![]() |
Congratulations America - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Congratulations America (/Thread-Congratulations-America) |
RE: Congratulations America - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 11-17-2016 (11-16-2016, 12:56 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Ummm, riding in the back of the bus or a whites only water fountian would be examples of ACTING upon one's bias or bigotry and would be considered discrimination according to JustWin's post. He wrote acted upon in a harmful way. Are you harmed by riding in the back of the bus? No. Therefore it doesn't qualify as discrimination according to his misguided definition. RE: Congratulations America - NATI BENGALS - 11-17-2016 (11-16-2016, 11:04 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Guess what happens if it reaches 2 million. Nothing because a system created to appease slave owners is still law of the land. RE: Congratulations America - PhilHos - 11-17-2016 (11-17-2016, 12:56 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: He wrote acted upon in a harmful way. Are you harmed by riding in the back of the bus? No. Therefore it doesn't qualify as discrimination according to his misguided definition. If you have difficulty walking, then yes, you are harmed by having to walk to the back of the bus. If you're forced to go to a specific location because of the color of your skin, I would say you're harmed (whether it's sitting in the back of the bus or being forced to the back of the crowd of reporters); maybe not physically harmed, but you're certainly harmed emotionally and having your freedoms restricted in an irrational way is another type of harm. RE: Congratulations America - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 11-17-2016 (11-17-2016, 11:04 AM)PhilHos Wrote: If you have difficulty walking, then yes, you are harmed by having to walk to the back of the bus. (11-17-2016, 11:09 AM)PhilHos Wrote:(11-16-2016, 09:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: What were you saying about having your freedoms restricted in an irrational way is a type of harm? RE: Congratulations America - PhilHos - 11-17-2016 (11-17-2016, 12:49 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: What were you saying about having your freedoms restricted in an irrational way is a type of harm? What freedoms are being restricted? Besides the freedom of the insurance company to offer whatever coverage they want? RE: Congratulations America - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 11-17-2016 (11-17-2016, 01:11 PM)PhilHos Wrote: What freedoms are being restricted? Besides the freedom of the insurance company to offer whatever coverage they want? The freedom to choose a birth control method without an employer's religious beliefs affecting their employee's decision. See Hobby Lobby. RE: Congratulations America - bfine32 - 11-17-2016 (11-17-2016, 02:55 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The freedom to choose a birth control method without an employer's religious beliefs affecting their employee's decision. As I recall Hobby Lobby does cover many forms of contraceptives. They only object to measures after conception. Of course I do not deal with private insurance on a daily basis RE: Congratulations America - oncemoreuntothejimbreech - 11-17-2016 http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/DC-Decoder/2014/0710/Hobby-Lobby-101-explaining-the-Supreme-Court-s-birth-control-ruling Quote:The US Supreme Court ruled on June 30 that the owners of closely-held, profit-making corporations cannot be forced under the Affordable Care Actto provide their employees with certain kinds of contraceptives that offend their religious beliefs. The Catholic church, universities, and hospitals held similar objections to providing health insurance coverage for contraceptives. I'm not sure what the latest status is with them. Let's assume for a second Hobby Lobby was owned by Christian Scientists instead of Christians; they could provide employer sponsored health insurance which only covered prayer as a method of contraception. But, so what? Condoms are cheap at Walmart. RE: Congratulations America - PhilHos - 11-19-2016 (11-17-2016, 02:55 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The freedom to choose a birth control method without an employer's religious beliefs affecting their employee's decision. I must have missed the news story that showed that Hobby Lobby employees were restricted from purchasing certain types of birth control. Or that an employee of ANY company was denied the ability to use birth control by the company. RE: Congratulations America - xxlt - 11-19-2016 http://www.cnn.com/election/results/president Latest numbers show Clinton up by 1.3 million in popular vote. Thank god we get the president that more Americans wanted: Trump. The man has a mandate. Heard this snippet of a (pre)seasonal tune on radio this AM: Donald with your brain so bright Won't you make America white RE: Congratulations America - Shake n Blake - 11-19-2016 People are still whining about the popular vote? 1. If presidents were elected based on the popular vote, the campaigns of Trump and Clinton would've been entirely different. There's no way of knowing if Trump could've drummed up more overall votes with a different strategy. 2. States like New York and California, with huge populations of mostly democrat voters, would pretty much decide every election for the entire nation. Hardly fare to the rest of the country, which has many varying sets of morals, beliefs and economic issues. The electoral college is far from perfect, but it's in place for a reason and it beats the alternative. RE: Congratulations America - NATI BENGALS - 11-19-2016 (11-19-2016, 03:19 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: People are still whining about the popular vote?This is the 5th time a president elect lost the popular vote. So your #2 is an invalid argument. So the alternative. Which is every American with voting rights has an equal say in who becomes president is way worse than a dated system that was made so slave states could have a little more pull. Other than your claim democrats would win every election. Is there any good reason to not use a popular vote with the technology we now have? RE: Congratulations America - JustWinBaby - 11-20-2016 (11-17-2016, 01:02 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Nothing because a system created to appease slave owners is still law of the land. Wow...no offense, but you must be a special kind of fry bundler RE: Congratulations America - bfine32 - 11-20-2016 (11-19-2016, 05:16 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: 1) This is the 5th time a president elect lost the popular vote. So your #2 is an invalid argument. 1) And only going by the latest 2, it is accompanied by a strong showing from a 3rd candidate. So instead of the left crying about how the EC caused them the election, they should cry about those that voted for Johnson. So even if we went popular just like all the left is crying about now Hills does not have the Majority so she would not automatically be President, just as Trump would not have if he hadn't got the majority of the EC. 2) Every American has an equal say with in their State and every state has a proportional say in who governs their Nation. 3) Yes, because in a Nation of United States, each state should have a voice; as we are a diverse Nation. If Congress decides tomorrow to scrap the EC in favor of an alternate plan, then folks can whine because their Candidate won under the new plan, if it ever happened. I would not be opposed to a revamping that awarded EC on a proportional bases. Therefore, each state gets its say. As for the current state it is nothing but sour grapes and a tactic employed to further divide the country. RE: Congratulations America - NATI BENGALS - 11-23-2016 (11-20-2016, 11:39 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 1) And only going by the latest 2, it is accompanied by a strong showing from a 3rd candidate. So instead of the left crying about how the EC caused them the election, they should cry about those that voted for Johnson. So even if we went popular just like all the left is crying about now Hills does not have the Majority so she would not automatically be President, just as Trump would not have if he hadn't got the majority of the EC. Im all for the end of the two party system. A popular vote is what it is. 4 good candidates get a large number of votes , it doesnt matter if someone hits some preset majority indicator. The person who gets the most votes wins. Except its not really an equal say in the state. If a person wins by one vote they get all the EC votes. If EC votes were split it may resemble equal say. Even though half of the state wanted the other person all the weight that state carries goes one way. Good point. We are a diverse Nation. And we are all voting on the same thing. Each state has a voice when they elect their own representatives. We are voting as individuals of a nation. The manner in which votes are counted should reflect that. This isnt a local or state election. I am voting for the leader of my country. It doesnt matter what state I live in. Little over 1.5 million sour grapes. RE: Congratulations America - TheLeonardLeap - 11-23-2016 (11-13-2016, 12:48 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: This one was even better: Only thing I got from that video is this guy is a real American Hero: (11-23-2016, 01:59 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Im all for the end of the two party system. You know, for this being a thread of pure condescension you created about how uneducated people chose the President, you are hilariously (and ironically) uneducated about the Electoral College. I may just be a humble HS Graduate, but I know that how the EC votes are awarded are up to the state. For instance, both Maine and Nebraska actually split up their electoral votes which are awarded based off of districts they've made in their state. Maine is split into two districts. Winning one will award 1 EC vote. The other 2 of their 4 votes Maine can award are given to the winner of the overall state popular vote. If your state awards them winner take all, perhaps you should go and try to get involved by writing your Governor to try to get it changed instead of crying because you lost in a system who's rules were already established and you were happy to play by... until you lost. RE: Congratulations America - NATI BENGALS - 11-23-2016 (11-23-2016, 02:53 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Only thing I got from that video is this guy is a real American Hero: I was aware there are some exceptions. I am by no means a history guru. I hated the subject. When they wrote the laws that determined the proper fractionional value of a slave in regards to population and state representation in federal government, my state wasnt a state. Im not the first and wont be the last to complain about the busted ass EC. When i first figured out what it was and how it worked in 2000 i was unhappy with the system. So its really nothing new. RE: Congratulations America - TheLeonardLeap - 11-23-2016 (11-23-2016, 04:19 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: I was aware there are some exceptions. I am by no means a history guru. I hated the subject. 1. How does that have anything to do with anything in this thread? The electoral votes are adjusted every 10 years based off the census data. I am pretty sure 2010, when the last census was, was after the Civil War. I'll give you a pass for not knowing that, though. You were too busy getting a super valuable college education to know silly things like history that us uneducated folk busy ourselves with. 2. Do you have some kind of weird fetish over the topic of slavery? You seem to mention it at least once every 2 posts or so. Are you one of those people who just brings up slavery/racism/Hitler in every debate ever, as some kind of perceived trump card? RE: Congratulations America - JustWinBaby - 11-23-2016 (11-17-2016, 12:56 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: He wrote acted upon in a harmful way. Are you harmed by riding in the back of the bus? No. Therefore it doesn't qualify as discrimination according to his misguided definition. Yes, you are harmed by being forced to ride in the back of the bus because you're made to feel like a second-class citizen. Crossing the street to avoid someone is more of a gray area - pyschological "harmful", perhaps, but mostly pretty benign. Nothing comparable to kicking someone out of your store or refusing an interview or promotion. You can be a bigot and tell all the offensive jokes you want in the privacy of your own home. But you're not a racist until you make a conscious act that causes actual harm to someone. Although it's interesting you don't think being forced to ride in the back of the bus, or drink from a black's only water fountain is harmful...yet still think a person is a racist even if they've committed no outward or harmful act. I guess what I'm saying is, despite what someone may believe, if we are defined by our actions then a person cannot be a racist until they take a harmful racist action, no? It's the difference between REAL discrimination and simply having bigoted views. Biases are natural, and everyone has them....some biases are associated with race, even if that's not the predominant factor. But bias and discrimination are not the same thing. RE: Congratulations America - NATI BENGALS - 11-23-2016 (11-23-2016, 05:23 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: 1. How does that have anything to do with anything in this thread? The electoral votes are adjusted every 10 years based off the census data. I am pretty sure 2010, when the last census was, was after the Civil War. I'll give you a pass for not knowing that, though. You were too busy getting a super valuable college education to know silly things like history that us uneducated folk busy ourselves with. 1. Because I was responding to a post that told me to write the governor of my state to get the law changed. And I was simply pointing out the fact my state wasn't a state when the laws were written to make up the EC. Chances are you could probably give me a sick burn on a history fact sooner or later if you keep trying though. 2. I have been a member of the bengals message board since like 2007 i think it was. This is probably at tops the 10th or so time I have mentioned slavery. |