Next Four Years: no policy is too right-wing

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

The new Republican reality: no policy is too right-wing
Conservative pipedreams are suddenly part of America's mainstream.

Andrew Gumbel reports from Los Angeles
08 November 2004

Where should the United States invade next? Iran, Syria, or Cuba? Will George Bush merely slash taxes on the rich even further in his second term, or will he have the courage to abolish income tax altogether? Will gay marriage simply be outlawed state by state, or will a much-threatened constitutional amendment come into being?

These might once have been idle questions for conservative Washington think-tanks. But now, with President Bush safely re-elected for another four years and increased Republican majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives, such radical right-wing notions are no longer pipedreams. They are the active stuff of policy discussion.

Grass-roots conservatives, many of them religious fundamentalists who paved the way for President Bush's victory in the suburbs and the rural heartland, are positively salivating at the prospect of having their efforts rewarded.

"I don't know if we're going to abolish the prescription drug benefit [for senior citizens], but we'd like to. It's just an expansion of government," the Republican strategist and direct-mail guru Richard Viguerie said over the weekend. "We'd like to see oil and gas exploration increased in the continental United States. We want a constitutional amendment on marriage. We want the culture of life expanded."

This wish list and others like it now face little or no opposition in Congress, in the White House or - as the federal bench is increasingly filled with ideological conservatives - the courts. The rest of the world may have thought the first four years of Mr Bush's presidency were quite radical enough, but they could turn out to be just the hors d'oeuvre to a radical-right beanfeast.

The New York Times reported yesterday that Vice-President Dick Cheney was supporting the idea of abolishing income tax and replacing it with a flat national sales tax - a highly regressive notion that would effectively shift the tax burden drastically away from the rich to the dwindling middle class and the working poor.

In Cuban exile circles in Miami, meanwhile, hardline anti-Castro leaders are getting very excited by a pledge President Bush made in one of his last campaign appearances in Florida to liberate their homeland. Career diplomats at the State Department are getting concerned this might be an indication that military intervention - the first since President Kennedy's disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 - might be seriously contemplated.

State Department stalwarts are getting equally alarmed at the prospect - yet to be confirmed - that Colin Powell will depart his post as Secretary of State and open the door to a neo-conservative takeover of foreign and national security policy.

A senior State Department official, writing anonymously in the online magazine Salon.com last month, laid out a stark future for US policy in the Middle East in a second Bush term, the first part of which appears to be close to fruition already. "The neo-cons, working in tandem with a similar staff in the office of Prime Minister Sharon of Israel, have a three-part agenda for the first part of Bush's second term," he wrote. "First, oust Yasser Arafat; second, overthrow the secular Baathist al-Assad dictatorship in Syria; and, third, eliminate, one way or another, Iran's nuclear facilities."

The Republicans' domestic agenda is likely to contemplate the further delegation of social services to religious charities, the further concentration of media ownership in a few corporate, largely pro-Republican hands, further moves to restrict or even outlaw abortion, restrictions on the civil rights of gay couples (for example, their right to bequeath property to each other) and increasing challenges to Darwinian evolution in school classrooms.

Some of the new faces in the Senate gave a flavour of the kind of politics we can expect out of Washington in the next political cycle. Tom Coburn, newly elected Senator from Oklahoma, is on record saying he thinks doctors who perform abortions should be executed. (So much for the "culture of life" behind the anti-abortion movement.) Jim DeMint of South Carolina said during his campaign that homosexuals and unmarried pregnant women should not be allowed to teach in public schools.

Democrats and many Independents are appalled at the prospects ahead. Since moderation seems unlikely in the immediate future, some of them are left hoping the Republicans will overreach so drastically that it will create a large political backlash.

California: Three strikes and jail for life

Petty criminals who steal a slice of pizza or a pack of batteries are still liable to be sentenced to 25 years to life under a notoriously draconian piece of legislation known as California's Three Strikes law. First introduced in 1994, it was sold to the public as a way of ensuring that violent repeat offenders are kept out of harm's way. But it rapidly became clear that the law applied to offenders of almost any kind. As a result, thousands of shoplifters, welfare frauds and other small-time offenders found themselves on the receiving end of a judicial sledgehammer.

A modest proposal to amend the law and exempt the pizza-stealers was well on its way to success at the polls last Tuesday until a coalition of prosecutors and prison guards managed to talk Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and four former governors into campaigning to defeat the measure. The airwaves were bombarded with adverts falsely claiming that thousands of violent offenders would be released if the ballot initiative passed. Result: Three Strikes will stand unamended for the foreseeable future.

Arizona: Immigration

Arizona voters resoundingly endorsed a ballot initiative requiring immigrants to show proof of citizenship when seeking government benefits - potentially barring all foreigners from the public schools and health programmes.

Quite what the initiative known as Proposition 200 means is not clear because its language is vague, but already it has spooked the state's large Latino population, most of whom did not vote. Attendance at public pre-schools in Phoenix has already dropped - numbers at one visited by a reporter dropped from 20 to just 2 at the end of last week.

Supporters of Prop. 200 say it is time to crack down on illegal immigration. (This is a state where ranchers take pot shots at Mexicans sneaking across the border.) Statistics show undocumented workers pay more into the system in taxes than they take out of it. Opponents hope they can strike the measure down in court before it spreads to other states. A slightly less draconian measure was passed in 1994 in California but later deemed unconstitutional.

Oklahoma: Death penalty for abortion doctors

Widely seen as the kookiest candidate in the recent election, Oklahoma's new Senator-elect Tom Coburn is so conservative it actually pains him to request federal money for his home state - usually the number one job of any elected representative in Washington.

On his campaign, he advocated the death penalty for abortionists and "other people who take life" - not, presumably, executioners or US military personnel in Iraq. He loves guns so much that after the Columbine High School shootings in 1999 - when he was a Congressman - he said he saw nothing wrong with people having access to bazookas and using them "in a limited way". And he loathes homosexuals. "The gay community has infiltrated the very centres of power in every area across this country, and they wield extreme power," he said. "That agenda is the greatest threat to our freedom we face today. Why do you think we see the rationalisation for abortion and multiple sexual partners? That's a gay agenda." Interestingly, Coburn is a doctor - an obstetrician, to be exact, who once admitted sterilising a 20-year-old woman without her written consent.

Kentucky: The terrorists are out to get me

The republican Senator Jim Bunning achieved re-election by a hair, but not before spooking many of his constituents into thinking he had lost his marbles.

He insists that all rumours about Alzheimer's or another degenerative disease are nonsense. One can be forgiven, though, for thinking him a touch paranoid for insisting on a massive security detail in the less than high-profile Bluegrass State. ("There may be strangers among us," he said a few months ago, hinting that al-Qa'ida was out to get him.)

Ditto his assertion - entirely unsupported by the facts - that campaigners loyal to his Democratic rival beat up his wife until she was "black and blue". The Washington rumour mill suggests that, having won re-election, Senator Bunning - a former baseball star - may now quietly retire.

Nationwide: Replace income tax with a levy on sales

Extreme policy ideas begin in the White House itself. Dick Cheney, the Vice-President, was reported yesterday to favour the kind of tax reforms that would make even the most radical fiscal wonk blush.

Mr Cheney is said to be among a powerful lobby with the President's ear whose recommendations include the abolition of income tax, the cornerstone of a progressive tax policy. In its place would come a national sales tax, in effect replacing a tax on income with a levy on consumption.

The idea that a Bush administration would use the tax system to favour the rich is hardly an outlandish one. Much pre-election debate centred on tax cuts implemented during his first term, which were heavily weighted towards the better-off.

Nor would he be the first leader to try to tip the balance of taxation from direct to indirect levies: Margaret Thatcher cut income tax and raised value-added tax.

But the latest proposals would be something else entirely, and a sign that the election victory has given Mr Bush the mandate to rip up the rule book and start again when raising revenue.

Mr Cheney's is not, however, the only voice advising the President on this subject.

Creationists rule in Kansas, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania

The last time there was a conservative majority on the Kansas state school board in 1999, they voted to change the science curriculum and present Darwinian evolution as just one theory among many to account for the bio-diversity of the planet.

Back then, the move provoked national ridicule, led to a defeat for the conservatives at the next school board election and eventually caused their ruling to be reversed.

That, though, was before the conservative tidal wave heralded by the re-election of President George Bush. Now the creationists are back in the majority in Kansas and have every intention of re-opening the debate sometime in the next nine months, according to local newspapers.

And Charles "it's only a theory!" Darwin appears to be under siege in other parts of the country too.

In the small town of Grantsburg, Wisconsin, the school board just voted to introduce a very similar change in biology teaching. The local schools superintendnent, Joni Burgin, argues the science curriculum "should not be totally inclusive of just one scientific theory".

More than 300 biology and religious studies teachers have written to the board to protest, so far without result.

In Dover, Pennsylvania, the school board last week approved the teaching of a newish twist on creationism called "intelligent design" - a theory that does not entirely reject Darwin but says the process of evolution and natural selection is too complex and too wondrous to have occurred without the guiding hand of a divine force.

The evolution debate has never entirely gone away in the American heartland, but until very recently, it was deemed too ludicrous to make its way into public school rooms.

The notorious Scopes monkey trial in 1925 turned the United States into a global laughing-stock that has haunted public administrators ever since.

Two things have now changed, however. First, religious fundamentalists are succeeding in making their influence felt on school boards across the nation - everywhere from Colorado Springs in Colorado, to Tulsa, Oklahoma, to the rural Midwest (not only Wisconsin but also Ohio).

Secondly, hardline creationists are now taking a back seat to the proponents of "intelligent design", or ID, which can be seen as a paradoxical form of evolution within the creationist movement.

Unlike the cruder, God-made-the-world-in-six-days brigade, ID proponents are trained scientists with degrees from respectable universities. They do not so much challenge Darwin as chip away at him piece by piece.

South Carolina: Ban gay teachers homosexuals

South Carolina's new senator-elect, Jim DeMint, runs only a short distance behind Tom Coburn when it comes to extreme positions.

"If a person is a practising homosexual, they should not be teaching in our schools," he said during a televised campaign debate a month before the election. Two days later, he told a newspaper reporter he didn't think pregnant single women who live with their boyfriends should be allowed to teach either.

The comments created a furore and led to Republican aides begging him to tone down his rhetoric. DeMint agreed not to repeat them and told subsequent interviewers that the issue was one for local school boards, not the US Senate. But he refused to retract his remarks, much less apologise.

He is also an advocate of a flat sales tax in place of income tax, something that might endear him to certain fiscal radicals in the new Bush administration.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[Gravitymaster 0]

Yawn... another Left-wing "I can't get over the fact Kerry lost, the sky is falling" angry rant. Get over it already.

[unformed 0]

And the religous right claims they're being persecuted.


But think about the children .... we're saving their souls!

This ad space for sale.

[TheAnvil 0]

Andrew Gumbel is a dumbass.

If he supports illegal immigration, he should come out and say so. If he's against a flat tax or national retail sales tax, then he should try and debate its merits and detractors vice insinuate it's wacky. If he supports the human rights abuses currently happening in Syria, then he should come out and say so.

He should also use a spell checker and take a writing course. This article has no point other than to whine.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[tkhayes 140]

Oh please! Actually a good list of factual cases fromt he recent news and headlines.

Do you REALLY want kids to learn creationism in science class instead of the valid data that we have in front of us for the past 5 million years of history. DO you really believe that we were 'created' by a divine hand?

This is scary shit - just the start. Question is, how much damage can they do in 4 years? I am afraid quite a bit.

-invade other muslim countries,
-change the education system and set it back 200 years
-spend us into oblivion expecting 'divine intervention' to take care of us?
-undo ANY hint of women's rights in this country, which makes us look more like the Taliban every day. What are we going to do - FORCE women to have babies?

No wonder people are leaving.

The best we can hope for is that they run the country so far into the ground that the republican party is annihilated in the next election. Don't laugh, it happened in Canada, and y'know what? Canada is no worse off.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Oh please! Actually a good list of factual cases fromt he recent news and headlines.

Do you REALLY want kids to learn creationism in science class instead of the valid data that we have in front of us for the past 5 million years of history. DO you really believe that we were 'created' by a divine hand?

No, actually I'd prefer that the public school system be abolished entirely and parents given the choice of sending children to whatever school they choose. I don't have a problem with the govt. setting a basic standard for the hard siences, ie. math, english etc. But if a parent wants to send their kids to a school that teaches more to the parents values, what wrong with that?

Quote

This is scary shit - just the start. Question is, how much damage can they do in 4 years? I am afraid quite a bit.

-invade other muslim countries,

You have a problem with denying Iran nuclear capabilities?

Quote

-change the education system and set it back 200 years

See above.

Quote

-spend us into oblivion expecting 'divine intervention' to take care of us?

Don't know where the idea of divine intervention comes in but I do agree we need to make a major shift in curtailing spending.

Quote

-undo ANY hint of women's rights in this country, which makes us look more like the Taliban every day. What are we going to do - FORCE women to have babies?

More hysteria. Nobody is going to overturn Roe Vs Wade. This was just an election year scare the Libs espouse every election cycle.

Quote

No wonder people are leaving.

Instead of staying and working for change? Hope the door doesn't hit them in the ass.

Quote

The best we can hope for is that they run the country so far into the ground that the republican party is annihilated in the next election. Don't laugh, it happened in Canada, and y'know what? Canada is no worse off.

Perhaps divine intervention will occur. There's always hope!

[jakee 1,262]

Quote

I don't have a problem with the govt. setting a basic standard for the hard siences, ie. math, english etc. But if a parent wants to send their kids to a school that teaches more to the parents values, what wrong with that?

English isn't a 'sience'. Biology is.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[SkyDekker 1,147]

Quote

But if a parent wants to send their kids to a school that teaches more to the parents values, what wrong with that?

what would your answer be if it is an extreme Muslim school?

[wmw999 2,150]

Quote

setting a basic standard for the hard siences, ie. math, english etc. But if a parent wants to send their kids to a school that teaches more to the parents values, what wrong with that?

Somehow I think the cost of enforcing standards (or would they just be suggestions?) for millions of individual parents would exceed that of certifying teachers. Or are you ignoring the millions of parents who would just ignore suggestions?

The more people who have a basic education, the better society as a whole is; it's one of the tools to raise yourself above where you started.

Paying for schools is not part of using them. Paying for them is to ensure that as many future adults as possible have a fairly consistent education. Using them is up to each parent. I sent my son to private schools starting in 7th grade; they fit his needs better, and we had the ability. If we hadn't had the ability, the amount I pay in school taxes would not have helped most likely. And if we hadn't had the ability, we would have found some other way to overcome the issues that had us switch to a private school.

Nothing wrong with that. No one from the government came and made us send our son to public schools.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[unformed 0]

Quote

Quote

But if a parent wants to send their kids to a school that teaches more to the parents values, what wrong with that?

what would your answer be if it is an extreme Muslim school?

If it's a private school ... it doesn't matter. Parents can already send their kids to various cult-like schools, baording schools with extreme punishments ..... private schools have absolutely nothing to do with public schools.

This ad space for sale.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

But if a parent wants to send their kids to a school that teaches more to the parents values, what wrong with that?

what would your answer be if it is an extreme Muslim school?

My answer would be the same. As long as the school is meeting "Academic Standards" I have no problem with their values. On the other hand if what you mean by extreme, is they are teaching hate, then obviously any reasonable person would have a problem with that. Did you really need to ask?

[dreamsville 0]

Some of you may recall a reporter asking Al Gore prior to the LAST presidential election about why he sends his kid to St. Albans, a well known private school in the District. His response was "Leave my family out of this!".

While people have a right to make private choices, it underscores an opportunity that a lot of folks want for their kids. School choice is born of the notion that if repeated infusions of cash don't work, maybe competition with or within the public education system will work. Nothing motivates like an incentive or hope.

I am grateful to my parents and those of my school classmates who made sacrifices. While I am not Catholic (never attended Parochial school), I never attended public school at any time in my life, not including the fact that Cornell University received New York state and Fed funding and University of Michigan received state dollars. It made a difference, with smaller class sizes and other opportunities. Anyone who can't understand why DC residents want their kids to have better opportunities to learn shouldn't have to look very far for examples that explain why.
|

I don't drink during the day, so I don't know what it is about this airline. I keep falling out the door of the plane.

Harry, FB #4143

[tkhayes 140]

Quote

You have a problem with denying Iran nuclear capabilities?

you have a problem with Iran defending its own borders from a US attack?

I believe ANY country has the right to defend itself.

In Iraq, we have conveniently starting calling the insurgents 'terrorists' nowadays, makes it easier to kill them, when in fact, they probabyl have/had nothing to do with any level of terrorism, they just want us out and their country back.

fundamentally, there is nothing worng with that.

Telling the world that 'we are doing it for their own good' sounds a lot like the Crusades - too much like the Crusades.

We DO NOT have the right to invade another country to disarm them, unless they attack us, threaten us with the same attack, or attack other innocents that request our help.

All I have seen out of Iran is the likelihood that they are building nuclear weapons. No threat of any use of same, nor any threat against any other country.

What would you say if the rest of the world told us to 'disarm or else', given that we have more nuclear weapons than anyone, we obviously are willing to invade countries that are of no threat, and we appear to be on a Crusdae to change the world to Christianity?

I hope Iran does not use them, but I hope they stand their ground with the right to build them (as long as we continue to do the same.....)

The USA can be so hypocritical sometimes.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

But if a parent wants to send their kids to a school that teaches more to the parents values, what wrong with that?

what would your answer be if it is an extreme Muslim school?

And the schools today aren't more social indoctrination camps than education centers? How about if we go back to teaching the damn basics instead of all the crap that's pushed on them now?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DrunkMonkey 0]

There was a bit on the Today Show, on the Southern Baptist Convention asshats. These sanctimonious assholes think they're the only reason King Goerge is back at 1600 Pennsylvania for another 4.

They openly stated that since they elected him, they expect a laundry list of things to happen:

-Stack the federal judiciary with Born-Agains.
-Replace at least 3 Supreme Court Justices with Anti-Choice types
-Expand sending my Tax dollars to religious charities, so they can dangle vital charity work in fron of the poor, the price being coerced conversion...
-The further erosion of personal liberties, because, GOD FORBID, someone might be doing something that doesn't fit into their narrow-minded worldview, which makes Leviticus seem like the guidebook for a Hippie commune...

Where's my AR-15? These people need "EXPRESS" stamped on their tickets to see the almighty...

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

I hope Iran does not use them, but I hope they stand their ground with the right to build them (as long as we continue to do the same.....)

The USA can be so hypocritical sometimes.

Residents in Utah were just notified that we are about to restart underground testing of nukes.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

But if a parent wants to send their kids to a school that teaches more to the parents values, what wrong with that?

what would your answer be if it is an extreme Muslim school?

And the schools today aren't more social indoctrination camps than education centers? How about if we go back to teaching the damn basics instead of all the crap that's pushed on them now?

I'm sorry - what crap would that be? I have a few friends I would like to call tonight to let them know they are pushing crap onto their students.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

setting a basic standard for the hard siences, ie. math, english etc. But if a parent wants to send their kids to a school that teaches more to the parents values, what wrong with that?

Quote

Somehow I think the cost of enforcing standards (or would they just be suggestions?) for millions of individual parents would exceed that of certifying teachers. Or are you ignoring the millions of parents who would just ignore suggestions?

Not really sure what you are saying here but let me clarify. I believe it is OK for the govt. to set academic standards for schools. Ensuring the standards are being met wouldn't seem to be any more difficult than the methods currently used ie. academic tests, quarterly tests etc.

Quote

The more people who have a basic education, the better society as a whole is; it's one of the tools to raise yourself above where you started.

Of course. My problem is the indoctrination and poor academic standards which pass for acceptable in the govt. run schools. Lets face the truth, they are a miserable failure.

Quote

Paying for schools is not part of using them. Paying for them is to ensure that as many future adults as possible have a fairly consistent education.

I disagree, educational goal should be to ensure each person has the "best" possible education. I think we can all agree this has been a failure and no matter how much money we throw at the problem, it never seems to improve. Why continue along a hopeless path?

Quote

Using them is up to each parent. I sent my son to private schools starting in 7th grade; they fit his needs better, and we had the ability. If we hadn't had the ability, the amount I pay in school taxes would not have helped most likely. And if we hadn't had the ability, we would have found some other way to overcome the issues that had us switch to a private school.

Nothing wrong with that. No one from the government came and made us send our son to public schools.

Wendy W.

Nor should they force you to send your child to public school. This leads back to the debate about how funding private schools should be done and I'm not getting into that issue. The bottom line is something radical has to be done. I view the quality of the education of our children to be the greatest challenge of the 21st Century. I do not believe we are on the right path to correct it, so why do people get so upset whena change is proposed. IMO it can't get too much worse.

• Quote

[jdhill 0]

Quote

we appear to be on a Crusdae to change the world to Christianity

Pure BS... We (the US or anyone else in the Coalition) are in no way trying to convert anyone to any religion. The "holy war" is being waged by muslim extremists.

Quote

In Iraq, we have conveniently starting calling the insurgents 'terrorists' nowadays, makes it easier to kill them, when in fact, they probabyl have/had nothing to do with any level of terrorism, they just want us out and their country back.

There are both in Iraq, insurgents fighting against the coalition and interm government, and foreign terrorist, that are fighting against the coalition and interm government... Is there anything wrong with the insurgents? Well I think they should work towards rebuilding instead of destroying their country, but fundimentally, no... they are fighting for what they think is best for them... but there is not anything wrong with their government working to put them down, and nothing wrong with the coalition assisting in that.

Is there anything wrong with the terrorists? Yes, and they should be cut out like any other cancer.

Quote

I believe ANY country has the right to defend itself.

I would expect any country to defend itself, which would include not provoking invasion... I doubt we will invade Iran... the war in Iraq is a continuation of the 91 war. Saddam never upheld his obligations of the cease fire, and there has not been any sustained period since '91 without hosilities between the US and Iraq. Saying the Iraq was not a threat to US interests is not seeing the forest for the trees.

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[SkyDekker 1,147]

Quote

On the other hand if what you mean by extreme, is they are teaching hate, then obviously any reasonable person would have a problem with that. Did you really need to ask?

I ask because in Catholic school I was told all other religions were wrong and Catholicism was the only true religion. I was told it would be preferable if I interacted with at least Christian but preferable Catholic people mainly.....pretty close to teaching hate.

It seems that we are often accepting of those things when we agree with the statements made. Personally I agree with a poster above. Schools should be for teaching academics, not indoctrination of belief, political, religous etc.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

You have a problem with denying Iran nuclear capabilities?

you have a problem with Iran defending its own borders from a US attack?

I believe ANY country has the right to defend itself.

In Iraq, we have conveniently starting calling the insurgents 'terrorists' nowadays, makes it easier to kill them, when in fact, they probabyl have/had nothing to do with any level of terrorism, they just want us out and their country back.

fundamentally, there is nothing worng with that.

Telling the world that 'we are doing it for their own good' sounds a lot like the Crusades - too much like the Crusades.

We DO NOT have the right to invade another country to disarm them, unless they attack us, threaten us with the same attack, or attack other innocents that request our help.

All I have seen out of Iran is the likelihood that they are building nuclear weapons. No threat of any use of same, nor any threat against any other country.

What would you say if the rest of the world told us to 'disarm or else', given that we have more nuclear weapons than anyone, we obviously are willing to invade countries that are of no threat, and we appear to be on a Crusdae to change the world to Christianity?

I hope Iran does not use them, but I hope they stand their ground with the right to build them (as long as we continue to do the same.....)

The USA can be so hypocritical sometimes.

What if you are wrong?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

On the other hand if what you mean by extreme, is they are teaching hate, then obviously any reasonable person would have a problem with that. Did you really need to ask?

Quote

I ask because in Catholic school I was told all other religions were wrong and Catholicism was the only true religion. I was told it would be preferable if I interacted with at least Christian but preferable Catholic people mainly.....pretty close to teaching hate.

Thats a long way from preaching hate. Look at it this way, your education was good enough that you are able to think for yourself and realise not all you were taught was correct.

Quote

It seems that we are often accepting of those things when we agree with the statements made. Personally I agree with a poster above. Schools should be for teaching academics, not indoctrination of belief, political, religous etc.

We couldn't agree more on this point.

• Quote

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

What if you are wrong?

Well, then you should shoot everyone that looks at you funny, because they could stab you in the back when you are not looking. That is being proactive on your own safety, isn't it?

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

What if you are wrong?

Well, then you should shoot everyone that looks at you funny, because they could stab you in the back when you are not looking. That is being proactive on your own safety, isn't it?

Yeah, lets let Iran go ahead and build nuclear reactors. After all, we have their word they won't build a bomb. Just because No. Korea lied to us and we are stuck with a precarious situation there doesn't mean Iran would do the same. I'm sure Pakistan is in full compliance with the IAEA too.

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Yeah, lets let Iran go ahead and build nuclear reactors. After all, we have their word they won't build a bomb. Just because No. Korea lied to us and we are stuck with a precarious situation there doesn't mean Iran would do the same. I'm sure Pakistan is in full compliance with the IAEA too.

And we have the resources to be the police of the world? Where do you expect to get all these troops and monies to protect us from such evil countries that just want to be on the same scale as us? Wait a minute! Maybe we could put together an organization of countries united against such things - now, I wonder where we could get one of those?

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....