jundp

If you got rid of all the peeps on here that took pot shots at one another, you might have a total of six posters tops in this forum. It's what we do. We wake up, check out the new post and threads and take a go at each other. It's all in good fun for the most part.

Good fun?

Since when was insulting each other and looking idiotic considered good fun? There's rarely any actual debate that happens because people are too busy saying "Like omgz0rz you are so wrong you stupid [insert over-used insult here]!!!!!1111"

*sigh*

1. Hawaii is a US state and thus not a "risk"

2. US Virgin Islands, Guam, and Puerto Rico are US Territories, but they could pose a slight risk as far as wedding goes, especially if you have to leave the US to get there/back

3. If you don't have the money for the destination wedding in Hawaii, you could always plan the cruise as a second honeymoon once AP or GC has been received.

Welcome to the P & R forum.

P&R means "resorting to the antics of whiny children"? I mean, I guess in the real world politics and religion does lead to that. So ridiculous. It's as if calling names suddenly elevates one to a higher status. Both sides who throw out these names look ignorant because no one fits the stereotypes completely here (IMHO).

You know what I love about VJ? It's a site filled with adults who respect each other and have the ability to debate in a reasonable, intelligent manner. It's not a place where people (who are presumably from other countries or in relationships with people from other countries) of diverse backgrounds lob insults at each other and resort to name calling: "You're a commie lib" "NO you're a right wing nut!" It's such an awesome environment in which to ...

WAIT A MINUTE!!!!

According to the link I posted above, you aren't required to have a legal civil union, if you are a same-sex couple. You must show that you are in a committed relationship, for at least 12 months prior to applying for a visa to Australia. But, the simple answer is "yes, Australia recognizes same-sex relationships for the purpose of immigration."

So what you're saying is, if we got married in New York, we'd be able to move back to Australia together (even though she's a US Citizen) because Australia recognises same sex marriages federally?

I found this: Australian Immigration

Relationship

You and your partner must have been in a de facto relationship for the entire 12 months immediately prior to lodging your application.

See: One-Year Relationship Requirement

The 12-month relationship requirement may be waived if one of the following situations applies:

you can demonstrate compelling and compassionate circumstances, such as if you have children with your partner.

all the following circumstances apply:

your partner is, or was, the holder of a permanent humanitarian visa

prior to their permanent humanitarian visa being granted, you were in a relationship with your partner that meets the requirements of a de facto relationship

the department was informed of this before the permanent humanitarian visa was granted.

You and your partner must show a mutual commitment to a shared life to the exclusion of all others. You and your partner must be living together or, if not, any separation must be only temporary. You must also have a genuine and continuing relationship with your partner.

FWIW, I don't think smoking should be allowed in restaurants or bars. It's not about "choice," it's about health. If you want to slowly kill yourself, awesome -- but don't expose others to your nasty habit.

smoker. I don't have a problem with smoking or people who smoke, but it is proven to cause a myriad of health problems, both in the smokers and in those who come in contact with the smoke, so I do have a problem when their choice affects the health of others.

Smoking sucks and second-hand smoke kills.

Bars are overcrowded and expensive.

I'd rather have friends over or go to a friend's house, drink wine or beer that costs less for the bottle/six pack than one drink at a bar, not deal with stinky people who smoke (or just stinky people), obnoxious patrons (male and female), and have more fun in the process.

I realize this has nothing to do with the OP.

As for Seattle, I've lived here 10 years and I really like it. But I'm not an extremist, and I don't own a small business, I don't hug trees (contrary to what Charles thinks), and I belong to an awesome charity organization. My friends are pretty in-the-middle, too.

I will say it's a standing joke here that people will protest just about anything, usually without any real understanding of that which they protest

This article is from humanevents.com "the leading conservative media since 1944." Thus, why is anyone surprised that it's a one-sided argument?

Media doesn't equal honest, unbiased reporting. It equals propaganda, whether it's from the left or the right. I'm not entirely sure there's any real journalism left today.

The term of art is "Limousine Liberals". They give all their money to save the trees and attend garden parties in the woods rather than give to charities and work in the soup kitchens.

Hmmm...interesting. The majority of people I know in the Seattle area who would be called "liberal" or "Commie" according to the definitions here on VJ are definitely NOT yuppies. And they are incredibly generous with their time, talents, and money when it comes to charity.

But I suppose it's better to have a narrowly painted POV to fit the stereotype. God forbid there are people who are a mix of conservative and liberal values. And btw, I've never heard of a "garden party in the woods."

I hate Texas.

I went to public school, all of my siblings went to public school, my son went to public school, and many of my colleagues teach in public school - no sex ed. My daughter went to a Catholic school and got sex ed (irony?).

I think that in America there is absolutely no excuse for having unprotected sex, especially if you are in a demographic at high risk of infection.

#######?

The only turn the other cheek religion that came into this country in it's early days is Quaker, Mennonite, and Amish...which are all cut from the same branch.

Not sure what country you were raised in, but it's never been that way in the US. Read up on US history.

Pssst....Quaker, Amish, and Mennonite are all Christian...

communist lib yuppies.

contradictory

Hopefully it's a dreadful one for a worthless piece of #######.

You are so incredibly classy...

First of all it is my favorite thing in life to do things with my family, it is what makes me happy. I am not too happy without them.

My family IS my investment portfolio. I cannot do anything better with money than invest it in them.

All I can say is...make your family your pleasure and joy and you will always be happy.

Amen, Gary!

This is actually becoming common here in the states. Forced blood tests on the spot if you are 'suspected' of MAYBE drinking a little and driving. Breathalyzers aren't cutting it anymore they think, so now they'll get a warrant from a judge allowing the cops to take your blood at that moment.... but hey, it's for the "greater good," right?

Two things:

1. The fourth amendment allows for a warrant if probable cause is shown. So I don't see how this is breaking the fourth amendment. However, that being said, I am confused about how a judge will grant a warrant 'on the spot' if you are pulled over and suspected of drinking?

2. If you are CHOOSING to drink and drive, then you are susceptible to the laws regarding drinking and driving. Therefore, don't drive while drunk.

ETA: I just looked it up and see that a judge is on-site at the check points, so that answers my question about a warrant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJJCBFZQhAI

Fantastic!

on the first point, Obamacare takes that "choice" you are referring to away....

on the second point, I wake up, I go to work, I come home, I obey the rules of the road, i go to the store when i need to, i attend shows/games, etc. when i want to..... In all of my doing that though, I make sure that I don't bother anyone, I keep to myself and whomever I'm with, and we go about our business. We won't interfere with anyone, get in their way, am courteous when need be, etc. All without the help of the government telling me what to do and not to do because that was the way I was raised. I'm a good ole Southern boy at heart who has manners and is respectful in public, which is a lot more than I can say for the half-wit pieces of ####### who have moved into this city in the last decade.

Whether or not you are "bothering someone" has no bearing on whether or not you are interacting with others and affecting their lives. Having manners or being polite makes no difference. It is naive (or dangerous, depending on the situation) to pretend that the actions we all take have no bearing on others. That isn't NWO. That's life in a society.

"Obamacare" isn't going track down every individual and force them to go to the doctor, get a physical, or wear a implant that shows where each person is every day. What it would do is offer universal health care that many people currently cannot afford. And if they CHOOSE to partake in that universal healthcare, then they MAY have to undergo preventative health care. That is not trampling on their liberty. Because, by choosing to take part in universal health care, they are saying they will follow the 'rules of the road' so to speak.

Dude, seriously?

Yes, we are 'global citizens.' We live in a world that is (figuratively) growing smaller and more inter-dependent. We do not exist in a vacuum where our actions only reflect back on ourselves. There's nothing New World Order about it.

Requiring people to have yearly physicals is hardly tramping on their liberty. If those same people want health care (which is a CHOICE), then they have the personal responsibility to partake in preventative health care as active members of the society in which they CHOOSE to live. They can opt to not have health coverage. And thusly, they can avoid taking any preventative health care measures.

You have a skewed view of society. How on earth do you expect to live, interact, work, and sustain yourself in a society in which you don't bear any responsibility at all for others?

FWIW, I have a grasp of constitutional issues, state's rights, federal law, and history. I'm also a member of a website meant for people with SO's from other countries, so the idea of being global citizens shouldn't be a foreign one here (ha! "foreign").

Also: Virginia and Montana are not "two total opposites." Just saying.

As far as 'social responsibility' goes, screw that. I'm no more responsible for you, than you are for me. If I leave you alone, don't touch you, don't interact with you, then no one should demand anything from me.

You seem like a very bitter person who has an unrealistic view of the world if you truly believe that we, as global citizens, bear no social responsibility.

Do you live in a cave in the wilderness? You keep talking about "choice" but what you fail to understand that living in America is a choice as well. Living in ANY society is a choice. And every single action you take has a reaction that affects other people. Whether you like it or not.

But back to the OP: why is preventative health care an issue?

WHY all the CAPS?

There is not one society that's not ethnocentric that has survived 'diversity' by the American Standard of diversity by pointing out the differences in people, rather than focusing on how they are the same.

Confusing.

You finally got that ? It is a sickness just like being a psychopathic killer is.

Screw tolerance. It's a sickness that shouldn't be promoted.

You're saying homosexuality is a 'sickness'?

Goethe in Love which is, well, about Goethe in love. It's based loosely on the accounts about which he wrote The Sorrows of Young Werther. It's very well acted and stays true to the time period. Plus, and this is a nice bonus, the actor who plays Goethe is rather easy on the eyes.