Fine, look at it at this way. Has your new wording changed my original argument in any way? No.. so what's your point?

I think we all have an understanding that citizen's vote for state politicians, and those state politicians are supposed to work for those citizens. That doesn't need to be written out for anyone here. Even the least knowledgeable people among us, and I'll put myself in that group for your own satisfaction, understand the basics of our government and how it works. It's clearly implied when someone says the state, they are referring to our state politicians, who are voted for by the citizens of that state, and directed by the citizens to make decisions. There's no need for you to spell that out for us.

If you don't want to call it semantics, so be it. The fact is, you tried to change the wording of what I said just to be an ass instead of actually contributing to the discussion, but the wording meant the same damn thing.

(06-06-2011 08:19 AM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  Bull.. that's completely different. We aren't talking about someone donating to the church or donating to Planned Parenthood. We're talking about tax money. If you want to use tax money, you follow the state's rules. It's that simple.

This. Same thing as people on welfare having to take drug tests. You don't have to take the drug test, but you don't get the money. If you want free money, play by the rules.

Agreed.. I don't know why that pissed people off. You're on welfare, what business do you have wasting money on drugs? And I'm not even talking about the legality of it. If drugs were perfectly legal, you still shouldn't be wasting money on them if you're on welfare.

I mean the fact the Florida guy had ties to the company that does the drug tests was clearly shady and I understand the uproar about that, but in general, the idea certainly makes sense even if the execution of it needs some work. If you're going to get tax payers hard earned money, you could at least follow the rules set by those giving it out.

(06-09-2011 11:19 AM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  Agreed.. I don't know why that pissed people off. You're on welfare, what business do you have wasting money on drugs? And I'm not even talking about the legality of it. If drugs were perfectly legal, you still shouldn't be wasting money on them if you're on welfare.

I mean the fact the Florida guy had ties to the company that does the drug tests was clearly shady and I understand the uproar about that, but in general, the idea certainly makes sense even if the execution of it needs some work. If you're going to get tax payers hard earned money, you could at least follow the rules set by those giving it out.

Agreed. If you truly need government assistance to feed yourself or family, legal or not, you should not be using drugs, drinking beer, smoking cigarettes, or any of that fun stuff. If you want government assistance to run your charity, play by the rules or fund it from donations.

(06-06-2011 08:25 AM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  DrTorch.. clearly. That's a given. I'd hope I don't have to explain how our government works.

That being said, the people the citizen's elected, determined these rules, and unfortunately for the Catholic church, their internal rules don't agree. That's their problem, not the state's (i.e. the citizens). If you don't like it, vote for someone else next time.

Unfortunately you do have to. The man has NO clue as to how the government works.