Check out some similar questions!

talaniman · Jul 5, 2013, 08:22 AM

The world is bigger than the middle east where the current major religions dominate. And there were scattered tribes all over the world with differing belief systems. War and trade intermingled many as well as slavery of the conquered.

Indeed the history of man is one of differing belief systems and for fact Jesus was a Jew, not a Christian, and a perfect example of making religions through martyrdom, a common practice of that time. But as I said, the world is bigger than the middle east and goes back tens of thousands of years before recorded history of the region.

They have dated the pyramids both in Egypt and South America and Mexico back even further.

talaniman · Jul 5, 2013, 08:27 AM

My point of course that man has evolved from what he was to now, and will continue to evolve into more than he is now. So spare me the absolute truth of your current belief because its subject to change later. This is not the early millennium of ancient long dead philosophy.

speechlesstx · Jul 5, 2013, 08:37 AM

Jesus was a Jew? I did not know that.

talaniman · Jul 5, 2013, 11:31 AM

So why aren't Christians Jews too?

cdad · Jul 5, 2013, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Not for 'reasonable people" which is the legal term oft used. It seems to be exclusively the rightys that bring up these "marry your horse" or "marry a child" arguments, why is that?

I won't advocate for the horse. But there are groups like NAMBLA that would want to marry a child. The reason it is out there as part of the discussion is because it wasn't that long ago being gay was considered by the medical profession as deviant behavior. That is why Im say when you open pandoras box you don't know what your going to unleash. It IS a logical part of the argument.

Wondergirl · Jul 5, 2013, 12:32 PM

Originally Posted by cdad

But there are groups like NAMBLA that would want to marry a child.

A child cannot legally sign a contract.

cdad · Jul 5, 2013, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

A child cannot legally sign a contract.

I have already pointed out when I child can sign a contract. And by extension the fact that it isn't happening now doesn't preclude that it couldn't happen later. Im not saying that any of the things that could happen are going to happen overnight. But the door is now open for them to happen. Hence the pandora's box reference.

speechlesstx · Jul 5, 2013, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

A child cannot legally sign a contract.

Laws change.

speechlesstx · Jul 5, 2013, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by talaniman

So why aren't Christians Jews too?

Really, you have to ask?

talaniman · Jul 5, 2013, 12:54 PM

I just do not believe the FEAR of what could happen, and what if something can happen, overrides what is happening, and that a segment of the American population has been discriminated against and denied the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness that all citizens are guaranteed in the Constitution.

They deserve, and have a right to be first class citizens with equal right under the law. Let the horse lovers, or child lovers make their own case whenever.

cdad · Jul 5, 2013, 01:01 PM

Originally Posted by talaniman

I just do not believe the FEAR of what could happen, and what if something can happen, overrides what is happening, and that a segment of the American population has been discriminated against and denied the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness that all citizens are guaranteed in the Constitution.

They deserve, and have a right to be first class citizens with equal right under the law. Let the horse lovers, or child lovers make their own case whenever.

Actually they never were denied rights. They were denied a marriage license. Solely based on the definition of the law. There were still avenues available for them to gain the same rights as married couples enjoyed. They just wanted to skip that part. Also it leaves the doors wide open for attacking the church. So spare me the they couldn't have the same rights bs. They had enough political power and connections to elevate civil unions to the same status and they could have left marriage alone as far as the definition.

The promotion of marriage is in the states interest and is a compelling one. Its not just about religion. Although it appears your side wants to make it about only religion so that way you can still feel good about it.

Pandora's box has been opened and time will tell what comes of it.

speechlesstx · Jul 9, 2013, 06:29 AM

The IRS Mistakenly Exposed Thousands of Social Security Numbers

Must be some more of that "smarter government" we got with Obama.

NeedKarma · Jul 9, 2013, 06:43 AM

Must be some more of that "smarter government" we got with Obama.

Or another example of inadvertent data leaks that happen all the time in public and private enterprises.

speechlesstx · Jul 9, 2013, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Or another example of inadvertent data leaks that happen all the time in public and private enterprises.

No, read the story, it was incompetence. They used words like "unwitting" and "accidentally" but it was no accident.

Every so often, 527s have to file tax forms to the IRS, which then get added to a database. The database itself is hardly a secret; the IRS has been sending updated records routinely to Public.Resource.org and other public-interest groups, and it's a favorite among political reporters. But when the IRS told the group's founder, Carl Malamud, to disregard the Form 990-Ts included in the agency's January release, he took a closer look at the files in question.

After analyzing the breach, Malamud wrote a letter to the IRS pointing out 10 instances where a social security number was accidentally revealed on the government's website—just a small sample of the larger breach.

Just the day before, Malamud had filed another letter to the agency describing a problem with the 990-Ts. Of over 3,000 tax returns contained in the January update, 319 contained sensitive data the agency should have scrubbed,

You know what "scrubbed" means, it means they didn't do their job before uploading the files - GIGO - you get out of it what you put in.

NeedKarma · Jul 9, 2013, 07:07 AM

It's always incompetence whenever there is a data leak/breach, or else they would never happen, whether it's lackadaisical programing that was exploited or a human error. That's part of my job to make sure that latter doesn't happen.

speechlesstx · Jul 9, 2013, 07:19 AM

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

It's always incompetence whenever there is a data leak/breach, or else they would never happen, whether it's lackadaisical programing that was exploited or a human error. That's part of my job to make sure that latter doesn't happen.

No one, and I mean no one can foresee every possibility so it's not always incompetence. This was pure incompetence that cannot be brushed aside as another "nothing to see here" moment.

excon · Jul 9, 2013, 07:19 AM

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, the IRS sucks... How come Issa is letting them get away with it?? He DOES have oversight.. He CAN subpoena witness's. He CAN put 'em in jail if they don't cooperate..

Why are you sniveling at me? Issa is YOUR guy.

excon

PS> On the other thread, tom is sniveling about the executive branch FAILING to investigate itself... Uhhh, that's WHY we have a sharp guy like ISSA...

speechlesstx · Jul 9, 2013, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

Yeah, the IRS sucks... How come Issa is letting them get away with it??? He DOES have oversight.. He CAN subpoena witness's. He CAN put 'em in jail if they don't cooperate..

Why are you sniveling at me?? Issa is YOUR guy.

excon

PS> On the other thread, tom is sniveling about the executive branch FAILING to investigate itself... Uhhh, that's WHY we have a sharp guy like ISSA....

And the moment he throws someone in jail you'll cry foul. That's how your side works.

tomder55 · Jul 9, 2013, 07:36 AM

You know what a constitutional crisis is ? It's called the Legislative branch trying to enforce it's contempt charges without the support of the executive branch. With the exception of a small security detail that scrubs the Kennedy family alcohol and drug abuse ,the only person the House has for enforcement is the Sgt at Arms . Yeah it would work real well to have him march to the White House and attempt to detain and arrest anyone there .

excon · Jul 9, 2013, 07:44 AM

Hello again, Steve:

you know what a constitutional crisis is ?

And the moment he throws someone in jail you'll cry foul. That's how your side works.

Side? SIDE?? I pay taxes too. Whether I like it not, Issa is MY guy too. IF the IRS is corrupt, I Want to know. IF Obama is corrupt, I Want to KNOW. IF BOTH are corrupt, THAT'S the Constitutional crisis. THEY'RE the one's creating it. My congressional representative ISN'T creating ANYTHING by investigating...

I don't understand you.. IF Obama is a CROOK, wouldn't you like to know?? Of COURSE, you want to know, but you cover up for Issa instead... Why you think THAT'S more important than a corrupt government, I'll NEVER figure out.

Excon