Why would you care about what you wrote? I don't know. Some people care about what they put out there. Others just flippantly write things and then won't defend them and deflect when challenged. I guess you are in the latter category. This is an unsupported assertion. There is no reason to believe that parents will not procure education for their children. What you are arguing is that your moral superiority ought to be enforced by the police powers of government on children so that they are not exposed to ideas with which you disagree. I don't see how your thinking is any different than that of the religious or the fruitcake "biased" ones. You are just as biased as any fruitcake and, unlike those fruitcakes, you insist that your biases be enshrined into law and paid for at gunpoint by your neighbors. You said you fought for freedom, but apparently you don't subscribe to it. What a hypocrite.
Only that most of our social dilemmas, in modern times, are simple moral failures since they do not require rocket science to accomplish, and even if they did we have already been to the moon and back.
Our wars on abstractions are prime examples. By what latitude of construction is there any specifically enumerated power to have wars on abstractions? From one perspective, we only have the "hellish" conditions we have on Earth, simply because we are not moral enough to bear true witness to our own supreme law of the land, in order to enjoy the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity. Consider that without a "war" on poverty, we could simply solve for the social dilemma of a natural unemployment rate with the existing concept and legal doctrine of employment at will; and with existing infrastructure, instead of more nationalized and more socialized public policy decisions, as we currently know them.
could you be more specific? who is waging war on what abstractions? so you mean more individual liberty and free trade would make conditions on earth better? agreed.
why should anyone confide in the sincerity of republicans who cannot bear true witness to their own, republican doctrine?
I think if you consider god in a pantheistic way you should have no conflict with saying the pledge of allegiance. After all, most people saying the pledge have very different views of what god is. The under god part of the pledge was added after WW2, so if you just remain silent on those two words you would still be saying the pledge as it was originally written. Its up to you though, I have witnessed many people remain silent during the pledge of allegiance and no one really noticed enough to make an issue of it. Where were you that it was made into such a big deal?
No reason to believe parents will not procure and education????? I sat in the YMCA waiting for a swim class to end so I could get in my therapy class, while there the two ladies next to me, whose kids were swimming, we discussing their reason for homeschooling. Both agree, that they home schooled so their kids would not have to put up with blacks, Muslims and Jews. THIS is what happens when you take the govt out of education, yet get bigoted, hateful biased NUTS perpetrating their own stupidity. Oh, and why laws are created has no meaning to anyone. 90 percent of all laws are foolish, and stupid. Idiocies such as it being illegal to kiss your wife on suday in Virginia, are still on the books. What matters is the law, not its reason for being written. If it is justified, it remains, if not, it is either removed or relegated to UNUSED, like the law on kissing. I did not fight for the freedom of future generations to be forced to endure the idiocy of their parents. I fought for future generations to be better than us, less hateful, less bigoted and less ignorant, not more so. If that requires FORCING some people to accept the responsibility they should embrace then so be it.
Are you sure you are even interested in the argument? You don't seem very ambitious or proactive in that regard.
HUH? You mean that when I do not understand something, my asking you to clarify it shows my disinterest, my lack of ambition and my avoidance of being proactive?? hmm, what would you call it is I just ignored your hard to understand statement and took a nap?
Don't even try. I stopped paying attention to danielpalos a long time ago when he asserted that the federal government has been delegated the power to control education because the Constitution gives Congress the authority to "fix the Standard of Weights and Measures". I'm not even making that up. He has a truly singular way of thinking, to put it mildly.
Setting "achievement" Standards for the Union could be considered a power delegated under that clause. It is not my fault those of the opposing view would rather resort to non sequiturs and other forms of fallacies, to try to make a point they don't have.
I guess that if you have no clue as to what you are trying to say, then not only is it hard to say it, it is impossible for others to understand, AND, you don't even have a clue why they do not understand, lol.
well, I thought I would give him a chance to clarify his position. but he has not taken me up on that opportunity. oh well, nothing to be done.
It sounds like your teacher and administration were out of line, however, it's reasonable for you to at least stand up and show respect for our country even if you don't believe in God.
