does everyone here think of the ruling allowing the "religious freedom" of Hobby Lobby's owners to supersede that of their employees? Somehow I think that if Hobby Lobby's owners wanted to impose Sharia on their employees while they're at work, the conservative wing of the SCOTUS wouldn't be so willing to capitulate.

Being forced to pay for something that goes against your religious principles and imposing your will on how others must run their lives are two entirely different things.

I'm not entirely comfortable with the ruling. Not that I don't think it was the correct decision, but I do see some businesses suddenly acquiring religion should it be financially favorable to do so.

 

[Danoff]

What does everyone here think of the ruling allowing the "religious freedom" of Hobby Lobby's owners to supersede that of their employees?

It doesn't, they aren't in conflict.

Hobby Lobby is free to not purchase things that violate their religious principles. Employees are free to purchase things that do not violate their religious principles. Done. Hobby lobby is not allowed to prevent their employees from using birth control.

 

[DK]

Hobby Lobby had no problem covering birth control before Obamacare. They seemed to have no trouble "violating" their religious principles then.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Hobby Lobby is just throwing a fit because a Democratic elect President is making them pay more for the insurance of their employees.

 

[Danoff]

Hobby Lobby had no problem covering birth control before Obamacare. They seemed to have no trouble "violating" their religious principles then.

Citation needed. Perhaps they felt that their employees were covering that cost through pre-tax paycheck deductions and that now the money is coming from them.

Also it's irrelevant, the government should not be compelling companies to cover contraception.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Citation needed. Perhaps they felt that their employees were covering that cost through pre-tax paycheck deductions and that now the money is coming from them.

Also it's irrelevant, the government should not be compelling companies to cover contraception.

True, but from a company's point of view it's probably cheaper to pay for contraception than visits to hospitals for duration of a pregnancy, stays at a hospital for delivery, any associated costs with treatment for mother and child, and then paid maternity leave.

However they would probably like it if they weren't forced to by Uncle Sam.

 

[Danoff]

True, but from a company's point of view it's probably cheaper to pay for contraception than visits to hospitals for duration of a pregnancy, stays at a hospital for delivery, any associated costs with treatment for mother and child, and then paid maternity leave.

However they would probably like it if they weren't forced to by Uncle Sam.

Hobby Lobby claims to not be motivated by cost.

 

[sumbrownkid]

Hobby Lobby claims to not be motivated by cost.

Yeah I know, but like DK said earlier, they had no problems covering it before Obama came along and now it is?

 

[terminator363]

Happy 4th of July or whatever in the states:

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Happy 4th of July or whatever in the states:

We middle Americans don't push back against this type of racist stereotype, but we probably should.

The crybaby libs push back against everything.

 

[FoolKiller]

What does everyone here think of the ruling allowing the "religious freedom" of Hobby Lobby's owners to supersede that of their employees? Somehow I think that if Hobby Lobby's owners wanted to impose Sharia on their employees while they're at work, the conservative wing of the SCOTUS wouldn't be so willing to capitulate.

It didn't overturn enough.

Everyone argues about this tiny thing.

Bigger picture: http://westmorelandtimes.com/news/1...forced-to-provide-any-health-coverage-at-all/

Free association for business owners is dead.

 

[Keef]

We middle Americans don't push back against this type of racist stereotype, but we probably should.

The crybaby libs push back against everything.

I think it's hilarious because I've actually seen it before, minus the flag.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

I think it's hilarious because I've actually seen it before, minus the flag.

Maybe you are right. I guess I shouldn't get my panties in a wad over such trivial matters.

Guess I'll have a snack...

And watch something on the NFL channel.

 

[Tesla]

True, but from a company's point of view it's probably cheaper to pay for contraception than visits to hospitals for duration of a pregnancy, stays at a hospital for delivery, any associated costs with treatment for mother and child, and then paid maternity leave.

However they would probably like it if they weren't forced to by Uncle Sam.

HL now do not have to provide 4 out of 20 contraceptives. They're still quite happy (possibly) to provide these, it's just that the 4 that are excluded they do not feel is in line for them religiously to provide. If the employee wants to go buy one of these 4, they are free to.

And FK is right; the bigger issue is that they have to provide this service by law.

 

[Danoff]

I'll just leave this here. This is a must-see:

 

[FoolKiller]

Dear America,

From what I can tell from most outspoken Australians, here and in public, this guy shouldn't have been electable. So, why is it that we can't get guys like this elected here? Or should the better question be; how is it people refuse to vote for guys like this because "they can't win" when it can happen in Australia?

I'll just leave this here. This is a must-see:

But the woman never answered the question. How do you fight a war against an ideology with weapons? The panelist was ready to point out that the number of radicals were even with the entire US population. You can't kill that many people in one generation, and even then you will have following generations that believe the same because of our actions. You would effectively have to kill off three generations, each equal to the US population, to achieve your goals in this way.

The panelist has a point, but it did not fit in response to the question asked. In fact, the answer to the actual question might likely point to the issue that created Benghazi.

 

[Omnis]

Dear America,

From what I can tell from most outspoken Australians, here and in public, this guy shouldn't have been electable. So, why is it that we can't get guys like this elected here? Or should the better question be; how is it people refuse to vote for guys like this because "they can't win" when it can happen in Australia?







But the woman never answered the question. How do you fight a war against an ideology with weapons? The panelist was ready to point out that the number of radicals were even with the entire US population. You can't kill that many people in one generation, and even then you will have following generations that believe the same because of our actions. You would effectively have to kill off three generations, each equal to the US population, to achieve your goals in this way.

The panelist has a point, but it did not fit in response to the question asked. In fact, the answer to the actual question might likely point to the issue that created Benghazi.

I'm acquainted with a pretty impressive student of strategic policy. His research on the situation in Sri Lanka has been published, and his conclusion was that pretty much the only thing that was effective in stopping the tamil tigers was bombing the everloving crap out of them.

I'm not sure that you can blow up 300 million people though.

 

[sammy neuman]

I'm acquainted with a pretty impressive student of strategic policy. His research on the situation in Sri Lanka has been published, and his conclusion was that pretty much the only thing that was effective in stopping the tamil tigers was bombing the everloving crap out of them.

I'm not sure that you can blow up 300 million people though.

We (the USA) probably can blow up 300 million people, but it would be difficult to get only the correct 300 million, and others would object, for several reasons.

 

[Omnis]

That's the entire population of the USA. When I say I'm not sure, I mean that from a practical, logistical perspective. I just don't think it would be possible, regardless of how anyone feels about it. You'd have to out-do all of the genocide and mass murder (nazis, communists, terrorists, etc.) of the last two centuries combined. And then you'd have to do it again, and perhaps a third time for good measure.

 

[FoolKiller]

That's the entire population of the USA. When I say I'm not sure, I mean that from a practical, logistical perspective. I just don't think it would be possible, regardless of how anyone feels about it. You'd have to out-do all of the genocide and mass murder (nazis, communists, terrorists, etc.) of the last two centuries combined. And then you'd have to do it again, and perhaps a third time for good measure.

I think it can be done with minimal collateral damage using enough "precision" drone strikes. Those never go wrong.

/sarcasm

 

[sammy neuman]

I think it can be done with minimal collateral damage using enough "precision" drone strikes. Those never go wrong.

/sarcasm

Insanely enough, I got to thinking about how I could kill 300 million people, given the entire known US nuclear arsenal. And believe me, I was planning to use maximum collateral damage, and selectivity was not a factor. But I stopped. Too much research and planning involved, I was concerned about the destabilizing effect of depleting the available stockpile, and my heart wasn't really into it.

Seriously, @Omnis has an excellent point. What do you do when you can't just shoot all of them? WWII demonstrated that you can (at least for a while) shoot enough of them (Nazis, Imperialists, Fascists...), but only by making an effort equivalent to WWII. An effort equivalent to Iraq and Afghanistan was not enough, and the outcome in Iraq may have created something worse.

 

[Keef]

Plan to Breakup California Into Six States Gets Enough Signatures to be Put to Ballot http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/15/us-usa-california-breakup-idUSKBN0FK03P20140715

 

[Omnis]

What else is keeping people out of California besides the state government and its taxes?

 

[Danoff]

What else is keeping people out of California besides the state government and its taxes?

Earthquakes, real estate prices, over crowding, traffic, forest fires, mudslides, and intense heat (for most of the state)

 

[sammy neuman]

Earthquakes, real estate prices, over crowding, traffic, forest fires, mudslides, and intense heat (for most of the state)

The golden hills of California are actually dry grass. Looks real good and it burns real good and if you like it down there then that's real good and you can keep it.

Lyrics from a song I wrote many years ago.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I think it can be done with minimal collateral damage using enough "precision" drone strikes. Those never go wrong.

Three or four of those could easily kill the required 300 million, no problemo

 

[FoolKiller]

Three or four of those could easily kill the required 300 million, no problemo

They'll definitely take out the next generation in the process.

 

[LeMansAid]

Dear America,

From what I can tell from most outspoken Australians, here and in public, this guy shouldn't have been electable. So, why is it that we can't get guys like this elected here? Or should the better question be; how is it people refuse to vote for guys like this because "they can't win" when it can happen in Australia?

I'd vote for him in a heartbeat. Mr. X, sitting behind is an absolute gun as well.

I think we're gravitating towards those with backbone and genuine will, while setting aside some topics that we may be at odds on. In the here and now, it's a good trade off.

We don't have the same religious influence that constricts the far right in the US, and we've had a spectacular failure on the far left with The Greens party showing us how not to do social responsibility. There was a surge for The Greens a few years ago with votes in big numbers, but they proved themselves to be horrendously limp, not even understanding how to properly help the environment. The core behind their making.

Sadly, even if you had lefties waking up, the religious will be tough nuts to crack.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Dear America,

From what I can tell from most outspoken Australians, here and in public, this guy shouldn't have been electable. So, why is it that we can't get guys like this elected here? Or should the better question be; how is it people refuse to vote for guys like this because "they can't win" when it can happen in Australia?

[Media]

We did elect a few... Their names are Mike Lee and Ted Cruz. Soon we can add Dave Brat to the list, I hope.

EDIT: Forgot to add Rand Paul to the list.