Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neil H who wrote (134366)	6/14/2013 10:06:48 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 149317

"This is a bad bill". Nope; just weak. It should have been single payer.... Medicare E. Tell the low-wagers they get subsidies.... People who are not enrolled in a government plan and who do not have affordable care through their employer can be offered a subsidy to help pay the premiums for their plans. These subsidies will be extended to people making up to four times the poverty level – that is up to $47,000 for an individual or up to $94,000 for a family of four. The subsidies, which will be paid directly to the insurance companies, will ensure that a family does not pay more that a certain percentage toward their healthcare costs. examiner.com "Getting the information out to the people by this October’s enrollment dates is going to be both critical and difficult" Now you can help spread the word... free money to buy free insurance to get free care in the Land of the Free.

To: Neil H who wrote (134366)	6/19/2013 10:55:52 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Neil, Obamacare in it's infancy is bound to go through some "teething pains". But that should not be the reason to not have the baby. No bill is perfect from the get go. Already many people are experiencing the benefits from the provisions of the bill that has already been implemented. Even though it has been smooth sailing so far, I am expecting it to hit some road bumps along the way. Almost all of us anticipate that there will be some rewrites. But it is during these re writes that we need to make sure that we do not digress from the fundamental goal which is that " the healthcare of all Americans should not be a for profit enterprise from which only "the haves" will benefit". Right now there is too much noise out there on this issue such as bribes were used to pass this bill etc. etc. we are fortunate that one such voice in the form of Michelle Bachman is going away. I am confident that some serious folks from both sides of the aisle will get together to hammer out improvements.

To: Neil H who wrote (134366)	6/29/2013 12:55:55 PM
From: ChinuSFO	Respond to of 149317

Even pastors and people with a religious bent of mind are changing in the gay marriage issue. I presume that they are feeling guilty of playing God on God's creations. This is interesting since this is an opinion from a pastor from Chris Chritie's state. ======================================== New notions of the 'traditional' family: Opinion By Star-Ledger Guest ColumnistThe Star-Ledge on June 29, 2013 at 6:01 AM, updated June 29, 2013 at 6:05 AM A man places his hand on his partner's back during a prayer service for LGBT families at the Washington National Cathedral on June 26, 2013 in Washington, DC. The Supreme Court of the United States struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and ruled that supporters of California's ban on gay marriage, Proposition 8, could not defend it before the Supreme Court. Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images By Chuck Rush After several centuries of cultural and religious oppression of gays, we are finally ready to treat gay families as normal. It is about time. Traditionalists argue that the nuclear heterosexual family structure is under attack and that it needs all the support it can garner. They worry that supporting gay families will somehow undercut support for the nuclear heterosexual family. The inverse is closer to the truth. In our extended families, there is no such animal as a “traditional” family. There are only blended families. I can’t think of an extended family that doesn’t have a divorce or two that complicates the picture, or a family that doesn’t have a couple who have adopted children, often from other nations. Of the families that attend our church, I am hard-pressed to think of one that doesn’t have interfaith or intercultural challenges. What binds them all together is their common quest to live in meaningful, loving relationships with one another, hopefully helping each other to thrive and find our place at the table. If that is the normative model of the extended family, then gay families don’t so much threaten traditional marriage as they complement and enrich the meaning of family. Last Sunday, our church held a picnic. I spoke to an Italian Catholic father who married a woman from the Philippines he met in medical school. They adopted twin girls from Korea and are raising them as Protestants, largely because we are committed to diversity, with inclusive support and acceptance. Another friend was raised Catholic, married a Jewish woman, had two children and adopted a third, who is African-American. Their extended family includes Irish, Italian and eastern European Ashkenazi wings. With their adopted daughter, they added a black Baptist wing. So when I saw two gay fathers, one from Europe and the other from the United States, adopt two biracial boys from different families, it seemed to me they have more in common with the other blended families around them than difference. All are seeking to ground their children with an identity, a place, a belonging. The process of blending has been much more interesting than the quaint segregation of yesteryear, has it not? All of us want to give the next generation a set of values that can help them find their way and negotiate the moral complexities life will surely throw at them. And all of these children want to be accepted for who they are, with their families helping them to develop a story of how they are uniquely appreciated for who they are. In my Christian tradition, we are taught that God loves all of us and that we are all children of God, first and foremost. Jesus taught us that the Kingdom of God is like a wedding banquet, where we all have our place at the table. Perhaps it was easier to get sidetracked with the argument for the traditional family back when we lived in County Cork or West Texas and were surrounded by people like us, pretty much from the same ethnic background with the same religious and cultural sensibilities. But we haven’t been living that way for quite a long time. And the process of blending has been much more interesting than the quaint segregation of yesteryear, has it not? Finally, we have a new normal for a new era. We are all blended, some just more than others. This is an era when we can openly acknowledge that being a regularly recurring deviation from the biological norm does not make you morally deviant. You are normal and different. Let’s figure out how to make people feel included without having the expectation that they will change to become just like us. To do it, we will need tradition more than ever. We will need the traditional values of gratitude for the uniqueness of each person and generosity that reaches out to include people who are different. We will need the traditional values of compassion to meet others where they are, and love that helps them to bloom from within. We will need the traditional value of reconciliation that softens the very real edges of difference to work toward an extended family we can all call home. We will need a vision of peace where we are all normal, blended and a work in progress. Blended, normal and different. That is the world we live in. It is about time our social and spiritual values catch up to address the reality of where we are. The Rev. Chuck Rush is senior pastor of Christ Church in Summit. blog.nj.com