Sooooo....Donald Trump may run for president....HAH!
In all seriousness though, maybe he'll be good at this? NAH!!!
No, guys, time to get serious. Maybe he has some things to offer? FA;LDFKJA;LKGHA;LJ YOU'RE FIRED!!!
I laughed out loud when I read this. Apparently he almost made a bid for the 2012 election too. To me he just seems unqualified for the job. I really have nothing else to say about it...he seems so bad to the point that it's literally comical! I dunno, what do you guys think about it? Does he have any political background? Did he go to school for anything like this? Do you think he's got the chops for it?
Comment below, let me know!
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
Ebola
There are numerous articles and news casts and rants about this so I won't attach one article seeing as you can google it and get a ton of stuff.
My main point in this article is on flights in and out of heavily infected African countries.
My teacher, Mr. Durrant just got back from a project in Africa and said that the media is blowing this way out of proportion. (Which is why I hate modern news media). He said that asking someone in Africa if they have Ebola is like asking someone from California if they have it because the guys in Texas have it. Yeah it's deadly, and yeah it's killed a lot of people but in all honesty, someone needs to talk to the news people and tell them to chill. Seriously.
On to my main point, if everyone is as freaked out and paranoid about it as they seem to be, why the heck haven't we closed boarders? Stop all flights, shipments and travel from those few African countries. Seems like the logical, smart, common sensical, responsible, anti-stupid and non moronic thing to do. But, alas, it hasn't happened.
However, I don't have a lot of knowledge on this deal so my question to you is are there any real reasons of concern on why we wouldn't shut the boarder? And do they justify it? Are they good enough?
Comment below, let me know!
My main point in this article is on flights in and out of heavily infected African countries.
My teacher, Mr. Durrant just got back from a project in Africa and said that the media is blowing this way out of proportion. (Which is why I hate modern news media). He said that asking someone in Africa if they have Ebola is like asking someone from California if they have it because the guys in Texas have it. Yeah it's deadly, and yeah it's killed a lot of people but in all honesty, someone needs to talk to the news people and tell them to chill. Seriously.
On to my main point, if everyone is as freaked out and paranoid about it as they seem to be, why the heck haven't we closed boarders? Stop all flights, shipments and travel from those few African countries. Seems like the logical, smart, common sensical, responsible, anti-stupid and non moronic thing to do. But, alas, it hasn't happened.
However, I don't have a lot of knowledge on this deal so my question to you is are there any real reasons of concern on why we wouldn't shut the boarder? And do they justify it? Are they good enough?
Comment below, let me know!
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Forcing Churches to Perform Gay Marriage
I'm gonna be careful here because I know that this topic gets people defensive.
In the article it says that this church has been threatened with legal action if they don't stop discriminating against who they will marry and who they won't.
"Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a federal lawsuit and a motion for a temporary restraining order Friday to stop officials in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, from forcing two ordained Christian ministers to perform wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples. ... "The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco.""
I do support this position. "The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines." Makes sense right?
However, the article does point out that the 'Hitching Post' as it has been lovingly called, is a business, not a ministry, therefore it should comply with anti discrimination laws. And I can see that but the idea of it still bugs me. Would people really go as far as demanding actual ministries to perform same sex marriages under threat of criminal charges? That annoys, irritates and somewhat angers me.
Whatever, equal rights for everyone. That makes sense and I support that. Free agency. But forcing another to comply with your beliefs because they don't support them...doesn't that raise some red flags?
Now I know that this was all hypothetical and didn't actually happen but it got pretty close here...all those lawyers just found a legal loophole to strangle them with.
What do you think about it?
Comment below, let me know! You can view the article here.
In the article it says that this church has been threatened with legal action if they don't stop discriminating against who they will marry and who they won't.
"Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys filed a federal lawsuit and a motion for a temporary restraining order Friday to stop officials in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, from forcing two ordained Christian ministers to perform wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples. ... "The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines," said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco.""
I do support this position. "The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines." Makes sense right?
However, the article does point out that the 'Hitching Post' as it has been lovingly called, is a business, not a ministry, therefore it should comply with anti discrimination laws. And I can see that but the idea of it still bugs me. Would people really go as far as demanding actual ministries to perform same sex marriages under threat of criminal charges? That annoys, irritates and somewhat angers me.
Whatever, equal rights for everyone. That makes sense and I support that. Free agency. But forcing another to comply with your beliefs because they don't support them...doesn't that raise some red flags?
Now I know that this was all hypothetical and didn't actually happen but it got pretty close here...all those lawyers just found a legal loophole to strangle them with.
What do you think about it?
Comment below, let me know! You can view the article here.
Saturday, October 11, 2014
Drone Fun
I use drones a lot.
They're fun and they get all the shots that no one else can get! However, I hate these new laws that are going into effect. Possibly because I'm very bias on the matter and the fact that I don't use them for anything malicious. It just got me thinking, what are some of the things that you guys could see drones being used for that the men in black wouldn't like? I think one of the things that I would take some pride in is if I shot one down with an air rifle. HAH! Could you image? I'd freaking mount it on my wall next to the polar bear I shot last week.
But in all seriousness, I can see how privacy would be an issue, but is the government really gonna make that argument when they're already archiving our texts, emails and voicemails? You can't have your cake and eat it too...what else other than privacy, though? A danger of falling vehicles? C'mon, someone has to be the first to get killed by a tiny drone falling from the sky!
Then there's the issue of making a profit off of them, like what Amazon was going to do. And I do believe that that needs to be regulated. It stands to reason and logic that that's how it should be.
What are some things that you guys have heard or think about these new pieces of legislation?
Comment below, let me know!
And if you want to read the article I read click right here.
They're fun and they get all the shots that no one else can get! However, I hate these new laws that are going into effect. Possibly because I'm very bias on the matter and the fact that I don't use them for anything malicious. It just got me thinking, what are some of the things that you guys could see drones being used for that the men in black wouldn't like? I think one of the things that I would take some pride in is if I shot one down with an air rifle. HAH! Could you image? I'd freaking mount it on my wall next to the polar bear I shot last week.
But in all seriousness, I can see how privacy would be an issue, but is the government really gonna make that argument when they're already archiving our texts, emails and voicemails? You can't have your cake and eat it too...what else other than privacy, though? A danger of falling vehicles? C'mon, someone has to be the first to get killed by a tiny drone falling from the sky!
Then there's the issue of making a profit off of them, like what Amazon was going to do. And I do believe that that needs to be regulated. It stands to reason and logic that that's how it should be.
What are some things that you guys have heard or think about these new pieces of legislation?
Comment below, let me know!
And if you want to read the article I read click right here.
Owens v. Love
Owens v. Love
So we've been talking about these campaigns for a while now and to be honest I haven't been following things anywhere outside of school, so when the topic is brought up I'm pretty lost which is why I wanted to do an article on it. If you want to read the one I read then Click here.
Anyhoo,
I thought it was cool how they were almost in a tie. I thought it especially cool because of Owens democratic stance. I don't really favor any part as you probably all know, (most likely because I don't really care as much) but I do find it awesome that some people of Utah aren't voting off of parties. Another point I found odd was when the article said that the Salt Lake Tribune had had a professional poll reviewer look over the two polls and said that they were both legitimate even thought they drew two very different conclusions. I would assume that this would be something about the margin of error and who they polled and where they were located and how old they were as we talked about in class. I just found the article interesting and cool to read even though I don't really care who wins! Best of luck to both candidates.
So we've been talking about these campaigns for a while now and to be honest I haven't been following things anywhere outside of school, so when the topic is brought up I'm pretty lost which is why I wanted to do an article on it. If you want to read the one I read then Click here.
Anyhoo,
I thought it was cool how they were almost in a tie. I thought it especially cool because of Owens democratic stance. I don't really favor any part as you probably all know, (most likely because I don't really care as much) but I do find it awesome that some people of Utah aren't voting off of parties. Another point I found odd was when the article said that the Salt Lake Tribune had had a professional poll reviewer look over the two polls and said that they were both legitimate even thought they drew two very different conclusions. I would assume that this would be something about the margin of error and who they polled and where they were located and how old they were as we talked about in class. I just found the article interesting and cool to read even though I don't really care who wins! Best of luck to both candidates.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)