I think, if we talked at length, you would find me more Libertarian than Republican. I am all for letting people do just about whatever they want, and I mean whatever, in the privacy of their own home, provided that all are willing participants, and that no one else is adversly affected by those actions. >And to the right it's a constricting rule book to strangle the populace. > >Neither directions suits me friend. > >Timothy Heald >Information Systems Specialist >Overseas Security Advisory Council >U.S. Department of State >571.345.2235 > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Kevin Schmidt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 2:58 PM >To: CF-Community >Subject: Yet another scumbag parent.... > > >Tim, > >To the left, the constitution is a piece of paper that shant be trifled >with. > >Kevin >>Mike, >> >>I have to disagree. What one does with their body is still their own >>business. This would simply be removing responsibility from the individual >>once again. A mandatory military enlistment forces you to act on your >>responsibilities as a citizen. This makes you not have to be responsible >>for your personal actions. >> >>Not to mention how would you enforce something like this? How do you make >>people not have babies? The ideas about birth control mentioned earlier >not >>only violate some people religious freedoms, as Dana mentioned, but they >>force you to put something foreign into your body, something that has been >>linked with cancer. >> >>Will it be forced abortion for those that get pregnant without a license? >>Or will they just be forced to give up the kid? At what age do you begin >to >>implants in girls or vasectomies in boys? Kids are getting pregnant at >ever >>younger ages. >> >>How would you deal with all of that? See this is why I think we need to be >>responsible to ourselves and those that we choose to bring into our circle >>of responsibility (spouses, children). With the welfare state, and social >>programs you make everyone responsible to everyone else. That's not right. >>Where is individualism in that? >> >>Also, as with any federal program, I will always measure it against the >>tenth amendment. Where in the constitution does it give the government the >>right to interfere in someone's life and body like this? I mean I would >>think that the 4th amendment would specifically not allow for this: >> >>"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and >>effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, >>and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or >>affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the >>persons or things to be seized." >> >>Read the first part again: >> >>"The right of the people to be secure in their persons" >> >>'nough said? >> >>Timothy Heald >>Information Systems Specialist >>Overseas Security Advisory Council >>U.S. Department of State >>571.345.2235 >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Haggerty, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 2:32 PM >>To: CF-Community >>Subject: RE: Yet another scumbag parent.... >> >> >>Tim - >> >>Good reasoning, but I have to wonder if legalization would ever stand a >>chance of passage in today's political climate. >> >>The point here is a little broader than simply trying to cut down on the >>number of people going to jail, that's only one of the proposed >>benefits. I think people having to get a license to be a parent is an >>interesting approach to cutting the link between violent crime and child >>abuse. Even if only a percent of a percent of children benefit from such >>a program, it would be worthwhile. >> >>Also, think about the parents you know. How many of them started off >>ready to be parents? In my case, I was a college student who had never >>had to balance a budget, cook a meal more substantial than ramen >>noodles, or keep house. Suddenly, I had to feed and clothe a child. >>That's a big transition. Learning these things was a lot of trial and >>error, and has led to some pretty tough situations. Sometimes the >>experience was overwhelming, and I could see how some people could just >>lose it and go overboard on their kids. A little more knowledge of how >>to deal with the challenges beforehand might go a long way in the more >>tragic cases. And let's face it - 30% of children in America are born >>out of wedlock, it's not like they are necessarily getting these skills >>at home. >> >>Other countries have mandantory military programs where you go on active >>duty for 2 years when you turn 18. This idea, while it may seem like >>something that only benefits a few people, actually serves the same end, >>that the common good can be upheld through vigorous preparation of young >>adults. >> >>M >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Heald, Tim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 1:54 PM >>To: CF-Community >>Subject: RE: Yet another scumbag parent.... >> >> >>That we put away a higher percentage than most nations is probably true, >>but I would take exception to it mainly being violent crime. The last >>time I was paying attention the major reasons for most incarcerations >>were victimless crimes, usually related to drugs. >> >>If we legalized drugs and prostitution than we would no longer have to >>spend all that money on enforcement and punishment, and we would be able >>to tax it like we do cigarettes and alcohol. >> >>Timothy Heald >>Information Systems Specialist >>Overseas Security Advisory Council >>U.S. Department of State >>571.345.2235 >> >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
