The judge was right. Separation of church and state. Period. No one has stopped anyone from praying anytime anywhere that I know of. You can pray to yourself anytime you want. When I was a student, I used to pray for snow days:)
Students in our schools need to learn reading, writing and math. They also need to learn accurate history -- like Thomas Jefferson, one of our founding fathers, supported the separation of church and state.
People have been saying that fracking is going to create 200,000 jobs in Ohio -- that sounds great, but I'm not holding my breath. The last article I read about fracking in Pennsylvania stated that between 5,000 and 6,000 jobs were created and most of the initial jobs created by fracking are temporary.
And, how about this quote from the article: “Will there be accidents?” he said. “I’m sure something is going to happen. But they’re being as responsible as any other industry and I don’t think a moratorium at this time is the correct way to go.”
Yeah, industries are very responsible and great at policing themselves... As usual, the rich get richer and the poor get cancer...
In regard to drug testing citizens.... here's a good article:
When The Worst Governors Get Bad Ideas, Rick Scott Edition
Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) came up with an idea he considered pretty clever.
First, he told Floridians that people on welfare were more likely to be drug addicts. What did Scott base this on? Nothing in particular -- he seemed to just make it up -- but Scott was quite fond of the argument.
Second, the governor approved a policy based on his faulty assumptions: those who apply for welfare benefits will have to pass a state-mandated drug test. How's that working out? Not well.
Since the state began testing welfare applicants for drugs in July, about 2 percent have tested positive, preliminary data shows.
Ninety-six percent proved to be drug free -- leaving the state on the hook to reimburse the cost of their tests.
As part of the Scott administration policy, those applying for benefits have to pay a $30 out-of-pocket fee to pay for the drug test. If they pass, Florida reimburses them.
And while the state saves some money by not making benefits available to those 2% who fail the test, Florida is forced to reimburse everyone else, plus pay for staff and administrative costs for the drug-testing program, plus pay the legal fees associated with the likely court challenge.
This really wasn't a great idea.
I'd also note for context that Rick Scott's drug-testing policy is limited to low-income Floridians needing temporary aid. It doesn't, in other words, apply to everyone seeking public funding -- only the poor, who the governor assumes are probably drug-addicts.
And speaking of the nation's worst governor, remember the $2.4 billion Florida was set to receive for high-speed rail? The project that enjoyed bipartisan support and was going to create tens of thousands of jobs? With Scott rejecting the funding, the money has now been officially reallocated for rail upgrades in the Northeast, high-speed rail in the Midwest, and related projects in California.
Florida's unemployment rate is only 10.7%. It's not like the state needed the boost.
I am late to the game, but to the Pro-Life cheerleaders -- It looks like you are going to have your way in regard to the health bill. Since I don't personally know anyone who is pro-life while also being a healthy eater and/or non-drinker, here is my proposal:
It is fundamental that food and drink is needed biologically and physiologically for the purpose of continuance of the human race. The side benefit is pleasure.
If persons find themselves with cancer, heart disease, diabetic or with high blood pressure and deem it an appropriate decision to be medicated, hospitalized, or have surgery, that is their decision and bill.
There is no justification for having responsible (and healthy eating) taxpayers shoulder the costs by having our tax dollars used to pay for the results of irresponsible fun and games (i.e., drinking, eating meat, sugar, etc.)
The issue of needing medical care due to a lifetime of unhealthy choices rests with the individual, but the financial obligation does not fall to the rest of society.
Judge slams critics of Texas school prayer ruling
The judge was right. Separation of church and state. Period. No one has stopped anyone from praying anytime anywhere that I know of. You can pray to yourself anytime you want. When I was a student, I used to pray for snow days:)
Students in our schools need to learn reading, writing and math. They also need to learn accurate history -- like Thomas Jefferson, one of our founding fathers, supported the separation of church and state.
February 9, 2012 at 4:07 p.m. permalink suggest removal
Fracking ban is unlikely, reps say
Blacksquirrel, I agree with you 100%.
People have been saying that fracking is going to create 200,000 jobs in Ohio -- that sounds great, but I'm not holding my breath. The last article I read about fracking in Pennsylvania stated that between 5,000 and 6,000 jobs were created and most of the initial jobs created by fracking are temporary.
And, how about this quote from the article:
“Will there be accidents?” he said. “I’m sure something is going to happen. But they’re being as responsible as any other industry and I don’t think a moratorium at this time is the correct way to go.”
Yeah, industries are very responsible and great at policing themselves... As usual, the rich get richer and the poor get cancer...
October 15, 2011 at 11:39 a.m. permalink suggest removal
Hagan: Why not drug-test officials?
In regard to drug testing citizens.... here's a good article:
When The Worst Governors Get Bad Ideas, Rick Scott Edition
Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) came up with an idea he considered pretty clever.
First, he told Floridians that people on welfare were more likely to be drug addicts. What did Scott base this on? Nothing in particular -- he seemed to just make it up -- but Scott was quite fond of the argument.
Second, the governor approved a policy based on his faulty assumptions: those who apply for welfare benefits will have to pass a state-mandated drug test. How's that working out? Not well.
Since the state began testing welfare applicants for drugs in July, about 2 percent have tested positive, preliminary data shows.
Ninety-six percent proved to be drug free -- leaving the state on the hook to reimburse the cost of their tests.
As part of the Scott administration policy, those applying for benefits have to pay a $30 out-of-pocket fee to pay for the drug test. If they pass, Florida reimburses them.
And while the state saves some money by not making benefits available to those 2% who fail the test, Florida is forced to reimburse everyone else, plus pay for staff and administrative costs for the drug-testing program, plus pay the legal fees associated with the likely court challenge.
This really wasn't a great idea.
I'd also note for context that Rick Scott's drug-testing policy is limited to low-income Floridians needing temporary aid. It doesn't, in other words, apply to everyone seeking public funding -- only the poor, who the governor assumes are probably drug-addicts.
And speaking of the nation's worst governor, remember the $2.4 billion Florida was set to receive for high-speed rail? The project that enjoyed bipartisan support and was going to create tens of thousands of jobs? With Scott rejecting the funding, the money has now been officially reallocated for rail upgrades in the Northeast, high-speed rail in the Midwest, and related projects in California.
Florida's unemployment rate is only 10.7%. It's not like the state needed the boost.
By Steve Benen | Sourced from Washington Monthly
Posted at August 26, 2011, 8:03 am
September 2, 2011 at 6:37 p.m. permalink suggest removal
Why is abortion part of the health-care debate?
Paul Shanabarger, thank you! You said that perfectly!
December 7, 2009 at 3:44 p.m. permalink suggest removal
Being free includes the freedom to be disagreeable
Tom Hall in Lisbon: Thank you! So many agree with you but we are shouted down by the "love it or leave it" people.
December 4, 2009 at 4:28 p.m. permalink suggest removal
Those who play should pay
I am late to the game, but to the Pro-Life cheerleaders -- It looks like you are going to have your way in regard to the health bill. Since I don't personally know anyone who is pro-life while also being a healthy eater and/or non-drinker, here is my proposal:
It is fundamental that food and drink is needed biologically and physiologically for the purpose of continuance of the human race. The side benefit is pleasure.
If persons find themselves with cancer, heart disease, diabetic or with high blood pressure and deem it an appropriate decision to be medicated, hospitalized, or have surgery, that is their decision and bill.
There is no justification for having responsible (and healthy eating) taxpayers shoulder the costs by having our tax dollars used to pay for the results of irresponsible fun and games (i.e., drinking, eating meat, sugar, etc.)
The issue of needing medical care due to a lifetime of unhealthy choices rests with the individual, but the financial obligation does not fall to the rest of society.
December 2, 2009 at 4:48 p.m. permalink suggest removal