In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
A Golden Valley woman is asking the courts to allow her to smoke marijuana for religious reasons — because she belongs to the First Church of Cannabis.
Through her lawyer, 31-year-old Ashley Firnschild is arguing to the Hennepin County District Court that the weed’s illegality places an “undue burden” on her “sincerely held” religious beliefs as a member of the Indiana-based church established earlier this year. The case is coming before the court because Firnschild is alleged to have smoked the weed in violation of a condition of her probation for a drug charge.
Firnschild’s use of marijuana is based on “guidance in the philosophies of her church” and her embrace of the church’s mission “establishes her dedication and sincerity to such ideologies,” the motion said.
Holy shit I hope this works. I'd love to see what conservative evangelicals have to say about other religions being able to circumvent state (and federal) law because of their "sincerely held religious beliefs".
She may have a problem with the "sincerely held" part. (given that the church has been established less than a year.) but if she can testify about the sincerity of her beliefs with a straight face....it should work.
(and I think there should be a general principle that the RFRAs should become FRAs... you should be able to get exemption from any law where the government places a burden on you, unless it is the least burdensome way to fulfill a compelling interest)
On September 15 2015 19:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Bernie at Liberty University is about as much of a lion's den as a liberal or socialist (or non-Christian) can find, and I think that given the situation, he dealt with the Abortion question reasonably well. Not perfect by any means, but he didn't get booed and got a few small cheers. I just wish he would have hit his final point home with a clever statement summarizing his point, like "If you truly want to be in support of Life, that doesn't mean you give up on helping babies once they're born... you shouldn't just help children into this world and then leave them to suffer in poverty. Because that's not truly being Pro-Life; that's just being Pro-Birth and then not caring about what happens to them afterwards."
Thanks for sharing, I hadn't kept up with this. I appreciated the ways he presented his opinion and I agree, a summary like you suggested would have been ideal to tie it together after "taking it a step further".
On September 15 2015 19:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Bernie at Liberty University is about as much of a lion's den as a liberal or socialist (or non-Christian) can find, and I think that given the situation, he dealt with the Abortion question reasonably well. Not perfect by any means, but he didn't get booed and got a few small cheers. I just wish he would have hit his final point home with a clever statement summarizing his point, like "If you truly want to be in support of Life, that doesn't mean you give up on helping babies once they're born... you shouldn't just help children into this world and then leave them to suffer in poverty. Because that's not truly being Pro-Life; that's just being Pro-Birth and then not caring about what happens to them afterwards."
Thanks for sharing, I hadn't kept up with this. I appreciated the ways he presented his opinion and I agree, a summary like you suggested would have been ideal to tie it together after "taking it a step further".
I agree a summary like Dark suggested would of been great.
I'm kind of amazed he made it out without any boos or significant jeering. He basically went in their house and asked them "are you all as 'Christian' as you think you are?"
The "Racism is a sin issue not a skin issue" line was the dumbest thing I've heard said in a while but it got the biggest cheers of anything from the LU crowd. They also sat on their hands like congress at a SOTU not cheering or applauding things we should all be in agreement about.
As far as I heard every candidate has been invited, we'll see how many others show up and how they get received there. Something tells me Hillary won't go. Either way though the intro from Jerry was probably one of the best Bernie has gotten.
It also appears we've already moved on to the fighting portion...
WASHINGTON -- A super PAC backing Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is going negative, circulating an email that yokes her chief rival Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to some of the more controversial remarks made by Jeremy Corbyn, the United Kingdom's new Labour Party leader, including his praise for the late Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan leader who provided discounted fuel to Vermont in a deal supported by Sanders.
Clinton's camp has long said it has no plans to attack Sanders. But the super PAC, called Correct the Record, departed from its defense of Clinton's record as a former secretary of state in an email Monday that compares Sanders with Corbyn. Correct the Record, led by Clinton ally David Brock, also has sent trackers after Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley.
The Democratic candidates have refrained from criticizing each other directly. Sanders has obliquely knocked Clinton for not stating her position on the Keystone XL pipeline, and hasn't made an issue of her use of a private email server and account while at the State Department. Clinton, in turn, almost never mentions Sanders' name and has focused on her Republican rivals.
A 13-year-old boy was charged with assault after he reportedly kissed a classmate "against her will".
The pupil from Pikesville, Maryland, allegedly kissed the 14-year-girl as part of a dare at Pikesville Middle School.
School officials took a report of an incident which is said to have taken place during school hours.
According to a police report in the Baltimore Sun, the girl told police on 9 September that he grabbed her by her shirt, pulled her towards him and "open-mouth kissed her with his tongue".
The action taken over the incident appears to have divided opinion in the local area. One local told Fox 10: "I would let the parents get together and discuss it… rather than getting the police involved. Let the school handle it first and then if the parents want to press charges, then there’s nothing else that can be done."
The boy was charged as a juvenile last week and released to his mother, WBFF reported. A spokesman for Baltimore County Public Schools said he also faces school disciplinary action.
This is a step in the right direction combating the war on women in america.
For the first time, the Food and Drug Administration has ordered a major tobacco company to stop selling brands of cigarettes.
The FDA on Tuesday ordered the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company to stop selling for brands: Camel Bold Crush, Vantage Tech 13 and the regular and menthol versions of Pall Mall Deep Set Recessed Filter cigarettes.
The FDA has ordered other cigarettes off the market before, but those actions involved much smaller companies selling much less popular cigarettes.
The agency says it took the action because R.J. Reynolds had failed to prove the brands were no more dangerous than brands that have been on the market longer.
"These decisions were based on a rigorous, science-based review designed to protect the public from the harms caused by tobacco use," Mitch Zeller, director of the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products, said in a statement. "The agency will continue to review product submissions and exercise it's legal authority and consumer protection duty to remove products from the market when they fail to meet the public health bar set forth under law."
Congress gave the FDA authority to regulate cigarettes for the first time in 2009. Among the agency's new powers are the authority to require new brands to prove they pose no more risks to smokers than cigarettes that were put on the market before Feb. 15, 2007.
The FDA says R.J. Reynolds had failed to show the four brands that have been ordered off the market do not expose smokers to more harmful chemicals, higher levels of menthol or new ingredients.
A 13-year-old boy was charged with assault after he reportedly kissed a classmate "against her will".
The pupil from Pikesville, Maryland, allegedly kissed the 14-year-girl as part of a dare at Pikesville Middle School.
School officials took a report of an incident which is said to have taken place during school hours.
According to a police report in the Baltimore Sun, the girl told police on 9 September that he grabbed her by her shirt, pulled her towards him and "open-mouth kissed her with his tongue".
The action taken over the incident appears to have divided opinion in the local area. One local told Fox 10: "I would let the parents get together and discuss it… rather than getting the police involved. Let the school handle it first and then if the parents want to press charges, then there’s nothing else that can be done."
The boy was charged as a juvenile last week and released to his mother, WBFF reported. A spokesman for Baltimore County Public Schools said he also faces school disciplinary action.
This is a step in the right direction combating the war on women in america.
How is this a story?
Charged as a juvenile. And from this bit... "he grabbed her by her shirt, pulled her towards him and "open-mouth kissed her with his tongue"", I'd say it's totally warranted. I feel sorry for the girl... obviously.
Or do people think it's okay for 13 year-olds to sexually-assault 14 year-olds? Or... is this a sexist thing? What? Why is this here?
Sounds about right. He isn't charged with sexual assault, just assault. Its the same thing if he had gotten into a particularly bad fight. And sexually assaulting other people is something that should be taken seriously, even at a young age. And the girl shouldn't feel like this is something she is required to put up with while boys figure out what is right and wrong. His record will be clean when he turns 18.
A 13-year-old boy was charged with assault after he reportedly kissed a classmate "against her will".
The pupil from Pikesville, Maryland, allegedly kissed the 14-year-girl as part of a dare at Pikesville Middle School.
School officials took a report of an incident which is said to have taken place during school hours.
According to a police report in the Baltimore Sun, the girl told police on 9 September that he grabbed her by her shirt, pulled her towards him and "open-mouth kissed her with his tongue".
The action taken over the incident appears to have divided opinion in the local area. One local told Fox 10: "I would let the parents get together and discuss it… rather than getting the police involved. Let the school handle it first and then if the parents want to press charges, then there’s nothing else that can be done."
The boy was charged as a juvenile last week and released to his mother, WBFF reported. A spokesman for Baltimore County Public Schools said he also faces school disciplinary action.
This is a step in the right direction combating the war on women in america.
How is this a story?
Charged as a juvenile. And from this bit... "he grabbed her by her shirt, pulled her towards him and "open-mouth kissed her with his tongue"", I'd say it's totally warranted. I feel sorry for the girl.
Or do people think it's okay for 13 year-olds to sexually-assault 14 year-olds? Or... is this a sexist thing? What? Why is this here?
Whatisthisasheep is the edgy-Trump-voting-Baitlord. He loves to find things in a naked attempt to rustle peoples jimmies. Its sort of adorable because he is really bad at it.
Sexual assault on a minor is obviously an issue, even if the person doing it is also a minor. Girls should not be forced to endure assaults without consequence until the person doing it is old enough to have somehow learned not to. And that's before we even address what allowing teenagers to ignore consent is going to teach them by the time they're legal adults.
The deadly and destructive wildfire that sped through three northern California counties has grown to 104 square miles on Tuesday, and fire officials say the toll of property loss has climbed to at least 585 homes and other structures destroyed.
At least four firefighters have been injured. One woman died in her home, and several other people remain unaccounted for on Tuesday morning.
For a third morning, people are waking up at evacuation centers, some still wondering if their homes are standing or leveled by the massive fire burning in parts of rural Lake, Napa and Sonoma counties, about 100 miles north of San Francisco.
Another 9,000 buildings are listed as threatened by the Valley Fire, which erupted on Saturday in the hills north of Napa County’s wine-producing region west of Sacramento and has since charred 67,000 acres (3,640 hectares), fire officials said.
The blaze, which is now 15% contained, ranks as the most destructive among scores of wildfires that have ravaged the drought-stricken western United States so far this year.
On September 16 2015 03:02 KwarK wrote: Sexual assault on a minor is obviously an issue, even if the person doing it is also a minor. Girls should not be forced to endure assaults without consequence until the person doing it is old enough to have somehow learned not to. And that's before we even address what allowing teenagers to ignore consent is going to teach them by the time they're legal adults.
Very true, although the potential consequences were wayyy out of line. I'm pretty sure some people were pushing for the kid to have criminal charges brought against him. He should just get a detention and have a serious talk with some parents and teachers. There is no reason to get the police involved at the age of 13 and 14.
On September 16 2015 03:02 KwarK wrote: Sexual assault on a minor is obviously an issue, even if the person doing it is also a minor. Girls should not be forced to endure assaults without consequence until the person doing it is old enough to have somehow learned not to. And that's before we even address what allowing teenagers to ignore consent is going to teach them by the time they're legal adults.
Very true, although the potential consequences were wayyy out of line. I'm pretty sure some people were pushing for the kid to have criminal charges brought against him. He should just get a detention and have a serious talk with some parents and teachers. There is no reason to get the police involved at the age of 13 and 14.
I think the consequences are fine. It's a serious issue and he's old enough to know better. Although I would put more responsibility on the schools to teach kids about consent before they're that old. You don't get to do sexual stuff to children who don't want you to do sexual stuff to them, even if you don't think it's a big deal. You, as the person doing it, are not qualified to decide whether or not it's a big deal and whether or not their non consent should be taken seriously. Even if someone dared you. No means no and a 14 year old should understand that.
Hopefully this will correct the gap shitty sex education regarding consent left in his knowledge.
On September 16 2015 03:02 KwarK wrote: Sexual assault on a minor is obviously an issue, even if the person doing it is also a minor. Girls should not be forced to endure assaults without consequence until the person doing it is old enough to have somehow learned not to. And that's before we even address what allowing teenagers to ignore consent is going to teach them by the time they're legal adults.
Very true, although the potential consequences were wayyy out of line. I'm pretty sure some people were pushing for the kid to have criminal charges brought against him. He should just get a detention and have a serious talk with some parents and teachers. There is no reason to get the police involved at the age of 13 and 14.
I disagree. He likely won't even see the inside of a courtroom or just receive slap on the wrist. But kids shouldn't' be shielded from what could be the real world effects of sexual assault. And girls shouldn't be given the message they need to put up with. Or feel guilty about involving the police.
I think there's a tactful compromise that can be made when dealing with children who are acting inappropriately. I don't think they should be tried as adults (if they're 14 years old), but I think there have to be serious enough consequences- and education- to let them understand that what they did is inappropriate. A 14 year old kissing a 13 year old is indeed technically sexual assault (or assault or whatever) because the 13 year old didn't consent, and the 14 year old needs to learn that such a thing is not appropriate, but I disagree with the idea that his entire future needs to be obliterated due to something he did as a kid. Fortunately, it didn't go down that route (I had read previous articles about that topic that had mentioned people were trying to basically ruin the boy's life because of this kiss), and so I'm okay with the way things turned out.
And yeah, American sexual education needs to be improved greatly.
Not the first time I've seen people express surprise that a crowd of Christians didn't boo someone. I know the type of people (generally) sent to those schools. They are the respectful type, it's what they've been taught. And they do a good job keeping to it.
None of that happened and no one would agreed that is was the appropriate response if it did. He was not charged as an adult. He wasn't even charged with sexual assault. He is charged with the exact same thing as if he got into a fight. His record, like all minors will be sealed at 18.
I don't think that school should avoid calling the police because they are afraid students would be over charged with a crime.
On September 16 2015 04:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I think there's a tactful compromise that can be made when dealing with children who are acting inappropriately. I don't think they should be tried as adults (if they're 14 years old), but I think there have to be serious enough consequences- and education- to let them understand that what they did is inappropriate. A 14 year old kissing a 13 year old is indeed technically sexual assault (or assault or whatever) because the 13 year old didn't consent, and the 14 year old needs to learn that such a thing is not appropriate, but I disagree with the idea that his entire future needs to be obliterated due to something he did as a kid. Fortunately, it didn't go down that route (I had read previous articles about that topic that had mentioned people were trying to basically ruin the boy's life because of this kiss), and so I'm okay with the way things turned out.
And yeah, American sexual education needs to be improved greatly.
You think that if an American adult grabbed a child and forcibly kissed them against their will they'd just get an assault charge before being released to their mother?
I think age has already been taken into account here.
A 13-year-old boy was charged with assault after he reportedly kissed a classmate "against her will".
The pupil from Pikesville, Maryland, allegedly kissed the 14-year-girl as part of a dare at Pikesville Middle School.
School officials took a report of an incident which is said to have taken place during school hours.
According to a police report in the Baltimore Sun, the girl told police on 9 September that he grabbed her by her shirt, pulled her towards him and "open-mouth kissed her with his tongue".
The action taken over the incident appears to have divided opinion in the local area. One local told Fox 10: "I would let the parents get together and discuss it… rather than getting the police involved. Let the school handle it first and then if the parents want to press charges, then there’s nothing else that can be done."
The boy was charged as a juvenile last week and released to his mother, WBFF reported. A spokesman for Baltimore County Public Schools said he also faces school disciplinary action.
This is a step in the right direction combating the war on women in america.
How is this a story?
Charged as a juvenile. And from this bit... "he grabbed her by her shirt, pulled her towards him and "open-mouth kissed her with his tongue"", I'd say it's totally warranted. I feel sorry for the girl... obviously.
Or do people think it's okay for 13 year-olds to sexually-assault 14 year-olds? Or... is this a sexist thing? What? Why is this here?
Completely agree. Also, your username makes the post even better.
On September 16 2015 04:06 Introvert wrote: Not the first time I've seen people express surprise that a crowd of Christians didn't boo someone. I know the type of people (generally) sent to those schools. They are the respectful type, it's what they've been taught. And they do a good job keeping to it.
lol... This is what I was talking about... They didn't do this when Bernie mentioned the ACA.
Although going back and listening/watching, a lot of Ted Cruz's applause lines generally fell pretty flat too.
It's not like I expected them to crucify the guy, I just thought if they booed and laughed at the mention of Obama, that getting called out like that would cause a more vocal response.
The comments from students were pretty interesting too.
Jeb Bush’s super PAC Right to Rise used stock video images from England and Asia for its new video, which seeks to contrast the former Florida governor's optimism about America's future with Donald Trump's pessimism about its present.
The video, which opens with clips of the real estate mogul edited to look sinister, says that Trump is in a “very dark place.” The video, called "Bright," then pivots to the sun rising in a field along with the text “choose a brighter path” as Bush says his message will be an optimistic one.
"If we get a few big things right, we can make lives better for millions of people in this nation where every life matters and everyone has the right to rise,” he says.
The only problem: The sun is rising over a field in Cornwall, England — a clip available for between $19 and $79 on Shutterstock.
The video also shows a clip of the silhouette of a construction worker with text on the screen that says "America is great" — stock footage that was taken from “a multiple story building in Southeast Asia,” according to the website Pond5. The HD version of the clip costs $35.
Ramos said that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency has estimated that it costs $12,500 to deport one person -- meaning that deporting 11 million people would cost around $137 billion.
Now Trump can say something hilarious like "for less than the cost of the Department of Education we can fix our illegal immigration problem in one year!111"
EPT
