<p>Figgy, marriage isn't a federal issue. I don't see why gays who obviously lead lives that contradict one of the most prevalent tenets in the Bible would want to marry anyway.</p>
<p>Because not everyone believes that it is a sin. I for one don't believe that we should segregate people because the bible says so. In that case why don't you mess with people who have committed the billion other sins listed in the Bible. Why don't you hold slaves? ect...</p>
<p>And it is a federal issue for two reasons. One: Law makers can vote whether to allow it or ban it. Two: Married couples get certain rights denied to couples in a civil union.</p>
<p>"Obama is inexperienced as far as D.C politics is concerned. State senate and U.S Senate are definitely different things.</p>
<p>Compare his experience to the tons of others running, and you will see why we call him inexperienced.</p>
<p>He exploits the fact that he hasn't had to take a stand on many issues because he frankly has not been there. While he claims he would have voted against the Iraq resolution, if he had actually been there, it might have been a different story. At the time of that vote, it was thought to be political suicide to oppose the war. I doubt he would have taken a stand had his career really been on the line. As his senate career goes on, we will see more and more of what he really stands for, and his attractiveness as a candidate will go down."</p>
<p>As I have said many times, including in this thread. Many of our greatest leaders were not experienced. Leadership is not something you get the longer you sit in the Senate collecting dust. </p>
<p>The only candidate that truly has experience in being the president is Hilary(who I dislike). She has lived in the White House for 8 years, therefore she is the most experienced?. Correct?</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is, experience=***** </p>
<p>You can be in the Senate for 40 years, that does not mean you are going to be a good leader and a good president.</p>
<p>^agreed.</p>
<p>i like what someone said earlier: the longer politicians are in the game, the more corrupt and apathetic they are likely to become.</p>
<p>true dat..</p>
<p>Ya he's a fresh face with people's hopes and aspirations leaning on him. He would surely go in with a bang. He probably hasn't become as skeptical and cynical of the system as many oldies. I'd say he's a viable candidate.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't see why gays who obviously lead lives that contradict one of the most prevalent tenets in the Bible would want to marry anyway.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why do the billions of people out there who aren't Christian and could care less about the bible marry then?</p>
<p>Regarding mj93's three points</p>
<ol>
<li>I don't know what Mr. Prager said on air. I believe that immigrants should make a conscious effort to speak English when dealing with their fellow Americans. I do not believe we should accommodate native Spanish-speaking immigrants by having a "Spanish option" available (e.g. in the post office.)</li>
</ol>
<p>I do not believe that we should force immigrants to abandon their culture, which is not the business of the United States Government. I am not sure if that is what Mr. Prager suggested.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>If elected, Senator Obama would be older than President Clinton was when the 42nd President took office. That's just bad journalism from the "fair and balanced" network.</p></li>
<li><p>In this time and age, I do not believe we should discriminate against others on the basis of sexual orientation. Furthermore, just because one believes in a religion that has been historically intolerant of gays does not give one the right to oppress another.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>If I had to label myself, I would call myself a classical liberal. I believe in freedom and by extension choice. I believe that the government's role should be minimal. (They should enforce laws that make sure everyone plays by the same rules as well as ensure property rights.) I believe that free market systems allocate resources most efficiently.</p>
<p>If I were forced to choose between freedom and equality, I would choose freedom any day of the week. I dislike socialism, although I respect the right of persons to believe in it if they wish. To me, social engineering and mass government intervention impede efficiency.</p>
<p>I'm looking forward to voting in 2008. Right now, I like Rudy Giuliani a lot. I eagerly wait for Senator Obama to fill in the blanks on the issues.</p>
<p>ps just read another article about Romney flip-flopping, this time on immigration. He is trying to model himself as "pure right" and it seems pure bs. Before he supported some immigrants becoming citizens...</p>
<p>"Those who've been arrested or convicted of crimes shouldn't be here. Those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process toward application for citizenship, as they would from their home country."</p>
<p>Now he doesn't want immigrants to have the opportunity to become citizens. Stop flip-flopping!</p>
<p>edit: Here's a little more on the whole flip-flop thing</p>
<p>"Then, with a chuckle, he made his cutting quip that referenced two embarrassing episodes for Romney in the past six months.</p>
<p>Romney has faced criticism for calling himself a lifelong hunter even though he joined the National Rifle Association in August and officials in four states where he has lived said he never took out a hunting license. Defending himself, he said in April, "I've always been a rodent and rabbit hunter, small varmints, if you will."</p>
<p>Also, The Boston Globe reported late last year that several illegal immigrants, including at least one from Guatemala, worked at the lawn care company that worked on Romney's two-and-a-half acre property in a Boston suburb for a decade. His aides have said that Romney was not aware of the workers' status, and that the owner was in the country legally."</p>
<p>He is definitely trying to mold himself into something he never was. Now he wants to be that gun wielding presidential hopeful as well to appeal to conservatives. I have a feeling what we are seeing is not really him!</p>
<p>"I believe that immigrants should make a conscious effort to speak English when dealing with their fellow Americans."</p>
<p>it goes without saying that immigrants will make efforts to learn english as fast as possible. however, it's a tough language to learn, and we can't expect them to become fluent immediately. it's especially difficult to learn when you're working for minimum wage 40 hrs a week (which is the position that many new mexican immigrants are in).</p>
<p>"I do not believe we should accommodate native Spanish-speaking immigrants by having a "Spanish option" available (e.g. in the post office.)"</p>
<p>please elaborate on your reasonings. </p>
<p>why shouldn't there be a "spanish option" in the post office on lake street in SE minneapolis? it would make more sense to me, seeing as 95% of the residents of that neighborhood are new mexican immigrants and speak primarily spanish. it seems much more practical for the sake of efficiency and easy communication. in fact, i would argue that spanish should be the main language offered at the post office on lake street. the grocery store across the street, the restaurant next door, and the travel agency nearby are all primarily spanish-speaking places.</p>
<p>"There are so many stances to take on so many issues.. Do any of you know of a site where it lists the many issues people are debating over with right now? (And the site only LISTS them, without any bias towards one stance or another)"</p>
<p>Anyone?</p>
<p>I do feel that immigration is such an issue with SOME people because they are Mexicans. It is undeniable if you look back in our history that anti-immigrant sentiment can be fueled by racism. First the racism was against eastern european immigrants, than irish, asians, ect... They are just the newest influx.</p>
<p>Good site. I took the quiz. Every Democrat is ahead of the Republicans. And then Rudy is the first Repub. It actually says I'd like Biden the most...I don't know too too much about him so maybe I should look into that.</p>
<p>Thanks mj93!</p>
<p>ps. I was happy to c Obama was 2nd and Clinton 3rd...I was suprised to c Edwards in the lower half of the Dems tho...but his was more economic policy that differed.</p>
<p>mj93,</p>
<p>
[quote]
it goes without saying that immigrants will make efforts to learn english as fast as possible. however, it's a tough language to learn, and we can't expect them to become fluent immediately. it's especially difficult to learn when you're working for minimum wage 40 hrs a week (which is the position that many new mexican immigrants are in).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, but they may be less encouraged to improve their English if they see that they can get by with their native language. I'm starting to see more and more Spanish in stores.</p>
<p>When I first started daycare, I couldn't speak any English even though I was born here. My mom took care of me at home, and she spoke Chinese to me. The daycare administrator told my parents that I needed to speak English, and lo and behold - one month later I could sing lullabies.</p>
<p>You say that ...it seems much more practical [for there to be a Spanish option] for the sake of efficiency and easy communication. I ask you, by doing so, are you encouraging them to learn English? Or, are you sending a message that it's OK to under-develop English skills in our country?</p>
<p>Not everywhere in our country is primarily English speaking. Some places speak primarily Spanish, and that's fine. If an individual wanted to live in an area of the United States that was primarily Spanish speaking, why would they need to become perfect English speakers? If a postal office is located in a Hispanic neighborhood, the post office should assimilate to it's surroundings by becoming a primarily Spanish-speaking post office. So yes, I do believe it's OK to "under develop English skills" in a few individual cases where perfect English isn't necessary.</p>
<p>You think?
lol, don't get me started, and last night I found this piece of trash which further cemented my disdain for the GOP party:
<a href="http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/50979/%5B/url%5D">http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/50979/</a>
I really dislike Limbaugh...</p>
<p>mj93,</p>
<p>You're right and I agree that there are places in our country that are not primarily English speaking. Some areas do have a majority concentration of Spanish speakers, and there is nothing wrong with that. And, if an individual wants to live in such an area, that's his choice. But, if he decides to visit a different area that is composed of mostly English speakers, he does not have the right to claim that other people should speak his native language so they can communicate. It is his responsibility to have a sufficient understanding of English.</p>
<p>As a values judgment, I believe that the Post Office should not assimilate to the community by offering services in Spanish instead of English. Rather, the community should adapt itself to the customs of the Post Office, that is, become accustomed to services in English. (I am not in any way suggesting that the community should abandon its predominant language.)</p>
<p>Perfect English is never necessary. Heck, you can walk into a lot of public high school English classrooms and even the teacher won't speak perfect English. However, if immigrants are to succeed in this country, they should be willing to adopt the majority language, in our case, English.</p>
<p>By claiming that it's OK to have more and more Spanish signs alongside English ones, we're sending the message that it's OK if you don't want to learn English, we'll change just for you.</p>
<p>I think all immigrant groups should preserve their language, culture, and customs. That's what makes America what it is. But, at the same time, they should be eager to adapt themselves to their new home and take in its language, culture, and customs.</p>