We are one nation under the Constitution. We are NOT under anybody's god. That unConstitutional phrase was not written into the original, but was inserted as an anti-Soviet (aka the godless society of the 1950s) gesture. It's but one of the many abuses of our secular society by fanatic Christians.
September 3, 2015 at 7:22 p.m.
This is pretty cut and dried. We are a nation of laws and the equal application of those laws for all citizens. The "Law" in the US is the Constitution. No laws can be enacted which violate the rights of citizens which that Constitution guarantees. The Supreme Court found, once again, that "equality" means equal and that "all citizens" means all citizens.
This clerk swore an oath to uphold the laws of the State of Kentucky and of the Constitution. She has defied a lawful judicial order to uphold those laws as they now stand. Ms. Davis' religious beliefs are of no consequence in the matter. They do not outweigh the laws in the US. Our Constitution forbids it. She doesn't have to agree with the law. She does have to comply or resign. It's not personal, it's the law.
There is NO religious liberty to discriminate. It doesn't exist. Period.
September 3, 2015 at 3:37 p.m.
I'll support your idea of revamping our voting system because of these two isolated incidents of illegals voting if you'll support the idea that if a single innocent person was ever executed for a crime he or she didn't commit, we will completely eliminate capitol punishment. I'll support your idea if you agree to support a ban on all guns if a single innocent person, say a child playing around in Daddy's closet or during a domestic dispute was ever killed. Deal?
September 2, 2015 at 10:54 a.m.
You're so right. Also, there are virtually NO examples of illegals making any attempt to vote. It's just more unsubstantiated scare tactics of the right.
Marco Rubio helped write a comprehensive immigration plan that isn't great, but it's not terrible and even GWBush supported it. It dealt with temporary labor, the high tech needs of Silicon Valley, border security and other still unresolved issues. It also contained a "pathway to citizenship". The pathway is fraught with obstacles that require a large fine ($40K), returning to their country of origin and more.
When you consider the financial conditions most illegals live in (off-the-books jobs, substandard wages, etc, the idea put forth by conservatives that large numbers of these folks will go through the process and be able to afford the fine just to get the right to vote for Democrats is insane! Only the wealthiest illegals would be able to afford to become citizens and would more likely vote for Republicans.
Rubio and the Republicans are fools to have walked away from this legislation. Their excuse was a demand that the border be "secure" before any other provisions could kick in. To no one's surprise, however, they refused to define the word "secure" to leave all other portions in limbo. Passing SOMETHING would have taken this issue, which has plagued the GOP for a long time, off the table without disrupting the balance of power. In fact, they could have demonstrated leadership and garnered political support among Latinos for finally taking action. Instead, they pulled back, got nasty and then doubled down on nastiness. And now they have Trump as their poster child. They handed the issue and a huge percentage of Latino votes to the Democrats exactly as they predicted. They've systematically alienated Latinos, blacks and women; three large constituencies one CANNOT win the presidency without.
August 28, 2015 at 10:19 p.m.
WTF are you smoking? Is that what passes for logic on your planet?
Burglary and theft are felonies in every state---regardless of dollar value.
You two guys are both high school students, right? Can't possibly have much life experience and be such mental lightweights.
August 28, 2015 at 9:50 p.m.
Everyone here can exercise themselves as much as they wish. The reality is that several things discussed here will never ever happen. First among those is that Trump will never be President. Second is that there will never be a Constitutional change regarding birthright. If one spends about 30 seconds thinking about what that requires, the fact it will never happen becomes obvious. I read one of the earlier posts which claimed that despite the fact that the 14th Amendment clearly states that anyone born in the US is a citizen it doesn't mean they are a citizen. Whew!
Third, no President would ever get authorization from Congress for the billions of dollars it would take to create the kind of repressive police force necessary to carry out the most egregious elements of Trump's suggestions. None of these radical right wind ideas deals with Asian immigration, overstaying visas or migrant workers. It's all about venting hate and prejudice, not solving illegal immigration.
The Republican-held House has had a bi-partisan Senate bill for nearly two years and is their typically obstructionist, do-nothing pattern, they've taken no action whatever. They've not sought to pass not amend nor propose alternatives. They've done nothing but politic and fund raise on the issue.
August 26, 2015 at 7:02 p.m.
News update indicated police have caught the suspect. Now the guy can be tried and if convicted he'll spend time in prison. That's the way our system works--not with this Neanderthal vigilante mentality exhibited here.
No one is dead, thanks only to the poor marksmanship of the over-testosteroned jeweler who thought he was a Navy Seal. No one needed to die. I'll happily repeat my point: killing a person over possessions is inexcusable. No lives were at risk. The jeweler's actions were excessive and should not be glorified or lauded.
August 20, 2015 at 5:51 p.m.
The jewelry was almost certainly insured. Thus, I see no justification whatever to shot to kill any person over insured stolen property. The jeweler was not defending his own life nor the lives of others nor his home. Judging by the story, the guy was running away when he was shot at. A police officer in Charleston has been indicted for murder for doing the same thing except that the running man was killed. Had the jeweler killed the burglar-as some here wish he had--one has to question whether a murder conviction would be worth satisfying one's greed and bloodlust.
August 20, 2015 at 10:41 a.m.
I'm a very pro-union guy when it comes to the workplace, but I can't support a union for college athletes.. For one thing, colleges give out lots of scholarships. Some are for various sports and the athletes within all those sports (baseball, swimming, football, basketball, gymnastics, golf, etc.) work very hard in their sport. Why wouldn't they all be eligible for union membership and some kind of pay? Scholarships are also given for academics. Since these folks work long hours at their given speciality, shouldn't they also be compensated?
The whole idea screams out the fact that there is far too much emphasis on sports scholarships in college and far too little on actual scholarship.
August 18, 2015 at 9:27 a.m.
Yeah, nothin' makes it a good day like condemning folks to die. That's the manly thing to do. But, wasn't it exactly that same manly thing that the guy was on trial for?
He condemned folks to die. How does having him killed differ? He, at least, carried out the murders himself. Here we see folks clamoring for murder, but by proxy to keep their hands and conscience clean. It doesn't make it any better when you call capitol punishment revenge rather than murder, that's what it is. And certainly trying to paint it as justice is laughable.
As to the sexist statement about the composition of the jury, they needed a unanimous vote for the death sentence. They didn't have that and I've seen nothing that tells what the final vote was or the breakdown of that vote. You're assertion, paulydel, is quite offensive and shows limited intelligence in the 21st century. Quite sad, actually.
August 8, 2015 at 4:21 p.m.