jvc wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:17 AM:I CANNOT IMAGINE AN AMERICA WITHOUT
GEORGE CARLIN!

jvc wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:22 AM:David Horwitz: Maybe that is why we are fining traunt kids now?

jvc wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:59 AM:What is a lift ticket? Is that like a government subsidy?

jvc wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:43 AM:Why do we continue to use the word globalization to describe an economic
condition of fair trade between poor and rich countries?We say our world is becoming flatter as a result of good trade relationships between countries.
Yet,there is no such thing as fair trade relationship and or globalization when poor countries have a standard of living that is so vasly different!
I submit that the term globalization can only be used when all countries are competing on the same leveling field and not in terms of poverty by virtue of a low standard of living! The wage disparity is so vast in comparison to our needs that we cannot possibly compete with this condition, the disparity in mean wages with China for example is 18 to one! Does this mean that our standard of living is now based not by our own economic efforts but by cheap foreign goods?

Chuck wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:04 AM:The news is reporting McCain proposes $300 million prize for new auto battery. Its nice to see innovation is rewarded. Hussein would tax innovation, and employers, as he has promised.

Chuck wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:05 AM:>>>I CANNOT IMAGINE AN AMERICA WITHOUT
GEORGE CARLIN!>>> Gee, and how will the Red Sea ever part again without ussein Obama

jvc wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:17 AM:Mr. Carlin should be referred to by the moniker of Mr. America because he spoke for all Americans that saw the America
of the privilege and the America of the hypocrite!

Focal Point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:38 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:05 AM:
It shows that Chuck never read the Bible.
Good for Chuck.

Tangentially Walker is right... wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:39 AM:Wouldn't it be great if this paper would hire Gary Walker as editor to help balance out the obvious left wing bias that favors the illegal aliens that have no respect for our laws. Mr. Abed and Mr. Gallo have indeed done much to help our community, and this amidst the growing divisiveness caused by the huge numbers of illegal aliens and those that protect them, in Escondido. Escondidans that favor law enforcement and strong business development will vote Abed and Gallo back for another four years on our city council. Thank you Mr. Walker for your ongoing candid letters. You have many more supporters than you might imagine.

Ms M wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:40 AM:Chuck
[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:04 AM:Chuck
Hussein would tax innovation, and employers, as he has promised. Ah Chuck - so early in the morning........now please tell me when Hussein made those promises. Thanks in advance for your reply.

CarlinShmarlin wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:50 AM:jvc
[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:17 AM:
I CANNOT IMAGINE AN AMERICA WITHOUT
GEORGE CARLIN!

Carlin made millions out of pointing out the obvious. How is that going to be missed? Now if Carlin made millions by offering solutions not just observations, I would agree he will be missed.

BIABS wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:55 AM:Nice try, Robert. But the fact is, water is provided via water meters. The more water meters getting issued(i.e., the more building that occurs) the more water that is capable of getting consumed.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:59 AM:Night exercises keeping him awake. Same old typical complaint about noise levels despite your effort to first apologize for your attitude. The Marine Corps is doing its job, training and being prepared, day or night. No one asked you to purchase a home in the proximity of the base. Camp Pendleton was here long before your housing development.

Surfer wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:02 AM:CarlinShmarlin Hey fella, Carlin was not a politician or a saint. He was a top rated comedian that made millions laugh and smile. He will be missed. If the government and society can not find solutions for its problems, why would you expect a comedian without any power except for his wit to be able to do so? See ya!

to Mr. Horwitz wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:12 AM:Enough of the whining already! The gay woman could have gone to someone else. Plain and simple.

Alf wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:13 AM:The letter from James Amorosa makes only one mistake. He seems to want to point out FACTS. The problem is that FACTS confuse the people who rely on religion and emotion, therefore, those people refuse to pay attention to FACTS. One FACT that they conveniently overlook is that the United States is NOT a democracy, it is a republic, ergo, a law can be passed by 70 or 80 percent of the people yet be overturned in court because it violates the Constitution. Such overturning is NOT judicial activism at all, it is the Court obeying the highest law of, in this case, the state of California. Both the California and the United States Constitutions provide for "equal protection under the law", so, while the proposed Amendment to the California Constitution may pass, it will still be in violation of the U.S. Constitution and, if challenged to the U.S. Supreme Court, will probably be overturned, as it should be. Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:19 AM:Until Robert Rivinius can provide facts that show that new houses do not add to the demand for water, an impossibility unless each house consumes only well water from its private well, I take his comments and letter with a grain of salt. That he represents the building industry and is obviously biased, inspires me to take his letter with an entire salt lick. Regards, Alf.

Alf wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:29 AM:The letter from Jeremy Hoy is right on! I remember, back in the stone ages when I took driver's ed, seeing "Signal 30", one of the first "shock" tactic movies of which I know. Did it work any better than other methods? I don't know, but I remember some people getting queezy during and after seeing it. Regards, Alf.

jvc wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:30 AM:So, it is obvious that America is a country of the privilege and a country of the hypocrite?

jvc wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:39 AM:We love you George!

Oh Carlinshmarlin wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:45 AM:Have YOU offered solutions to all the world's problems in a meaningful way? So you will not be missed? Is that the measure of a life to you? "Offered solutions to the world's problems. Therefore, will be missed." Why not try honesty: you disliked Carlin because of his political views. Maybe?

Alf wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:56 AM:Well, "Focal Point" at 7:59AM, this weekend was hot enough that people without A/C had to have windows open. I do recall people who bought houses near Miramar and then complained about the noise. I thought and still think that they were morons to buy near, at that time, a Naval Air Station. Did they think that jets and helicopters made no noise? Did they think that training only went on from 9AM to 5PM? Regards, Alf.

Apollo wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:00 AM:Re: Alf (8:13 a.m.)
Everything you wrote in your blog was correct up until the last sentence.
Yes, prohibiting same-sex marriage does violate the "equal protection" clauses of both the U.S. and California state constitutions. In addition, it also specifically violates the California clauses prohibiting laws that discriminate based on gender.
So, yes, any such prohibition "should be" overturned.
The one error you made was that you said it "will probably be overturned."
You are assuming that Bush and othe Republican appointees will actually follow the Constitution, which you should know you probably can't count on.

Jack_D wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:23 AM:James Amorosa may be right that Canada has a Constitution with a written guarantee of freedom of conscience. So what? That doesn't seem to have helped Maclean’s, a British magazine that has published the work of Mark Steyn, conservative critic of Islam. Now the magazine and its editors are in the dock before the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal on the charge that they violated a provincial hate-speech law by running the work of a hate-monger, namely Mark Steyn. A similar prosecution is pending before the national version of this kangaroo court, the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

it's hard to hold Canada out as a beacon of liberty and justice.

Remember the real Legacy wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:28 AM:Bob Shuster may be the only one who misses Mr Snowder on the school board. The rest of us will remember his creative means of financing the Valley Center High School with a bond paid for by the Escondido property tax payers. We will remember him when the new bond measure floats in November, just about the time we get our property tax bills and are reminded that we are already paying a high school measure for decades to come! NO new bond!

Chuck wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:32 AM:>>>I do recall people who bought houses near Miramar and then complained about the noise. I thought and still think that they were morons to buy near, at that time, a Naval Air Station>>> My office is right under the the take off pattern from Miramar. Funny, I never thought of it as noise. I think of it as the sweet sounds of freedom

jvc wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:34 AM:To use a phrase that was used in a recent movie and I use it here to describe George Carlin....he did not clam to be a man OF the people but a man FOR the people!

Chuck wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:34 AM:You would have read about it if you werent celebrating the terrorist bombings last week, hoping Hussein would get a few votes out of it

Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:39 AM:As I have stated before, I think "shock" works. I agree with Jeremy Hoy today.
I've been working on another idea, in my mind's eye. How do we reach those kid's who think sex is a plaything, a toy.. as taught today by the public school.
I think a little "shock and awe" is exactly what is called for here.

Perhaps the first field trip could be to a hospice?
And the second could be to an entire day spent in the home of an unwed mother?

Would it shock the kids? Yes.
That's good. That's what we need it to do. Will the kids think twice? Most of them, yes. Will this activity save lives? Yes, it will! Then I guess we can count this a success.

Constitutional Right... wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:40 AM:I have a question for Alf, Focal Point, Chuck, Reardon, and the rest of the regular crowd.

If the constitution gives the right for homosexuals to marry, then why is it that a brother and a sister can't marry? Or, a father and a daughter? If it is their choice to do so, and love one another so much, wouldn't this also be allowable by the constitution?

Just curious as to your views on these possible unions of people.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:45 AM:Alf[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 8:56 AM: You are exactly correct, my fellow Gyrene.
Regards, FP.

Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:46 AM:Jvc: A lift ticket is a plastic surgeon gift certificate given by a man to his normally aging lady.

Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:52 AM:Quoted from the tomorrows Guardian (of London):
(Quote)James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.(Unquote)

Free speech is hereby criminalized!

Questioning Al Gore's scare tactics is a crime?

These people are unhinged!

Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:04 AM:Oh, so right Gary Walker.
"They've also aggressively prosecuted the growing blight of illegal garage conversions..."
My advice to them a long, long time ago.. was to go after health & safety code enforement.
They would still have to deal those who would call this "selective enforcement", just as they are calling traffic stops, selective.
Personally, I'd like to see that.
I would just love to watch all these groups stand in front of one of these shacks, and defend it.
Drill Here.
Drill Now.
Pay Less.

Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:12 AM:Think of it, Richard Hartman.. as your sacrifice. Your personal sacrifice for freedom. What you are hearing IS the sound of freedom.
and I say: Let Freedom Ring!
Me, on the other hand, am comforted by those sounds. It tells me, those brave men & women are looking out for me, my family, and my country.
God Bless em!
Drill Here.
Drill Now.
Pay Less.

Alf wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:23 AM:Well, "Apollo" at 9:00AM, while I sincerely believe that GWB will mangle this country and its Constitution as much as he is able, I also truly believe that the U.S. Supreme Court will, despite any appointees and their personal and political beliefs, follow the Constitution and, if they err, they will err on the side of maintaining or expanding rights, not restricting them. Regards, Alf.

Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:26 AM:It seems to me that David Horwitz doeth protest too much.
I mean.. what are we actually talking about here? An elective procedure, right? And since it's "an elective", it's not mandatory, it's not life threatening, in other words, not essential.
If a doctor has an objection over an elective procedure, let him opt out.
There are plenty of other doctor's I'm more than sure who would be willing to do it.
Drill Here.
Drill Now.
Pay Less.

Surfer wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:26 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 7:04 AM: Where is he going to get the money, Dude?
It could it be our tax dollars? Darn, McBush would have to raise taxes or spend it on the nation's credit like the Iraqi War. Then, all the conservatives on this blog like Chuck would be belly aching about that situation. Hussein (a wonderful name) has advocated the production of such a battery. Besides, I want one of the new hydrogen cars as soon as they become imported and affordable for the USA. See ya!

Focal Point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:27 AM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:32 AM: I just had to pick myself up from the ground. The is the first time that I agree with Chuck.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:31 AM:Constitutional Right...[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 9:40 AM: What does it have to do with homosexuals getting married? Father and daughter or sister or brother. Trying to sneak in the incestral biblical prohibitions-eh. Interbreeding with family members usually results in physically and mentally defective children.

Alf wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:38 AM:Well, "Constitutional Right..." at 9:40AM, experience taught what we now know, two people who are closely related (parent/child or first cousins) are far more likely to create genetic abnormalities. Why and when that got codified into law is something that I cannot answer. But that bit of knowledge is courtesy of my departed mother-in-law, a Professor of Biology. Regards, Alf.

Enviro Friendly wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:40 AM:There was a letter written in yesteday's edition that called diesels dirty. I would just like to point out that the emissions from a diesel engine are less pollutant than those put out by those engines that run on gasoline. Additionally, those of us who drive diesels pay a higher tax at the pump which I find funny since my diesel fuel is a by product of the gasoline process. I guess it is because we depend so much on diesel to ship our items across the country. More money to be made. As for the alternative energy source vehicles, until such time that they can pull as heavy as a load as my diesel can, I will continue to drive my truck thank you very much and I would prefer that you quite trying to FORCE me to drive something else because of YOUR agenda.

Greenergy wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:41 AM:As usual, Reardon at 9:52 a.m. can only make his "point" by starting with one assertion and making a conclusion completely unrelated to it.
Either that, or he can't tell the difference between "speech" and "action."
I checked out the Guardian (of London) article he referred to.
The point is not about curtailing the expression of opinion, but about intentional fraud in the same manner that tobacco companies held conclusive scientific proof of harm caused by their products long before the surgeon general's report, but knowingly and fraudulently waged a disinformation campaign to misrepresent facts they knew to be false, using their deep pockets to fund "studies" exonerating their cancer-sticks, just as oil companies do today to discredit real scientists.
It is just a shame that so many gullible Americans, including Reardon, are taken in by such fraud.
For your info, Reardon, intentional consumer fraud, libel, slander, or yelling "fire" in a crowded theater are not protected speech.
And your reference to Al Gore is specious and dishonest.
His name never appears once in the article.
The accusations are not based on the writings of a journalist, but on the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence.

Alf wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:44 AM:Drill in "Ron's" back yard.
Drill in "Ron's" back yard NOW.
Pay the same or more for gasoline.
Regards, Alf.

Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:47 AM:Speaking of fact checking....
I think James Amorosa owes Mr. Kirk
an apology.
Canada may have a constitution, but Canada also has a "Human Rights Commission."
In Edmonton, Alberta Christian pastor Steve Boissoin has been accused of propogating "hate speech" by writing a letter to the editor. He wrote the letter to the Red Deer Advocate outlining his disagreement with the homosexualist activist agenda.
This "commission" is looking into whether the pastor violated "hate speech" laws, when writing his own personal, political opinion.
In yet another case, and growing daily...
Mark Steyn offended Muslims in British Columbia, when he published his book, “America Alone.”
Now not only the Muslims but also the Canadian diversity police want their pound of flesh.
Steyn was effectively "taken to court", the Canadian Human Rights Commission by the Canadian Islamic Congress.
Apparently, in Canada speaking out of turn can now land you in court.
But, I think it shows how far they have gone PC, and how "groups" will use these commission to shut down free speech.
Drill Here.
Drill Now.
Pay Less.

Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:48 AM:Constitution: Society has the right to establish norms, and the British Royal family is a good example of why close relatives are not societally permitted to marry. In the case of incest, as in polygamy and previously even homosexuality, there has been a societal determination that when two rights collide, individual and society, that society prevails.

Society has a right to change its mind. The thought of freeing slaves was unthinkable 300 years ago, and homosexual marriage was unthinkable 50 years ago. Perhaps society will decide that the congenital problems with incest are not so terrible years from now.

I suppose even Christians would accept incest eventually when they consider how our human race began, according to their own “Book.” Without incest, we would not exist as a race – according to the “Book” – and I suspect that it was common in small tribes in the evolutionary history as well.

As to the Constitution, the 10th Amendment applies -- if it is not in the Constitution it is up to the States to set their own "marriage" rules. I personally have no objection to Brother-Sister relationships – or any other coupling that consenting individuals like. It does not change my life one bit.

Alf wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:51 AM:Well, "Focal Point" at 9:45AM, if only I could be correct about everything. Then again, I'd be as deluded and insufferable "Ron". Regards, Alf.

To Ron on shock wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:52 AM:The kinds of "shock" you describe are very different from literally traumatizing kids by telling them that a friend is dead. But I do agree with you that real-life education might help a lot of kids. I recently saw a film called Four months, Three weeks, Two days. It's about two college roommates in Romania before the fall of Communism. One is pregnant and wants an abortion. The roommate arranges one. Abortion is illegal at the time. It's a completely detailed and realistic look at this event. Very disturbing, of course, but very good. And not propaganda! There is stuff for "both sides" of the American debate to chew on. Certainly seeing the fetus is horrifying. At the same time, the whole process shows us what women went through before Roe. Watch it with your daughters and sons (not if they're preteen, though).

SS TAX wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:53 AM:Here is a thought. Why not do away with Social Security Tax from wages earned, and instead put a tax on commodities bought. This new tax, which would affect all people, whether in this country legally or not, would go to a Social Security Reserve Fund that could be drawn from once our Citizens hit retirement age. So anybody out there, making money and not reporting it properly would be supporting this program. Everyone has to go and buy groceries and the like. What say you?

to Constitutional right wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:58 AM:This has been discussed many times here as far as marrying children, many wives, and even animals. In each case there could be a good, interesting, long discussion. I would hope that if anyone decided to try to marry a sibling, and took it to court, as much information as possible would be discussed pertaining to the consequences of incest. Then our society would decide. This is as it should be. We have no authority on high dictating to us what these things should be, other than the constitution. The Bible is not our book of laws, and besides, the Bible thinks polygyny is the way to go, generally arranged long in advance between families. Tradition should be given lots of weight, but not dictatorial powers (or else nothing would ever change). We are right in the middle of such a challenging of tradition with respect to homosexuals and steadily we are coming to see that, given all the ways that modern marriage has already shattered so many "traditions", the gay thing is not that big a deal, at least not to increasing numbers of people. It's a natural process. The process has never not been there.

hardtack wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:59 AM:Great quote by Justice Joyce L. Kennard, cited in James Amorosa’s letter:
“The court's most important role is to preserve constitutional rights for minorities from obliteration by the majority."
Sounds like something James Madison or Thomas Jefferson might have said.

If Justice Kennard applies that principle equally in all her judgements – say, for example, cases regarding adult drug use, income taxes, estate taxes, minimum wage mandates, rent and price controls, etc. – then I would call her a “constructionist” judge. If she discriminates and waffles between which minority and which majority she favors, then she is an “activist” judge.

I would also venture the opinion that the majority favors activist judges specifically because they will obliterate the rights of certain minorities.

Interesting post Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:02 AM:The one about Hansen and the tobacco analogy. Is it merely free speech? If the tobacco companies had research that showed a link to cancer and hid it from the public for the sake of profits, do you see that as a crime or free speech? If I make a house that I know is so shoddy that it will collapse in a stiff wind, and don't tell you about this as I sell it to you, was it just free speech when I said the house's construction was fine?

Remember wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:06 AM:Bush and McCain have now showed us the true reason for the Iraq invasion. Even though violence is down and political progress is being made, and as the Iraqi troops stand up, Bush and McCain will not, as they promised, stand down. On the contrary, they want more than 50 permanent bases in Iraq, independent of Iraqi interference or law. This is called imperialism. When you put it together with the fact that 4 US oil companies just signed their no-bid contracts to drill Iraqi oil, it's called imperialism, big time. We were right: it was about the oil. But in addition, it was to transform Iraq into a giant military operations base. Last time they were polled, 73% of Iraqis wanted the US out ASAP. The kind of thing Bush/McCain want in Iraq is exactly why it's all but impossible to criticize Chris Pulse's comments: they are accurate!

Marine Brat Navy Wife wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:07 AM:I live in O'side and LOVE the sounds of training/bombing at night. Nothing like the sounds of freedom to make one sleep.

On those restless nights, I cannot sleep and the lulling thuds don't help, I just think about those guys -- and gals -- (that are NOT sleeping well or at all) in a desert, in a jungle or else where.

Keep up, the beautiful sounds.

BTW, if one cannot sleep, investing in some ear plugs might be an idea.

I just don't see the need to inform the public of all the manuevers the military are doing.

Lastly, it's our obligation to endure night training in return for the privilege of freedom.

Sleep tight.

Apollo wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:21 AM:Re: Chuck (9:32 a.m.) and Focal Point (10:27 a.m.)
The ones training to go get Bin Laden in Afghanistan sound like the sweet sounds of freedom.
The ones training to go to Iraq sound like the sad dirge of hopelessness - respect to the soldiers who dutifully obey their orders, but sad for the waste of life, suffering and national treasure on this war of diversion so defense contractors and oil stock holders can continue to hear the greedy sounds of "ka-ching."

Drill here.
Drill now.
Add profits to Ron's stock portfolio

Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:23 AM:Surfer: Fuel cells have been around for some time – I wrote a column on fuel cell cars being engineered by Ballard of Canada, and that must have been five years ago. The problem is size, cost and infrastructures – basically an engineering problem, not a scientific problem.

Honda can do a few “one-offs” for lease soon (at a million dollars a copy), but mass production is another question. It’s like the problem with the Soviet Union in miniature – their science was superb, and they could build one of ANYTHING, they just could not build a thousand of ANYTHING.

Honda will solve the problem, soon, as will many others. The question is cost.

For some reason, environmentalists are willing to accept 10 years for a partial fuel cell introduction, but not 10 years for ANWR oil production.

I am for the right to choose. In everything! Let’s have oil-based cars, fuel cell cars, hybrids, steam driven cars, Ethanol fueled cars, electric cars…let the people decide.

I wish wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:34 AM:Alas, I can only wish that the sounds of those planes and artillery were the sounds of freedom. We need a military, of course, to provide for the common defense. And there have been times in the past when the fate of our nation, and our freedom, depended on our military. But it's been a long time, and at the moment, we have no enemy nations of consequence. The military has typically (since 1945) been an instrument of aggression, I'm afraid. As a patriot, this sickens me. I love what our country stands for, its ideals. I salute the young people who volunteer for the military who believe they are doing so as a gift to the nation, for its defense, for its freedom. But sadly, this is not how they will be used, and that infuriates me. When I hear the planes and artillery, I think it's the sound of practicing killing, and for what? Saddens me terribly.

Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:37 AM:Interesting: Let me get this right.

If Al Gore, Point-man for Global Environmental extremism is proven wrong because the seas do not rise to flood Miami, but he makes hundreds of millions of dollars in carbon credit markets, then Gore can also be put on trial for fraud?

If not, then he gets “free speech,” but the oil company executives do not?

Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:43 AM:Alf: Are you saying that if an oil company offered you, say $100,000 to drill in your yard, and $5 a barrel for every barrel they bring out of the ground, you would say "NO!"?

They can drill in my yard, starting tomorrow!

Chuck wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:46 AM:Soon, the sickos in Sacramento will make it legal to marry your pet goat and legislate that employers must give 2 months paid leave to bond with your goat.

Constitutional Right wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:50 AM:Thanks for responding FP and Alf.

Focal Point
[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:31 AM:
Trying to sneak in the incestral biblical prohibitions-eh. Interbreeding with family members usually results in physically and mentally defective children.

To FP: For the record I wasn't trying to sneak in anything, just asked a question about a person's rights.

Alf
[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 10:38 AM:
Well, "Constitutional Right..." at 9:40AM, experience taught what we now know, two people who are closely related (parent/child or first cousins) are far more likely to create genetic abnormalities.

You both point out medical reasons as to why there should not be "reproduction" between two persons related which I agree with fully. But, that still does not answer the question of what makes a union between such persons illegal.

And maybe this isn't a fair comparison to the current situation, but in my relatively simple mind, they are comparable if the unions are done strictly from a "love" and emotional perspective and not from "physical" perspective. Obviously, with out medical aid, it is impossible for two people of the same sex to reproduce.

I am not looking to get into the whole reproduction being a prerequisite to get married issue. There are several things that can go into whether a couple is able to or wants to have children that are not factors into my original question.

Again thanks for the responses. I don't always agree with everything that anybody has to say on this forum, but have learned from most all who have posted here. The important thing is researching what is posted and concluding your own decisions and not being so hard lined as to not being able to listen to others ideas and opinions. To not take others opinions in account, to me, is just dumb.

to Focal Point- wrote on Jun AM wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:57 AM:AIDS is known to be highest amongst men having sex with men. Men are dying from, or living with, aids and yet we seem to see that as a side effect of the gay lifestyle. Why shouldn't we see birth defects as only a side effect of the incestuous lifestle?

to Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:05 PM:Mr. Gore and many more are hoping for exactly that. Gore will get a pass and the rest will make their money because of him.

I think it a rather good GOP impersonation he's got going there.

Greenergy wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:07 PM:Reardon at 11:37 a.m. simply repeats his 9:52 a.m. distraction from the truth.
Reardon, I already answered you at 10:41 a.m.
Obviously you missed it.
The post from Interesting at 11:02 a.m. essentially echoes my point, and is spot on.

The point is not about curtailing the expression of opinion, but about intentional fraud in the same manner that tobacco companies held conclusive scientific proof of harm caused by their products long before the surgeon general's report, but knowingly and fraudulently waged a disinformation campaign to misrepresent facts they knew to be false, using their deep pockets to fund "studies" exonerating their cancer-sticks, just as oil companies do today to discredit real scientists.
It is just a shame that so many gullible Americans, including Reardon, are taken in by such fraud.
For your info, Reardon, intentional consumer fraud, libel, slander, or yelling "fire" in a crowded theater are not protected speech.
And your reference to Al Gore is specious and dishonest.
His name never appears once in the article.
The accusations are not based on the writings of a journalist, but on the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence.

Go solar.
Drive electric.
Don't buy gas.

Surfer wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:10 PM:Remember[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:06 AM: Dude. I am askance when it comes to this treaty. Why is any treaty being negotiated when our presence is allegedly there under a UN mandate? Our time is up in Iraq when the UN ends. The problem is that the US not only wants the Iraqi oil. It also wants forward staging areas for its future attack on Iran. See Ya!

Oh Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:14 PM:Are you honestly saying that you don't see a difference between "Inconvenient Truth" and tobacco companies covering up cancer links or oil companies doing something analogous? I think you're fibbing about that. But let me ask you, does Gore say anywhere that "if what the experts say is true, then..."? Well, hey! That's a rather large difference between him and the oil/tobacco people right there, isn't it? Like the difference between reportage and fraud? Oh, Reardon, why do you stoop so low and so poorly LOL

to to Focal Point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:16 PM:AIDS is transmitted by unprotected sex and shared IV needles. Neither is a homosexual phenomenon. Has nothing to do with anything.

to Constitutional Right wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:23 PM:Certainly it's true that the demand of homosexuals for equal marriage rights brings "marriage" into question. This is not a bad thing, IMHO. Questioning our assumptions for good reasons is healthy. And this is not new even in the domain of marriage. Adultery, for example, was considered a crime in most states until not that long ago. Divorce was extremely difficult to get. Those were questioned and things changed (for better or worse). I can't say for sure if or when incest, child marriage, or polygamy will matter enough to someone to pursue a legal challenge, but when they do, we'll debate it. I do find it amusing that of all people, those here who say they value individual freedom above all things are the ones who demand "traditional" marriage. Seems contradictory. But of course it was those same conservative freedom lovers that resisted the rights of women to vote, and the end of Jim Crow. Go figure. I guess they are all for "freedom for ME".

Focal Point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:23 PM:to Focal Point- wrote on Jun AM You are incorrect. World wide, the majority of the people who have AIDS are heterosexuals. I never said that birth defects were only a side effect of an incestuous sexual union or life style. AIDS is not the effect of a gay life style or heterosexual life style or any other type of style. It is a result of unprotected and unsafe sex. Now listen up. Address your questions to someone else because the subject is to close to me. I watched my brother suffer and die from AIDS 13 years ago. It is still in my mind. But, understand this fact. World wide, the majority of the people who have contracted AIDS, life with AIDS and who have died from AIDS are heterosexuals.

Surfer wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:30 PM:Reardon[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:23 AM:
ANWAR drilling is a joke. The oil derived from an American oil source will be sold to the Americans or world wide at the international market price. It will not reduce or dependence on oil. In general, I would concur with you to let the market settle the issue based on need, use, value and supply/demand concepts. But, to me and this is just my opinion, it is a question of national security. I am leaning toward the hydrogen car for the future. I also tend toward nuclear power if a method of safe disposal of spent nuclear fuel could be found. Congrats on your previous articles. See Ya Brah!

Reardon wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:30 PM:The question of birth defects as a consequence of an incestuous lifestyle is interesting.

In days now long past, that was a decision for the couple involved -- they and they alone bore the financial responsibility of AIDS or incestual deformity.

Today, because we have "socialized" the cost to EVERYONE, then everyone gets to have a say!

There is therefore a concomitant loss of freedom. Society has decided to "insure a burning house" and then set rules of conduct to diminish the societal costs, by banning tobacco in many places, requiring helmets for motorcyclists, etc.

The Gay Lobby has had the political muscle(sic) to get the societal financial support without the societal penalty, but incest and many others have not yet muscled up, politically, and are probably too small, too guilt-ridden, and too financially insecure to do so.

Animal lover wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:34 PM:Chuck[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 11:46 AM: If so, I am buying futures in goats.

Chuck wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:46 PM:Drill Here.
Drill Now.
Pay Ron More.

Bob wrote on Jun 23, 2008 12:49 PM:The 10:31 AM post is correct. Chuck is an exelent example of this.

Health risk wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:03 PM:We have no laws against people marrying who have a high risk of passing on or even creating medical problems in their offspring. This has nothing to do with anything.

Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:08 PM:I'm beginning to get the impression that "Greenergy" @10:41 AM feels that all the "real" scientists are only those who agree with his conclusion on human caused global warming.
And he will only consider them "real" scientists if they agree with his own conclusions.
So, am I hearing this right? Any scientist who does not buy into global warming is a bought & paid-for hack?
Is that what I'm hearing you say?
That unless they agree with your conclusion on global warming, they are ALL hacks?
Wow! That's quite a statement.
I wonder how Lenny Bernstein made it into the IPCC as a lead author, no less? Hmmmmmm?
Hey Reardon, you hit the nail on the head the otherday, when you said: "Until you buy MY brand."
This is the answer in a nutshell.
If you buy the global warming theory, then you are a "real" scientist.
If you do not, or have doubt's, or if you might have a few questions, or if you pose questions about the theory... Then, you are a denier. Your are one of THEM! Your NOT a "REAL" scientist.
Your a hack. Is that about right?
Somehow, I think those who disagreed with the "Steady-State" theory, would somehow fall into that catagory, as well?
Drill Here.
Drill Now.
Pay Less.

To CR wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:13 PM:Incestuous marriages should be no more of an issue than same sex marriages. In this age of genetic testing, any birth defect could be detected well before actual birth, and the fetus simply aborted, which is the woman's right to choose.

Concerned One wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:14 PM:Yikes, I go away for a few days and look what happens. The topic of the day is incest, people are discussing the virtues of hydrogen fuel cell cars (clue: they have no virtues), and Ron has a new chant: drill here, drill there, drill everywhere! Ahhh I love the smell of controversy in the afternoon. Cheers, C-1.

sdraoul wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:15 PM:Canada does not have a Cosntitution liek we do. Their's is one in name only. There is no freedom of the press, there is no freedom of expression.

There is no "Bill of Rights.." Furthermore, Canada isn't even really independent. It remains under the English Queen and she has a representative in Canada, last I heard.

Canadian newspapers cannot identify criminal suspects even during their trials. If an AAmerican publication prinst the name of a Canadian criminal before conviction it can be confiscated.

Write Mark Steyn is beign tried by a "Human Rights Commission because he wrote a piece of fiction that Muslims objected to. Under Sharia law he is being prosecuted. Canada informally recognizes Sharia law and is using it to try anyone who writes anything Muslims find offensive.

Drill wherever wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:39 PM:In California we don't tell people how and where to drill.

TO to to Focal Point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:39 PM:Come now... Where is the highest incidence of the disease found? I think you know.

Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:44 PM:Because you are still putting it into the hands of those who will spend it, "SS TAX" @10:53 AM.
Just because you "collect" it a different way, does not mean they will suddenly "get religion", and be good little boys & girls.
I mean.. think about it.
Your whole life, you give these guys 12.4% of your entire life's wage.
And they waste it.
Save your own money, hide it where they can't find it, you'll be better off in the long run. Trust me.
Drill Here.
Drill Now.
Pay Less.

to to focal point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:52 PM:regarding AIDS: As I said, AIDS is communicated by certain kinds of unprotected sexual behavior and needle sharing. Certainly the incidence of HIV is highest in the homosexual community, but they aren't sick because they are gay, they are sick because they did these things, which heterosexuals also do. Homosexuals that are careful are exactly as likely to become HIV+ as heterosexuals. Comprende?

Oh no Still waiting Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:55 PM:OMG, here comes Ron and his Lenny Bernstein again. Ron, I've asked you for this dozens of times, but you seem unwilling. Since Lenny's credentials are so important to you, tell us, please, about the credentials of ALL the members of the IPCC, not just the one or two that you find useful. You are SO dishonest, Ron, really, doesn't it embarrass you to get called out so frequently? Anyhow, we are still waiting for the credentials of the other IPCC members.

Oh Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:58 PM:You were not so smart to share with us that you merrily invest in oil and also sell your product for defense purposes. As you rant and rave about this or that person just doing things for personal gain (like Gore), you can't help but give yourself away as identical to them. And railing about taxation is even more comical, you who make a fine profit from taxpayer money via the military. So your cheering for oil and for war are nothing but self-serving. Some patriot!

Apollo wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:00 PM:Re: to Focal Point (11:57 a.m.)
And AIDS is lowest among women having sex with women (in the United States). Based on your theory, gay men should not be allowed to women but lesbians should.

Chris wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:01 PM:So Chuck and Marine brat think that all the noise from our military are the sounds of freedom. How delusional can you get? No it is the sound of expanding American imperialism and our boys practicing to be ready to massecre more people, who have no defense, all to the glory of all that represents the bloodletting of the American empire.

Betty wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:02 PM:Richard Hartman needs to move or get a life. As a mother, I want those soldiers to get all the training they want. So what if your sleep is disturbed! It is the sound of freedom. GET OVER IT or better yet MOVE!

Pavlovian wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:11 PM:Isn't it funny that all those who post here today defending the flight training and the noise that comes with it use the exact same phrase, "sound of freedom"? Do you guys even think about what you're saying? It seems like these phrases just pop right out, on demand, on cue. Man, are we easy to manipulate via brainwashing and propaganda! In case you haven't noticed, but since the cold war ended there is not another nation in the world that can be rationally said to be our enemy in the traditional sense. Individuals or groups might attack Americans, just as Americans do each other, but another nation? Not a chance. We spend more on weapons than the rest of the world combined, more or less. The only way we would be in a war is if we start one. As we have. "Sound of freedom"? Ding ding, dribble dribble. At least say "sound of profits"!

Constitutional Right wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:14 PM:To CR
[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:13 PM:
Incestuous marriages should be no more of an issue than same sex marriages. In this age of genetic testing, any birth defect could be detected well before actual birth, and the fetus simply aborted, which is the woman's right to choose.

Wow, that is quite a statement. Just because the baby might not be coming out just how the parents want it to, then it is ok to just kill that fetus that is beginning to form into a person in the mothers womb.

Remember how persons here in the United States were appalled at how citizens of other countries were killing thier newborn babies because it was not the gender that they wanted? But, I guess because it has not been born yet then it is ok to not allow it to continue to grow and live.

You are welcome to your opinion of course but that is pretty selfish to terminate the fetus just because it doesn't measure up to your expectations. There are plenty of families (both heterosexual and now homosexual) that can not, either medically or physically produce offspring of their own that would love that fetus and raise it as their own (providing that it is allowed to continue to develop).

This is a dear subject to me. I had a friend that became pregnant from a rape. She chose to have the child, because even though how she was impregnated was horrible, the human being that grew inside of her and that she birthed was very special and precious to her. Unfortunately, when he was six y.o., he was taken from her in a car crash.

Apollo wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:20 PM:Re: Constitutional Right (9:40 a.m.)
(and numerous respondents)
From a purely legal standpoint I don't have a legal issue with brothers and sisters marrying, as long as they are of legal age and there is no question as to the mutual valid consent.
The biggest problem with incest is the validity of the consent. In almost all cases, if it persists into adulthood, it had its origins during the childhood of at least one of the parties (especially if the other party is a parent, in which case there is the problem of disproportionate authoritarian power), in which case it is at the very least a remnant of abuse. But if this is clearly demonstrated not be a factor, then from a legal perspective I wouldn't care.
Further, a gender-neutral prohibition on incest does not discriminate on the basis of gender, which is the objection the Court found.
It would still be a legislative rather than Constitutional matter.

To Concerned One wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:21 PM:Concerned One
[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:14 PM:Yikes, I go away for a few days and look what happens. - And your point was? Well Dude, These have always been on again off again hot button topics, And, You say,"hydrogen fuel cell cars clue: they have no virtues". Get real dude, Maybe five years ago. Today's have leapfrogged over every other "Green" Technology out there. What Oil Co. do you work for? Now I'm concerned. I'll bet no one even knew you were gone!

to chuck wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:21 PM:My goat keeps the grass short!

To Chris wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:22 PM:Chris
[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:01 PM:

Apparently, you have never been in the military, nor have you done any proper research on the rules and regulations that the military follows. You just like to make assumptions off of what the media tells you and off the stupidity of the few.

Ron wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:23 PM:Barack Obama wants to be known as the "post" racial candidate, yet this week is launching an offensive against any perceived slight by those evil Republicans. Obviously, he is just a little more than nervous about some of his past statements, like the following:
"White man's greed, versus a world at need."
Very similar to what we all hear his pastor, the wrong Rev. Wright say. Isn't it?
so now we have the folowing connections"
the wrong Rev. Wright,
aquanitance of Farakhan,
A friend of unrepeantant American terrorist Bill Ayers,
loose lip's Father Phleger,
and now Richard Danzig, noted philosopher of the "Winnie the Pooh" strategy of national security.
Now, should the Republicans use the above statement during the campaign, will they be labeled as vicious, and cruel. Yes. Will they be labeled as using racial politics. Yes. But, will they be accurate? Yes.
If it's about judgement, Obama is not showing any.
Drill Here.
Drill Now.
Pay Less.

Focal Point wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:25 PM:Pavlovian[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:11 PM: I did not say "sounds of freedom."

To Pavlovian wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:29 PM:At 2:11, Did you even read your own post, You said it yourself, but apparently you did not understand your own words, Let's try this one, Deturrent.

To jvc wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:31 PM:jvc
[-] wrote on Jun 23, 2008 1:17 AM:I CANNOT IMAGINE AN AMERICA WITHOUT
GEORGE CARLIN! "Dude, T R Y!!!"

Concerned One wrote on Jun 23, 2008 2:48 PM:To To: Sorry, but hydrogen fuel cells have not made a giant leap to the green side. In fact, the fuel takes more energy to make than it produces. That's typical of many wonderful green solutions. Oh, and Honda's new model? Just go ask a dealer when you can order one. In the meantime, I'll drive my fuel efficient VW and wait for the price of hybrids to come down before I buy. Be smart, be open, and don't jump on every bandwagon that comes through town. Regards, C-1.

Chris to to Chris wrote on