Government Shutdown

[Dragonlady]

That post looked like a quote from the military manual, which is full up with buzzwords and probably hasn't been updated in decades. So, if it is in the manual, it is enforceable until revoked.

[Random Precision]

Originally Posted by Brian

Once again, mswas is being reasonable. Too bad the rest of you can't take the hint.

You misunderstand. I am not arguing my opinion. I am arguing the Constitution and the first amendment thereto. I personally do not care which particular type of sky pixies anyone chooses to believe in and give money to. I simply do not wish to be forced to endorse or appear to be endorsing any particular flavor of sky pixie. The chaplain service afforded by the military does not promulgate any specific religion nor coerce the expression of that religion. Having a Christian minister bless the Congress in open session does give the appearance of endorsing and promoting a specific religion over others.

So if Congress wants a shaman to rattle some bones for good luck, they can do it on their own damned time. But if a serviceman or woman feels the need to seek comfort from their faith before going into battle or just assuming the next watch, then we are obligated to provide that for them because we have required them to be far away from their usual sources of religious faith.

This is all covered in the Constitution. Really.

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Random Precision

You misunderstand. I am not arguing my opinion. I am arguing the Constitution and the first amendment thereto. I personally do not care which particular type of sky pixies anyone chooses to believe in and give money to. I simply do not wish to be forced to endorse or appear to be endorsing any particular flavor of sky pixie. The chaplain service afforded by the military does not promulgate any specific religion nor coerce the expression of that religion. Having a Christian minister bless the Congress in open session does give the appearance of endorsing and promoting a specific religion over others.

So if Congress wants a shaman to rattle some bones for good luck, they can do it on their own damned time. But if a serviceman or woman feels the need to seek comfort from their faith before going into battle or just assuming the next watch, then we are obligated to provide that for them because we have required them to be far away from their usual sources of religious faith.

This is all covered in the Constitution. Really.

Is there Separation of Church and State, or not?

[hatesfreedom]

I don't remember, is there seperation of church and state, or not?

[hatesfreedom]

hey guys, do civilian laws apply to the military or not?

[hatesfreedom]

hey dudes, do chaplins have to work with all faiths or can they just choose to work with one, or not?

[hatesfreedom]

hey ladies, have chaplins been around forever or did they just become a thing in the last five years, or not?

[hatesfreedom]

i will concentrate iwth all my powers and try to summon the ghost of andrew jacksons hair to figure this out

[Random Precision]

Originally Posted by Brian

Is there Separation of Church and State, or not?

I did cover this, but I'm going to make the charitable assumption that you are asking honestly.

The phrase "Separation of Church and State" does not actually appear in the Constitution, but has been used to describe the establishment clause. Which says that Congress shall enact no law respecting an establishment of religion. Which the Supreme Court has ruled as meaning that the government may not declare any religion as the official religion of the United States nor should there be any appearance of the State promulgating an official religion.

That said, the next part of the amendment states that (Congress shall make no law) abridging the free expression thereof. So if Congress sends troops to parts of the world or even parts of our own country where someone would find it difficult to freely practice their religion, then they have abridged it. Thus, the chaplain corps was formed. Since it encompasses all denominations, it does not promote any specific one, especially as no one is required to make use of it, and satisfies the establishment clause. And by making it available to the military, it satisfies the second part of the amendment.

Did you fail government (or civics) class in high school? This was on the test.

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Random Precision

Did you fail government (or civics) class in high school? This was on the test.

Did you fail?

This was on test, as well.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

You don't like that one, do you?

[Tuckerfan]

Originally Posted by hatesfreedom

hey dudes, do chaplins have to work with all faiths or can they just choose to work with one, or not?

They are given training to be able to work with all faiths, including being able to perform services of other faiths.

Originally Posted by hatesfreedom

hey ladies, have chaplins been around forever or did they just become a thing in the last five years, or not?

They've been around since at least the Civil War. In Army Life in a Colored Regiment by Thomas Wentworth Higginson, he talks a great deal about the unit's chaplain. The guy was a total badass. Not only did he fight in engagements with Confederate forces, but he bought a very expensive repeating rifle to use in battle. He was captured by the Confederates and spent a year as a POW before escaping to rejoin the fight. During the time he was a prisoner, he harangued his captors about how evil and sinful they were, and never once played the meek POW. (This is according to people who were prisoners with him.) He was Father Mulcahy and Rambo, all rolled into one.

[Glazer]

Originally Posted by hatesfreedom

hey dudes, do chaplins have to work with all faiths or can they just choose to work with one, or not?

Yes they work with all faiths. They tend to specialize in their own. But when one is not available any will do.

And check your spelling Brain might cry.

[Atalanta]

Originally Posted by Glazer

Chaplain's provide at least one crucial non religious service. One which would be hard to replicate by anyone else. When a Service Member has a problem in which through feel they cannot go through their chain of command. They can go to a Chaplin and feel comfortable that it will be handled with discretion. I had a suicidal roommate while I was in the Army. Had I went through the COC it would have ruined his life even more. After going to the Chaplin He was able to talk to him (my roomy) and arrange for counseling and eventual return home without charges or a dishonorable discharge. There are many situations where a neutral third party that no one would question your wanting to see them is just the thing. Ask to see a lawyer and every one is going to want to know why. Ask to see the Chaplin and it can be kept on the down low.

This.

[Dragonlady]

Originally Posted by Glazer

And check your spelling Brain might cry.

Originally Posted by Brian

I generally ignore stupid things like "chaplins". Spell check is your friend. Wasn't there a little red underline when you typed it? Why did you post it? English is not that hard.

No, apparently he will ignore the post if you have typos in it. I see a solution to our dilemma...

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Atalanta

This.

Tell it to the Chaplin. Is his name Charlie? I honestly don't understand how people can be that stupid, and manage to breathe.

[Dragonlady]

I don't understand why you let yourself get so sidetracked by a misspelled word. It was pretty apparent what he meant, so why not respond to the statement, instead of harping on a misspelling?

[Tuckerfan]

Originally Posted by Dragonlady

I don't understand why you let yourself get so sidetracked by a misspelled word. It was pretty apparent what he meant, so why not respond to the statement, instead of harping on a misspelling?

Because that would require him to admit that he was actually wrong.

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Dragonlady

I don't understand why you let yourself get so sidetracked by a misspelled word. It was pretty apparent what he meant, so why not respond to the statement, instead of harping on a misspelling?

He misspelled it at least three times in one post. That's not a typo, it's stone cold ignorance.

[Dragonlady]

I don't know that he is wrong. He is so busy harping on spelling, it's hard to tell what his point IS. Once again, I think this is an example of how his communication methods are difficult to follow.

[eleanorigby]

Originally Posted by Dragonlady

I don't understand why you let yourself get so sidetracked by a misspelled word. It was pretty apparent what he meant, so why not respond to the statement, instead of harping on a misspelling?

Because he doesn't have an argument. And he's moved the goalposts again with dragging in the 2nd Amendment. My, we are far from the Gment shutdown now.

[Dragonlady]

Good point Rigs. Im done with the hijack.

[Glazer]

Originally Posted by Brian

Tell it to the Chaplin. Is his name Charlie? I honestly don't understand how people can be that stupid, and manage to breathe.

I don't see you holding your breath.

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Glazer

I don't see you holding your breath.

I know this isn't the Dope, and fighting ignorance isn't the goal here. But is proper English too much to ask for?

Once, or even twice, is a typo. Three times is stupid.

[Random Precision]

Originally Posted by Brian

Did you fail?

This was on test, as well.

You don't like that one, do you?

I take no issue with the second amendment, and if you don't believe me, please come through my locked gate onto my property some dark night and I will explain the castle law to you in terms you cannot possibly misunderstand.

However, since this is your way of admitting you've lost the argument, I will take this as your admission that you are in fact a fascist who failed government class and have demonstrated amply that you aren't interested in debating honestly.

I'm not too concerned that you don't have any respect for other's opinions, but I am appalled that you have so little respect for facts or the US Constitution. If you aren't someone's sock engaged in some perverse type of performance art, then you're a truly pathetic excuse for an American.

\ I'm outta here \

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Random Precision

I take no issue with the second amendment, and if you don't believe me, please come through my locked gate onto my property some dark night and I will explain the castle law to you in terms you cannot possibly misunderstand.

However, since this is your way of admitting you've lost the argument, I will take this as your admission that you are in fact a fascist who failed government class and have demonstrated amply that you aren't interested in debating honestly.

I'm not too concerned that you don't have any respect for other's opinions, but I am appalled that you have so little respect for facts or the US Constitution. If you aren't someone's sock engaged in some perverse type of performance art, then you're a truly pathetic excuse for an American.

\ I'm outta here \

ducati is that you?

[Glazer]

Originally Posted by Brian

I know this isn't the Dope, and fighting ignorance isn't the goal here. But is proper English too much to ask for?

Once, or even twice, is a typo. Three times is stupid.

As is critical thinking.

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Glazer

As is critical thinking.

Chaplin. It's actually sorta funny in its stupidity.

[Dragonlady]

Just because he doesn't know the correct spelling of the word, doesn't make his idea any less valid. It is a MISSPELLING, and misspelling a word does not make everything he thinks stupid, or wrong.

[Glazer]

Glad to be of service.

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Dragonlady

Just because he doesn't know the correct spelling of the word, doesn't make his idea any less valid. It is a MISSPELLING, and misspelling a word does not make everything he thinks stupid, or wrong.

He doesn't have access to dictionary.com?

[Dragonlady]

If he didn't know it was wrong, as seems apparent by the fact that he repeatedly spelled it the same way, and his spell check didn't catch it (mine doesn't), how would he know to look it up?

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Dragonlady

If he didn't know it was wrong, as seems apparent by the fact that he repeatedly spelled it the same way, and his spell check didn't catch it (mine doesn't), how would he know to look it up?

I'm not going to press it any further, but his inability to spell common words makes his opinions less than convincing. YMMV.

[Dragonlady]

It does vary. His spelling does not make his ideas any less valid to me, but I can see where it could make you, and some other people, wonder.

[loshan]

He may be well versed in spelling, howbeit it is transpicuous to me that Brian is uncapable of textual cogitation.


Hey Brian, without checking dictionary.com, can you tell me which words are red lined?

[loshan]

BZZZZZT. Too long. You're looking up the answers. That is not allowed.

[ulfhjorr]

Originally Posted by Brian

But is proper English too much to ask for?

Actually, it may well be. After all, there is no English equivalent to L'Académie française*, right? So who is to be the arbiter of what is "proper English" or not? No meaning was lost in the alleged misspelling, no confusion caused, so what's the beef?

I mean, really, what's the big deal with a dropped 'a' in this world that makes it so much worse than the 'e' that was dropped from the switch from the earlier 'chapelain'? Or the 'u' that is so often dropped from words like 'colour' or 'favour' when written by Americans? Hmmm???


*And, to bring this somewhat back to the topic of the OP, would their dictates even hold sway in the middle of this ridiculous government shut down?

[Kat]

They'd have been shut down, too.

[Muffin]

Originally Posted by Random Precision

I did cover this, but I'm going to make the charitable assumption that you are asking honestly.

[Snip of an accurate, clear and concise summary.]

Did you fail government (or civics) class in high school? This was on the test.

Since you asked:

Originally Posted by Brian

I graduated junior high more than 30 years ago. Enough said.

Originally Posted by Glazer

Too bad you stopped there. High school would have really helped you.

[Muffin]

I'm curious as to how the present unpleasantness will affect how Congress will handle the pending default.

[Veb]

Okay, this thread didn't so much drift as caught fire at sea. From now on, please keep the discussion to the actual shutdown. If anyone wants to discuss side issues, like what should be cut, etc. please start new threads.

[BJMoose]

:: looks at thread, shakes head sadly ::

This is why we have government shutdowns.

[Erving#6]

Just as you like to pretend "well regulated" isn't there as well.

Originally Posted by Brian

Did you fail?

This was on test, as well.

You don't like that one, do you?

[Veb]

Originally Posted by Erving#6

Just as you like to pretend "well regulated" isn't there as well.

Mod note
Okay, enough hijacks. Anyone who wants to counter personal political idiocies, have at it...but do it in The Pit. The government shutdown provides enough fodder for real discussion. This is directed to everyone, btw, not just Erving. Just stop it.

[SmartAleq]

Oh my, SO busted. Front page of the New York Times today (PDF), check out the story right under the picture. Nice to know that all the misery was planned well in advance. How, exactly, is planning to send the government into shutdown preparatory to forcing the US to default on it's creditors (I'm assuming that's next on the agenda, eleven days from now) not economic terrorism? How are these assholes still in their jobs?

Text of the original letter is here. My goodness, the Tea Party even issued a spankingly spiffy little toolkit packet (PDF)! How very proactive of them!

This was not a random happenstance, this was a coldly calculated maneuver to use a full on government shutdown to force the delay or overturn of a law the Tea Party doesn't like. They're fucking traitors and need to be on trial as such.

In similar news, Tea Party aligned Rep Lee Terry of Nebraska, says that while other government employees may go piss up a rope for their paychecks during this wilfully caused mess, he himself simply MUST continue to dray HIS pay because, in his own words:

Originally Posted by Tea Party Asshole

“Whatever gets them good press,” Terry said. “That's all that it's going to be. God bless them. But you know what? I've got a nice house and a kid in college, and I'll tell you we cannot handle it. Giving our paycheck away when you still worked and earned it? That's just not going to fly.”

Funny thing, our own taters also has a nice house and kids in college, yet she isn't getting her paycheck. Guess some animals are more equal than others.

Assholes.

[timbicile]

I ain't reading this shitfest but:
Because of the shutdown the NFL games are not being shown on the Armed Forces Network.
This pisses me right the fuck off.

[Chocodile]

One thing that conservatives often say is that private companies can offer services more cheaply and efficiently than government, and so Washington should butt out. According to SmartAleq's link, they've had more than a year to speak with the alleged private industries to line up and take over when the shutdown occurred.

Had this happened, they could have proven their point extremely well. But it didn't happen. Where are are all those guys from Cabela's to man the gates of our national parks? Why isn't Nike financing transmission of sports to remote military locations? Shouldn't Remington Arms be guarding the Capitol building and Kraft Foods be handing out food for the hungry?

[ryevermouthbitters]

Originally Posted by timbicile

I ain't reading this shitfest but:
Because of the shutdown the NFL games are not being shown on the Armed Forces Network.
This pisses me right the fuck off.

I don't think that's right. They're apparently having at least two games.

[Glazer]

AFN is what turned me off Football.

[Erving#6]

Originally Posted by SmartAleq

Oh my, SO busted. Front page of the New York Times today (PDF), check out the story right under the picture. Nice to know that all the misery was planned well in advance. How, exactly, is planning to send the government into shutdown preparatory to forcing the US to default on it's creditors (I'm assuming that's next on the agenda, eleven days from now) not economic terrorism? How are these assholes still in their jobs?

Text of the original letter is here. My goodness, the Tea Party even issued a spankingly spiffy little toolkit packet (PDF)! How very proactive of them!

This was not a random happenstance, this was a coldly calculated maneuver to use a full on government shutdown to force the delay or overturn of a law the Tea Party doesn't like. They're fucking traitors and need to be on trial as such.

In similar news, Tea Party aligned Rep Lee Terry of Nebraska, says that while other government employees may go piss up a rope for their paychecks during this wilfully caused mess, he himself simply MUST continue to dray HIS pay because, in his own words:

Funny thing, our own taters also has a nice house and kids in college, yet she isn't getting her paycheck. Guess some animals are more equal than others.

Assholes.

I'm a "essential" federal employee who will receive 60% of my pay and will get paid whenever they want to end this fiasco. Fun times!!!

[Veb]

Bloomburg's analysis of the economic consequences of a default: http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...warfing-lehman

One of the best analyses of the Tea Party I've seen lately: http://www.salon.com/2013/10/06/tea_..._newest_right/ It does a good job of explaining its roots and rationale. The Tea Party isn't just a bunch of barely literate yokels in funny costumes. It's much worse, IMO. Blinkered fanatics, in fact.