Messages

1

Your Turn / Re: Civil unrest and Christian witness

« on: January 09, 2021, 06:00:11 PM »

While there are "platforms" for the political parties, we can also look at actual outcomes. The number of abortions have decreased faster under democratic presidents than the "pro-life" Republican presidents. The national debt has gone down under Democratic presidents than under the Republican ones.

There was the famous GHWBush's, "Read my lips: No new taxes," which didn't prove to be true during his presidency.

I wonder why those who oppose socialism are happy to receive their Social Security checks, and medicare benefits, and, in one case, was receiving government disability checks. They like the socialistic programs that benefit them; but oppose them when they benefit others.

Please show verifiable proof that the decrease in abortions and in national debt actually correlate with administrations.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/sep/25/facebook-posts/graph-us-abortion-rate-during-different-presidents/


While politifact takes some issues with the CDC's ability to collect data, they agree that the chart showing greater decreases in the number of abortions during democratic presidents is based on the (incomplete) numbers we have.

?? Your "verifiable proof" is an article that states:
"Moreover, experts said tying the abortion rate to the occupant of the White House alone is an oversimplification of a variety of factors that are at play.
We rate this claim Half True."

Oh... A little news for you as well:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/number-abortions-u-s-drops-lowest-they-became-legal-nationwide-n1055726

2

Your Turn / Re: The Orders of Creation - an Essay by Ed Schroeder

« on: January 05, 2021, 04:51:27 PM »

There's a very slickly produced Venn diagram in the following video that does a good job of explaining the relationship between the Moral and Ceremonial law.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r2m_cffRjI

3

Your Turn / Re: Not about the election...

« on: December 18, 2020, 01:42:05 PM »

Au contraire, mon père:

https://babylonbee.com/news/buttigieg-defends-transportation-credentials-revealing-he-has-played-tons-of-mario-kart-64

If he's not Transportation Secretary, all of these moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain......

4

Your Turn / Re: Coronavirus news

« on: December 17, 2020, 10:52:18 AM »

One of the hospitals I work with began employee vaccines yesterday.  the first employees to receive the vaccine are "..those who have initial contact with patients whose COVID-19 status is positive or unknown."

https://news.childrensmercy.org/childrens-mercy-employees-receive-first-doses-of-covid-19-vaccine/

5

Your Turn / Re: Demands to take things seriously

« on: December 14, 2020, 03:14:13 PM »

......if they would continue to deny sexual minorities fair treatment in the civil realm, and if the civil realm has imposed penalties, they deserve the penalties.

Is NOT referring to someone by an arbitrary pronoun they happen to chose to use today a denial of their fair treatment in the civil realm?

My pronoun choices for today are "Your Highness", when speaking TO me... "His Majesty" when speaking ABOUT me.    Anything less will be considered a denial of my fair treatment in the civil realm.

...Unless you agree with the aforementioned US Court of Appeals, that is.

6

Your Turn / Re: Demands to take things seriously

« on: December 14, 2020, 11:06:01 AM »

The next response will be from those who fear what will happen to them if they speak against certain aspects of this “gender“ discussion.
“We will be ostracized,“ they say, “we might lose our job!“ And they will claim that they will be subject to other forms of social disapproval.
To Which I say, as I have said before, so what? If this is a matter as serious, as grave, as essential as you say it is, you should be willing to take the risk and consequences of standing up for your conviction.

Wrong.

7

Your Turn / Re: Demands to take things seriously

« on: December 14, 2020, 11:05:32 AM »

There is plenty of howling all over the place, Pastor Charleston.
What we do not have is any effort to engage those who are calling for changes in ways that indicate we understand some of their concerns. Instead, we have Peter saying “case closed! It’s over! Anything else but the way I see it is stupid!“
This is not even an attempt to change the minds of those who are urging other things. And it is certainly not an attempt to understand their concerns, even if we think they are wrong.
I am not sure that the “pronoun change“ is a good idea, and I suspect the motives of some who are promoting it. On the other hand, I try to understand the concerns of some others who are involved in this discussion.
Peter and others who immediately reject these concerns, and then go on to see some vast conspiracy that is going to overwhelm them with something they can’t stand and cause them to withdraw from society Are not “discussing” anything.

Who is "Pastor Charleston"?
You have a "quote" from Pastor Speckhard in your comment.  Please provide the source for that quote -- I have not read it anywhere on this thread except for your comment.
You state you "try to understand the concerns" of others involved in this discussion, yet you do not identify any of those concerns.   Could you please elaborate on what those concerns are?

8

Your Turn / Re: Demands to take things seriously

« on: December 14, 2020, 10:54:08 AM »

Assuming that Gender is just as fluid as language, attempting to keep track of these new gender pronouns and when to use them (there are more than what appears on this list, BTW, according to the LGBTQ+ Resource Center, at University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee) is a quixotic undertaking.
...Or so says the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/19/19-40016-CR0.pdf



FYI -- Here's the link to the UMW "Gender Pronouns" page:
https://uwm.edu/lgbtrc/support/gender-pronouns/

9

Your Turn / Re: Not about the election...

« on: December 10, 2020, 02:22:52 PM »

Regardless of whether the case can or does do anything about the 2020 election, it has tremendous ramifications going forward in ways that somewhat combine the topics of moving on from the election and life after the pandemic. The changes made to state election laws by judges and governors were done under the auspices of emergency conditions. But they also clearly violated the U.S. Constitution, and arguably impacted the outcome of the election. The lingering question is the extent to which emergencies justify ignoring the Constitution. It will matter going forward. We've have race-relations called a national "emergency" and health "crisis." We've had global warming described in the same terms. If the SCOTUS decides that everything was Constitutional in the election, expect a lot more things to be called emergencies in the future, and lot more governors and judges (and presidents) doing quickly by fiat what would otherwise be done (or not done) via laborious legislation.

How was the U.S. Constitution violated?

Well -  "The Constitution provides that state legislatures — not federal judges, not state judges, not state governors, not other state officials — bear primary responsibility for setting election rules,"   -- Justice Neil Gorsuch

10

Your Turn / Re: Coronavirus news

« on: December 07, 2020, 10:52:11 PM »

Positive COVID-19 coverage:
a) - Coming soon - VACCINE!!! 
b) - It's vaccine that is over 90% effective
c) - It came through a process of R and D that was incredibly swift (for vaccines) and that was both collaborative and competitive, so real-world!
d) - It will be available to most populations globally and nationally in large numbers and relatively quickly
e) - Treatments have advanced in the past year to the degree that there are more options for those infected that work
f) - Health care professionals on the ground, doctors and nurses and EMTs and all those at all levels, have risen to a difficult challenge with courage and collaboration
g) - Churches and spiritual leaders/communities (this can be extended to the interfaith intersection as well)  have risen to a difficult challenge with words of comfort, hope, assistance and encouragement
w) - most Pro Sports had some kind of season, and pro hoops in particular did a remarkable job with their bubble  (I mark this as (w) because it should be way near the bottom)

I'm sure there are lots more.  We can start the positivity wave right here!

Shouldn't we also report that more people are dying per day than ever before? Even with all these advancements, people are dying at a record pace.

https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19

Not according to Johns Hopkins...

What source are you using?

11

Your Turn / Re: Coronavirus news

« on: December 07, 2020, 06:50:07 PM »

Trump administration officials passed when Pfizer offered in late summer to sell the U.S. government additional doses of its Covid-19 vaccine, according to people familiar with the matter. Now Pfizer may not be able provide more of its vaccine to the United States until next June because of its commitments to other countries, they said.
As the administration scrambles to try to purchase more doses of the vaccine, President Trump plans on Tuesday to sign an executive order “to ensure that United States government prioritizes getting the vaccine to American citizens before sending it to other nations,” according to a draft statement and a White House official, though it was not immediately clear what force the president’s executive order would carry.
That included whether it would expand the U.S. supply of doses beyond what is spelled out in existing federal contracts.

Conveniently ignores the 100 million vaccine doses purchased from Moderna, 100 million from Johnson and Johnson, and 300 million doses from AstraZeneca.

12

Your Turn / Re: Coronavirus news

« on: December 03, 2020, 01:04:43 PM »

Really?  Small towns determine what hours asphalt companies work, who they employ, who the condict business with, and what wages they pay, and how much their work is worth?

Sometimes. I've been places where the asphalt companies only worked at night so that the roads would be open during the busy traffic times. A city may contract with only a company that is an equal opportunity employer with minorities visibly in the workforce. Yes, the city tells the company how much their work is worth when they give them the contract for their bid. They also agree to a time-table when it's supposed to be done.

Beyond (maybe) determining where the company can be physically located and what taxes the company does (or does not) pay, towns don't regulate these businesses as much as you think the do.

Regulate means: "to set rules." I think that cities set more rules for asphalt companies working in their cities than you might think. If they don't follow the city's rules, they don't get to work.

This is a ridiculous argument - asphalt companies don't have to accept a contract a town offers them -- if the contracted pay is too low, they don't accept the job.  Working at night?  That's a stipulation the town may put in place, but again, the company is free to not accept the contract.  Timetables?  If the timetable is not acceptable to the company, they don't have to accept the contract.

Bottom line, if the job isn't acceptable to the company, they don't take it.  That's capitalism, not socialism.   Arguing otherwise just means you don't understand socialism.

13

Your Turn / Re: Coronavirus news

« on: December 03, 2020, 10:39:17 AM »

Most everyone who posts that our federal support of the military is socialism. It is spending money for the common good (or the good of society - where "social" comes from), rather than investing money to make bigger profits.

That's why privates get paid the same as generals.  The making, moving, and trading wealth is owned or controlled by the workers. Equal distribution and all that.   Yay, Socialism!

Who said that socialism is paying everybody the same? Socialism: the making, moving, and trading wealth is owned or controlled by society. Marxism was about the workers rebelling against unjust owners and taking control of businesses.


Things such as a society (in this case a small town) deciding to pave its roads and taxing all citizens in town to pay for it is a form of socialism. The same with community fire departments, water bureaus, police departments, etc.

Socialism advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Do small towns own their own asphalt company and paving equipment?   Mine doesn't
Do fire/police departments make their own vehicles? Mine doesn't

No, small towns don't own asphalt companies and paving equipment, but they do regulate them.

Really?  Small towns determine what hours asphalt companies work, who they employ, who the condict business with, and what wages they pay, and how much their work is worth?

Beyond (maybe) determining where the company can be physically located and what taxes the company does (or does not) pay, towns don't regulate these businesses as much as you think the do. 

14

Your Turn / Re: Coronavirus news

« on: December 02, 2020, 04:36:57 PM »

Most everyone who posts that our federal support of the military is socialism. It is spending money for the common good (or the good of society - where "social" comes from), rather than investing money to make bigger profits.

That's why privates get paid the same as generals.  The making, moving, and trading wealth is owned or controlled by the workers. Equal distribution and all that.   Yay, Socialism!

Who said that socialism is paying everybody the same? Socialism: the making, moving, and trading wealth is owned or controlled by society. Marxism was about the workers rebelling against unjust owners and taking control of businesses.


Things such as a society (in this case a small town) deciding to pave its roads and taxing all citizens in town to pay for it is a form of socialism. The same with community fire departments, water bureaus, police departments, etc.

Socialism advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Do small towns own their own asphalt company and paving equipment?   Mine doesn't
Do fire/police departments make their own vehicles? Mine doesn't

15

Your Turn / Re: Coronavirus news

« on: December 02, 2020, 03:26:44 PM »

Most everyone who posts that our federal support of the military is socialism. It is spending money for the common good (or the good of society - where "social" comes from), rather than investing money to make bigger profits.

That's why privates get paid the same as generals.  The making, moving, and trading wealth is owned or controlled by the workers. Equal distribution and all that.   Yay, Socialism!