Jennifer, ever noticed all the lefties with all their arguments on why capitalism is terrible and ought to be abolished? You are basically playing their game here. You haven't given any hint on a better system, only said we should try something known to be worse because what we have has problems. OTOH, the libertarians have offered the only real alternative which is removal of the state from the marriage contract and it's terms. I can't imagine any system which can eliminate courts from playing referee on property and children. If the state doesn't do this, then the state interferes by its refusal to interfere. It enslaves the partners. In the modern world, people just won't choose marriage under your scheme anymore and the Libertarians will get a de facto win. No one will agree to a state sanctioned marriage.
I guess she intends to ignore anything that doesn't fit her scheme. Oh well, hopefully the scheme dies an early death. Unfortunately, it has all the makings of something that will spread among church communities.
Jennifer, lets not mince words here. What you are talking about is preventing one partner in a miserable situation from getting state protection and dissolving a marriage. You are also allowing the least reasonable and sane parent added ability to hurt the children. You are trying to make it sound like the state is not being invited into the disagreement, but they always are. NFD was only passed because the state and voters realized the damage of forcing one parent to meet ridiculous standards of evidence while incentivizing parents to libel the other. Why do you think you can ignore this? Why do you want to?
Jennifer, you agree that NFD is better than what was before, but you think it went to far? I suggest you would influence more people by not decrying NFD. You should instead suggest specific changes and pivot whenever NFD is brought up. Simply say NFD solved some problems while creating others and you want to improve things and move along. Also, never label people you are trying to convince. You say "libertarians" and the only ones of those still listening will only be doing so to argue with you. Lastly, the state currently has no real interest in marriage. Pushing the issue to the churches would change little other than to get the state out of it. Children and property matters would still be matters for the court just as they are now.
Dear Jennifer, you look rather young so I will forgive you for not understanding the nightmarish situations that brought about NFD. People who had no business living together were forced to stay together resulting in beatings, murders, false accusations leading to imprisonment, poverty, and murder suicides. My mother, being catholic, resisted divorce and we both were put in mortal danger by her delay. Dad's third wife ended up with gray patches on her face from all the beatings at one point but was afraid to leave likely in fear of deportation or homelessness. NFD may be bad, but what it replaced was worse. I can't imagine going back. The better solution is getting the state out of the marriage business altogether and leaving it to the churches.
This would certainly be a teachable moment, wouldn't you say.
Certainly, the simple solution is to study the problem in a scientific manner. Design a study, use blind graders, compare all the works in question. Let's see if there really is racism in upper academia, or if it's really BS.
I doubt most of the whiners could design a study that would actually prove anything, and the professors aren't going to do any work. Nothing will get resolved unless we end up taking the word of some grunge king that he didn't fake the data. If we do believe him, then the whole thing will prove whatever he wants. He will then get a job at the census bureau.
The half of the story that gets less attention is actually the worst part. Companies spending millions to influence legislation actually leads to billions in lost productivity and puts off innovations for years and decades. When Americans believe success is about power and influence rather than providing value to others, the whole world suffers. They depend on us to be the place where those growing the pie win out over those trying to control its division.
I may be willing to listen to wife vent without offering solutions because that's what an experienced husband learns to do.
I am not willing to keep putting up with it among conservatives. The solution is not for Brown to fix anything. Brown is the cause.
The solution is for responsible speakers to publicly refuse to speak at Brown. Brown, and institutions like it, cannot prosper without a veneer of open minded, academic curiosity. Such cannot exist when the veneer not only refuses to adhere but points out the phony material trying to be covered up.
These incidents will only end when someone these fools wish to suck up to cancels or refuses to speak at their school until a person they treat so horribly is apologized to, lured back, and allowed to speak to a full house of respectful listeners. Of course, a proper boycott like that would only be started by a great person willing to pass up the outrageous speaking fees they get at what is almost surely tax payer expense.
Soldiers shouldn't be used as cops. We should avoid this problem by sending soldiers into wars against countries, not against their leaders or their oppressors. If we need to invade Iran, then we go to war against the Iranian people. Hundreds of thousands of them are going to die, so maybe they ought to know what that's going to look like. Warn them now. No more Vietnam-Iraq-Afghanistans. Think Germany.Cops need to realize they aren't soldiers. No more black outfits, boots, and machine guns. Get them back into police uniforms that say law enforcement, not junior SWAT wannabe. Nothing resembling modern military equipment or clothing should be allowed even for the SWAT teams except where it would be cost prohibitive to not use the same gear (like helmets perhaps). And for Pete's sake, "no knock" raids need to be for known dangerous criminals only.
Canadian Healthcare is among the worst in the world, getting worse all the time, and has done moral damage that the country may never recover from. Intentions might matter in personal relations, but not government. Call me after you have suffered the system, we can compare scars and stories. The key to progress is lack of centralized management. Obamacare's victims will not all ever be counted because it has already slowed medical progress and that time will never be recovered. Utopia Texas, on the other hand, does work. My in-laws had a weekend place there for a few years.
I've been thinking for a long time that much of the world's problems could be solved if jurisdictions actually could secede, and or join neighboring sovereigns with some sort of super majority.
It would make governments compete. Much would then be solved.
Seems to me this should be an easy win for the House Republicans. Draft an appropriations bill ordering the various non military and law enforcement branches to lay off their swat teams and turn over the excessive arsenals for sale to allied foreign military or something. Create a few more SWAT jobs at the FBI, and then direct all the other agencies to call the FBI for assistance when needed.
All the possible arguments the Dems could use to stop it are essentially pro 2nd amendment arguments twisted in a way that shows they think their government departments are more important than the lives of regular voters.
Turn signal use virtually ceased by the early eighties. I blame the 55 limit. Radar speed tickets became an industry while PSAs tried to preach the whole "speed kills" nonsense leading to drivers thinking that the speed limit was all anyone cared about. He new bogey man, distractions, is more deadly, but who listens to the kid who cried wolf?
Another problem has been the junk science on this subject by academics wanting money and attention. These guys have been pandering using the global warming researcher attack plan. If device use is as bad, or worse, as drunk driving, where are the bodies? There are surely more device users than drunks on the road, yet sense the astronomical growth of device use over the last fifteen, the fatal accident rate as fallen. The hyperbolic studies are therefore wrong. QED. Is it dangerous to text? Yes. Is it worth it to text? No. Should you do it? No. Is it as bad as drunk driving? Apparently not.
Dialing and texting aren't at all dangerous if done properly:Here is a similar method to that used by the best drivers in the world. If you aren't a formula one driver, fighter jock, or other person selected for aptitude and then trained for months or years, and proven to be a capable operator of dangerous operations then don't take any shortcuts! They don't, so obviously you shouldn't!1. Ready the device.2. Actively check your situation (Check your mirrors and think about nearby cars and your navigation. Where are you, where are others?)3. Input one character.4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 until complete. If you can input blindly, then you can replace step 3 with inputting a word at a time, but only do ths if ur spilling is not important! No editing is possible. Of course, it is very rare that its not easier to pull over in a car than do ths tedious process. While flying, you can't pull over, and few planes have keypads for inputs, so this is what we do in the cockpit. Works fine in a car because of the step by step hyper vigilance and under a second interruptions.
Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:
Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place. Join today!
Already a Member? Sign In