Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Illinois Bans Abstinence-Only Sex Ed: ‘In Fantasy Land, We Teach Our Kids Abstinence’.
Finally some good news on this front.
I assume it would be unconstitutional because it restricts religion-motivated abstinence-only sex ed, but we need to know the bill's actual content to assess that (and the argument that religion-motivated abstinence-only sex ed in publicly funded schools violates the Esthablishment Clause is a valid one, too).
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Schools are secular though. They're not supposed to teach anything because a person's religion says so. Unless pro-abstinence people can overturn the mountains of evidence that it's a bad method of teaching then they don't have any justification for opposing this.
How does it violate the clause?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. . . ."
The two interpretations are that we can't have a national religion and the US can't show favoritism to any one religion. Preventing abstinence education does not violate either of those interpretations.
![]()
I don't think anyone is saying we shouldn't teach it at all. It just shouldn't be taught as the preferred method and it certainly shouldn't be all they're told about.
Those other methods do fail but abstinence still causes higher higher pregnancy rates. I don't have any data on hand but I believe the explanation is that abstinence does little to change whether or not people will have sex before marriage so people still run the risk of getting pregnant. Teaching about birth control lowers this risk because it assumes that people will have sex anyway so they might as well have an idea of how to avoid the downsides to it.
Newt Gingrich Blasts Obama’s Terror Policy: ‘Stunningly, Breathtakingly Naive’
edited 26th May '13 2:40:54 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016
Because their reactions are always the funniest.
Senator Graham (R-GA): Obama 'tone deaf' on security
There are more of them. They are louder. They do things we find "stupid" or "silly" more often. The individuals are more vaied. Etc.
While we do bring up the "stupid" on the Dem side, it is more about what they as a group are not doing. Compare that to what the Republicans keep doing, and it is fairly obvious that Republicans would be in the news more often.
Oh, and this is a Democrat leaning forum right now. We are more willing to forgive Dem's.
(I realize the question was partly sarcastic, but it is a serious issue)
EDIT: Actually looked at those headlines. Love how Obama is "going to far" with drones and "not going far enough" with the terror threats at the same time—even though the drone program has been damn successful against foreign terrorist threats.
edited 26th May '13 12:24:42 PM by Belian
Yu hav nat sein bod speeling unntil know. (cacke four undersandig tis)the cake is a lie!I'm just worried we may be falling into this particular trap
Bob Dole Lashes Republican Party: They Should Put A Sign On The Door That Says ‘Closed For Repairs’
I don't get the comparison. I just post links and we comment on them.
edited 26th May '13 12:32:18 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016Rand Paul's rhetoric is increasingly ridiculous given that Obama's standard for domestic drone use is now tighter than his.
@Braeburn: Your link to the Newt Gingrich story leads again to the Rand Paul one. Did you mean this?
Yes and fixed.
Senator Coburn (R-OK): Federal disaster aid took responsibility from states
edited 26th May '13 2:42:03 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016Senator Coburn: Holder investigating DOJ a ‘total conflict of interest’
So, for anyone in the US of A (or interested in it) the employment rate is probably a big thing to you. I have found this: http://www.epi.org/publication/unemployment-rates-whites-latinos-african-americans/
Basically the highest unemployment rate for Hispanics, blacks, and whites are: Hispanics: Rhode Island, 18.2% vs. 10.3% overall; Connecticut, 16.1% vs. 8.8%; and Pennsylvania, 13.3% vs. 7.9%. Blacks: Michigan, 18.6% vs. 9%; New Jersey, 17.8% vs. 9.7%; and Illinois, 17.6% vs. 8.7%. Whites: Nevada, 9.3% vs. 10.8%; Rhode Island, 9% vs. 10.3%; and New Jersey, 8.6% vs. 9.7%.If you notice, the unemployment rate for whites is lower than the state average in every state and DC. So what does everyone think of this? Do you think things are going in the right direction? What alarms you the most?
I made a thread about this before, but it didn't get that much attention,so I figured I'd re-post it here, just to here people's thoughts. This is from last December so unemployment rates for most states have changed, but that's the most up-to-date info out their, and I'm pretty sure the situation is probably more or less still the same.
edited 26th May '13 8:32:05 PM by KBSL

Something must be up with the forums. I can't edit past posts.