March 2, 2009 by RBuffordTJ.

You can find the news article here

Now, here is my issue with this. Proposition 8, the bill that clarified marriage is between one man, and one woman, passed by a significant margin. How did this happen you ask? Well, it happened the way it was suppose to happen, by a vote OF THE PEOPLE!

Of course this is never enough here in the People’s Republic of America (sad but this is where we are headed as our new Socialist leaders rip our Constitution to shreds).

Personally, I don’t care if they allow or ban gay marriage, my anger is not over whether it passed or failed, my anger is because we are pushing aside what THE PEOPLE voted for because some people (the homosexual activist movement) feels THEY are of a higher position and their views and desires are worth more, than the average heterosexual American.

Listen closely. YOU ARE WRONG! Enough already with fighting until you get your way by screaming “discrimination”. It makes you as ignorant as Jessie and Al screaming “racism” every time something doesn’t go the way they want it to. You are all coming across as quite arrogant, and I am sick of seeing our leaders pander to your ignorant blathering about what YOU demand YOU should have.

It was voted on. You lost. Period.

Now the argument (supposedly) is over the ability to see your ‘partner’ in the ICU at the hospital, being able to make health care decisions and such, this was the lead battle cry this time around. Let me educate you as to how you can have this ability without force feeding us your crap. Get a Healthcare Surrogate, a legal document giving you the ability to make these decisions, and it is 100% legal. You can get a Durable Power of Attorney if you want your ‘partner’ to be able to make decisions if you are incapacitated, or in the sad event of your passing.

Both of those are legal, binding documents that give you what you claim you are fighting for.

Now, the PEOPLE of California voted. The PEOPLE voted against what you wanted.

This government is suppose to be “Of the people, by the people, for the people”. You should stop trying to destroy our founding principles just to get your own personal way. Grow the heck up and stop your whining.

Bufford
(One seriously fed up American)

Posted in Pointless Lawsuits, Decision 2008, RBuffordTJ, Other, Politics, Coherent Thoughts, Current Events | Print | 9 Comments »

January 6, 2009 by Jeremy.

240,000 dollars awarded to man forced to cover Arab T-shirt

“Jarrar, a US resident, was apprehended as he waited to board a JetBlue flight from New York to Oakland, California, and told to remove his shirt, which had written on it in Arabic: “We will not be silent.”

He was told other passengers felt uncomfortable because an Arabic-inscribed T-shirt in an airport was like “wearing a T-shirt at a bank stating, I am a robber,’” the ACLU said.

Jarrar eventually agreed to cover his shirt with another provided by JetBlue. He was allowed aboard but his seat was changed from the front to the back of the aircraft.”

I do think that it is perfectly reasonable to make the man change his shirt or cover it up (as he did). His shirt could cause fear, apprehension, fighting, etc. on that plane and is is the airlines responsibility to ensure the safety and well-being of its passengers. Free speech is not intended to start riotous acts or even used as an attack at a single individual or a group (I believe his shirt did just that).

It is not fair, however, that he was made to sit at the back of the aircraft. He did what was asked of him and he should have been allowed to board as a regular passenger.

We have taken this PC movement too far. Things are more black and white than people want to believe. There is right and wrong and we need to get away from this gray middle because that will lead us to a point where we are unable to speak out against anything and that is truly a detriment to the Freedom of Speech.

Posted in Pointless Lawsuits, Jeremy, Coherent Thoughts, Current Events | Print | 5 Comments »

July 2, 2008 by Jeremy.

At least that’s what someone should have told a 17-year-old Georgia teen when he visited Six flags. I was watching the news this morning and more information came out. Apparently the boy and his friend jumped the fences to cut into line and save some time.

The big story now is that the boy’s family is wanting to sue Six Flags! I am so tired of people not taking responsibility for their own actions.

I am truly sorry that this boy is dead but it is because of his own bad decisions that this incident happened. He totally ignored warning signs and had to jump two 6-foot fences to get into this restricted area. I think it was obvious that he wasn’t supposed to be there but he didn’t care.

So who is wrong here? Should the boy have paid attention to the obvious warnings or did Six Flags neglect to safeguard the ride with enough restrictive measures?

Posted in Pointless Lawsuits, Jeremy, Coherent Thoughts | Print | 1 Comment »

June 20, 2008 by Ian.

HT to Al Mohler for this one:

Father doesn’t know best, court rules in girl’s fight to get grounding overruled:

Toronto’s Globe and Mail reports that a father ruled too harshly when he grounded his daughter from a school camping trip after she broke his rules on the internet. Now, this isn’t a father who is punishing his daughter by tying her to a tree, she was JUST grounded! More than that, his rules against internet use which she willfully waltzed over were created for HER PROTECTION. She had created an account on online dating sites and published her pictures for all to see. If that were my daughter I would have deleted the accounts and banned her from not only any contact with friends but from all electronic media for at least a month. The child that is in a home is under the Biblical authority of the parents and we should be allowed to punish as we see fit short of physical abuse. I completely understand how the court should step in if there child is being beaten, that makes perfect sense to me. If there’s sexual abuse, fine. To overstep the authority of parents on a grounding? That’s blatant abuse of authority and if this ruling isn’t overturned the Canadian justice system will show itself to be a worthless institution that looks out for the interests of no one.

Now, what does this have to do with us? For that, I turn to the end of Albert Mohler’s commentary on it:

The logic of this ruling is not limited to Canada. In 1970, Hillary Rodham, then a young lawyer (and later Sen. Hillary Clinton), wrote a law review article, “Children Under the Law,” in which she argued that minors should be treated as “child citizens” who should, under at least some conditions, be able to challenge their parents in court over parental decisions.

This father may win his appeal — we must hope that he does — but the damage is already done. This 12-year-old girl has defied her father and been rewarded by a secular court. The judge and the court have now become complicit in the girl’s disobedience. This father has had his rights as father denied and his authority undermined. We can only imagine the costs of this judicial malpractice in the life of this girl and her family. Beyond this, the precedent is now set for further judicial mischief.

Is this the kind of worthless judicial system we have to look forward to in this country? With the continual pending hate crime and homosexual “inclusiveness” legislation, it’s only a matter of time.

Posted in Ian, Pointless Lawsuits, Current Events | Print | 6 Comments »

April 9, 2008 by Ian.

It’s not often that I see something in the news that makes me think that a liberal (possibly communist company like Google does the right thing. Fortunately (I think), this is a good for us, bad for you example. For quite some time, Google ads have generated a ton of money for their company by placing advertisements next to the items that are searched for. For instance, if you were to go to Google.com and search for “fish tank” you’ll likely get something like this:

It’s based on your location by your IP address and they can find regional and specific things for what you’re searching for. It’s a great idea and it works very well. You can give people what they are looking for and, for a fee, you can make sure that your paid sponsors are able to keep their content on top. This is how it works for them throughout the world on each of their many varied servers. See how it works in the UK?

Unfortunately, Google doesn’t really stick to that practice when it comes to things that they have problems with. Abortion, for example. What happens when you want to put a notice up about support for those who have had abortions or for people who are in trouble and seeking help? Apparently, if you’re in the UK, you’re screwed! Google is now getting sued in by a non-profit Christian group in the UK because they refused to place their ads, using the same process detailed above, next to the results on the word “abortion”. The Daily Mail is carrying this story and it looks like a standard “you’re not giving me what I want so I’m going to sue you” case but on further investigation there’s a lot more behind this.

The Christian Institute, a “non-denominational Christian charity”, wanted to pay Google so that whenever the word “abortion” was typed into the popular search engine, its link would appear on the side of the screen.The link would have read: “UK abortion law - news and views on abortion from the Christian Institute. www.christian.org.uk.”

But Google refused the advert because it said it had a policy of declining sites which mixed the issue of abortion with religious views.

Its Dublin-based advertising team replied: “At this time, Google policy does not permit the advertisement of websites that contain ‘abortion and religion-related content’.”

Google does, however, accept adverts for abortion clinics, secular pro-abortion sites and secularist sites which attack religion.

~ Daily Mail :: Emphasis mine

That’s when I decided to see what they meant by “Google does, however, accept adverts for abortion clinics, secular pro-abortion sites and secularist sites which attack religion” so did a little digging and here’s what I came up with:

Googling “Abortion” in the US I get the following:

It’s fair and balanced; one site to help those who are searching and the other is an abomination from hell.

Now, in the UK:

… huh? A provider, a financier, and a link to feed your lust? Remember, these aren’t RANDOM - you have to PAY for each item you are searched under. Someone actually PAID MONEY to have their company show up for CASH LOANS when you’re looking for ABORTIONS! Worse is the sick freak who thought people were looking to get off on abortions. What kind of people live in the UK?

Next, I thought I’d give it a go at searching “religion”. Here it is in the good old US of A:

This actually warms my heart. I didn’t think I’d see this at all. All in all I’m very pleased!

Here’s the result for the UK:

Y’all are off my “visit” list. Seriously. Buy “religion”? “Scientology”? To quote great preacher on a completely unrelated topic, “Are you kidding me?”

After reading this, there are a couple things that come to mind. First is that, as Christians we know that we are only promised persecution and troubles if are sold out to Christ and that our gain comes in the life to come but the other thing that I think about is that the UK is often leading us by only a short scale in public policy. If this passes as acceptable for them, how long before it passes here? Are we only one bill away? If Google won’t post the picture, I will. Here you go, Christian Institute and keep fighting the good fight!

God bless America. Not as a song title or an idea but as a real command. God has given a lot for us thus far, why can’t we acknowledge that and turn back to Him?

Posted in Technology, Ian, Religion, Pointless Lawsuits, Coherent Thoughts, Politics | Print | 5 Comments »

June 6, 2007 by Jeremy.

To springboard off of my recent rant about frivolous lawsuits, I have found yet another one. This times it’s by a judge and it is just over the top!

Judge Now Only Wants $54 Millions From Dry Cleaners for Lost Pants

I mean those pants must have been made with pure crack cocain or something. What is he possibly thinking? I missed the story the first time around but it really caught my eye this time.

Posted in Pointless Lawsuits, Jeremy, Coherent Thoughts | Print | No Comments »

May 31, 2007 by Jeremy.

Iowa Woman Sues Wal-Mart Over Fall in Puddle of Vomit

I am so tired of all these frivolous lawsuits. Common sense should tell us that it is very unlikely that Wal-Mart is directly responsible for this accident. It is reasonable to believe that if they were aware of the mess, they would try to get rid of it. That is just good business.

Accidents happen and people need to realize that as do all these moronic trial lawyers. There should be a limit to how much someone can sue for in these absurd cases and maybe even in all cases unless there is an evident monetary value. I also think the losing party should be required, by law, to pay for all of the legal fees for the other party. That might stop some of these stupid lawsuits.

Top Ten Frivolous Lawsuits

Some may think this is funny but I really think it’s just sad…

Posted in Pointless Lawsuits, Jeremy, Coherent Thoughts | Print | 2 Comments »