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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (793206)	7/2/2014 8:38:48 PM
From: combjelly	2 Recommendations Recommended By bentway tejek Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1576881

What is the lie, Tenchu? Ok, back when we had a draft, the only ones who got approved as a conscientious objector were Christians. Prior to 1948, that was even the standard, no other need apply. That is a fact. Want to discriminate against LGBTs? It is ok if you are a Christian. Obama wants to issue an executive order disallowing government contractors from discrimating against LGBTs. Guess what group demand they should be exempt? How many official religious holidays are not Christian? Laws take Sundays into account if they involve a day in the week. When I was growing up, Texas had blue laws. Most are gone, but not all. That is just a few. I know, I know. Y'all like to style yourselves as a group who is persecuted and demeaned. In reality, what is happening is y'all just don't get your way all the time. That isn't persecution, it is life for everyone else. You have argued that a person's religious beliefs have primacy over the law. But the only beliefs you see are valid are Christian. All others are "silly". Like I said, a massive sense of entitlement. I don't mind exemptions in certain cases for things of conscious. But religion shouldn't be a factor. Of course, that would be an assault on Christians, wouldn't it?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (793206)	7/3/2014 1:44:36 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576881

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (793206)	7/3/2014 1:53:36 AM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1576881

Missouri Governor Vetoes Abortion Waiting Period BECAUSE IT HAS NO EXCEPTION FOR CASES OF RAPE OR INCEST By Newser Editors and Wire Services newser.com Posted Jul 2, 2014 2:08 PM CDT (NEWSER) – Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon today vetoed legislation that would have required a 72-hour waiting period for women seeking abortions. The Democratic governor said he vetoed the bill because it didn't include an exception for rape and incest victims, and hence showed "a callous disregard for women who find themselves in horrific circumstances." The measure would've made Missouri just the third state to require a 72-hour waiting period, along with South Dakota and Utah. Utah's law includes an exception for rape and incest victims, and people under age 14. Missouri currently requires a 24-hour wait between when a woman consults a physician and receives an abortion. The Missouri House approved the legislation with enough votes to override a veto. The Senate was one vote short of a supermajority.