<p>
[quote]
1. For example, with Creationism, it shouldn't be taught in schools, especially not in a science class. Why? Because there is no science involved. If someone wants to believe in it and practice at home they should go do that, but that's where it should start and end. Every religion has different interoperations on how the world was created and let them have it. But again. Theres no science involved.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Some would disagree with you, and perhaps with good reason.</p>
<p>There is a growing battle within the scientific community concerning "Creation Science". It has nothing to do with the sciences being debated, but rather if they SHOULD be debated.</p>
<p>You see, a lot of people have invested a LOT of time, money, and FAME into evolution, and anything that might challenge that is, by definition, a threat. So if tomorrow some scientist out there actually came up with PROOF of A God, how inclined would they really be to listen? Not much.</p>
<p>Sadly, however, too many Creationists have either done poor science or just made stuff up, which hurts the credibility of the movement. Equally, the evolutionists don't want anything upsetting their little applecart. Either way, the TRUTH suffers.</p>
<p>I, for one, am perfectly content believing that God created the universe, and that evolution is simply the way we humans describe HOW He did it. </p>
<p>Regardless, I find it laughable that simply saying, </p>
<p>"Today we are going to begin studying Evolution. This is a scientific theory that has a great deal of evidence to support it, but also a good number of questions. Some believe that the universe was created as-is by a supreme being, while others believe that everything evolved from nothing. In this class, we are simply going to examine what science has told us based upon what we see in the world around us. As to how it got started, well, that's another class altogether. Turn to page 24, please."</p>
<p>Will land you in a courtroom these days, because the God-haters out there (who are more zealous than any Christian you can name) simply REFUSE to allow even the MENTION of God in any school, despite the fact His name is spoken all over our public buildings, in our founding documents, and throughout our history.</p>
<p>
[quote]
2. Gay marriage. WHO CARES. What happened to live and let live. If its all about freedom and they don't try to make you become gay, let it be.</p>
<p>Even if you don't agree, don't you think that the government should pay more attention on issues of national security, and the economy, etc? So basically, new amendment, Creationism can't be taught in school. Marriage is defined as a union between two people, regardless of gender.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Interesting. You begin by asking, "Who cares?". Well, if that's true, then why does the left insist of redefining something that has had one and only one definition for thousands of years? I mean, who cares, right? If t's not important, why bring it up? Just call it a civil union and be done with it.</p>
<p>But NOOOOOOOOO. They know damned well that what they are doing ISN'T legitimate, so instead of just living the lifestyle (their choice, I'll agree), no, they have to go and REDEFINE everyone ELSE'S life.</p>
<p>BTW, your definition for marriage would be rejected, too. Some idiot in England recently married (yep, that's the word they used) a PORPOISE.</p>
<p>So, marriage would need to be defined as a union between two things. Wonderful. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
5. Religious institutions all lose their immunity from taxes. Make it a simple flat rate. The Catholic Church owns more of this country than Microsoft. Its time they pay like everyone else. Why? Because, in law, we are told that if religious institutions get involved in politics they lose their tax-exemptions. Every rabbi, cleric, priest, reverend is going to talk about politics and they should be allowed to. But they have to pay too. No double standards.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No double standards, eh?</p>
<p>You mean like when Jesse Jackson and the rest of that bunch pass the plate and then give the funds to the democrats, but NOTHING happens to their tax-exempt status?</p>
<p>Get rid of the double-standard FOR REAL, and then maybe I'll buy it. As for all of them losing tax-exempt status, I couldn't care less.</p>
<p>
[quote]
6. The media needs to be more independent. Spare me the liberal media accusation. Has anyone seen Fox News? I am saying its not independent, regardless of political leaning. Most media networks are connected to large conglomerates which are involved in politics, and that can effect the news reporting. The media should be forced to be an independent entity with no ties to any political groups or government contracts. I think this is slightly fixed with my proposal about election funding.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wow. Fox News. That's all you can name?</p>
<p>Okay. Let me list the LIBERAL media:</p>
<p>ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, Atlanta Journal Constitution, Miami Herald, Time, Newsweek. I just rattled those off the top of my head.</p>
<p>The media is independent, the problem is it's insincere. When you listen to Rush Limbaugh, you KNOW he is a Conservative, and you KNOW you're going to get the news and comentary from that angle. Don't like it? Al Franken (assuming Air Amerika is still on the air) is right down the dial.</p>
<p>However, the rest of the media LOVES to wax eloquent on how independent and non-partisan and impartial they are, but there are entire BOOKS written by FORMER MEDIA people DOCUMENTING their liberal bias. Dan Rather doctors up a story about documents that turn out to be forgeries. New York Times screws up twice in one week when it publishes stories that later turn out not to be true. An ABC executive sends out an e-mail saying how much he hates the guy. Notice nothing ever PRO-Bush or PRO-war, or PRO-Conservative seems to come out of these "oops". Nope, it's always a mistake that made someone on the right look bad, then they bury the correction in the Fighter pages (F-14, P-38, F-18, F-22).</p>
<p>What needs to happen is that the media should be held to a standard that clearly separates NEWS from OPINION. They have every right in the world to skewer Bush or anyone else, ON THE EDITORIAL PAGE, but when they start inventing polls or slanting the NEWS to support their agenda, then they need to be held accountable.</p>
<p>You guys really need to get a grip on this media thing. Fox News is the most popular news channel because it at least TRIES to be fair and balanced. You see liberals AND Conservatives battling it out on that channel. On CNN, you're lucky if you get one Conservative on there in a week. </p>
<p>
[quote]
7.Even thouh I don't think this is too important, but since I am a high school senior and it is on my mind. No more legacy points in college admissions. Just because someone is born in a certain family they shouldn't have these large advantages in the admissions game. There should be more federal and state aid for colleges because it is getting far too costly and is limiting people from lower socio-economic backgrounds.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Legacy points or any other standard a private university uses to accept applicants is its own business and none of yours. If they don't want you, tough toenails. Deal with it. I anted to go to nuke school and didn't get in. If I were a liberal I would have sued for discrimination against Hispanics or something, but the fact remains that they had their standards and I didn't meet them. Doom on me. I learned from it, though!</p>
<p>As for government aid to schools: WHY? Show me where in the United States Constitution it authorizes the federal government to do ANYTHING involving education. I can show you where it specifically says it CAN'T be involved, for no other reason that it wasn't specifically granted the authority.</p>
<p>As for this "lower class" BS, I'm not buying it. I have a bachelor's degree and two masters. You know how much I paid to get them? ZERO. USNA was free (and I got 5 years work experience afterwards), and my EMPLOYER (yes, one of those greedy, evil, Fortune 500 corporations) paid a full ride for BOTH of my masters, and not just for me, but for 5 co-workers, too, as well as dozens of others who got degrees gratis.</p>
<p>What needs to happen is that people need to stop waiting for the government to show up and pull their tails out of the mire instead of doing it themselves. Too many people have decided to use our safety net as a hammock.</p>
<p>The Department of Education should be abolished completely. a) It's unconstitutional, as nowhere is the Federal Government authorized by the Constitution to be involved in education. b) The DOE doesn't educate anyone. It's nothing but a bunch of bureucrats and union thugs throwing their weight around and wasting our money. You want public education? Go talk to your state governments. </p>
<p>You claimed you were in favor of vouchers. If we're going to insist on this fraud of publicly-funded education, then I say we do it with vouchers and let the parents decide where their kids go. But NOOOOOOO!!! We can't do that because (horror of horrors) the parents may send their kids to a RELIGIOUS SCHOOL! (Insert Comfy Chair sound here). The NEA fraks out every time the topic is brought up because they know their gravy train will derail if vouchers go through. Don't you love liberals? Pro-choice, but only when a child DIES. Otherwise, they're so anti-choice it's pathetic.</p>