Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Obama Will Sign GIVE ACT Into Law Today!

page: 11
29
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Picao84
reply to post by glad_to_be_His
 



BUT, Im not willing to give my liberty.. its not even whats in discuss here..



See, IMO that is exactly what we are discussing here. The liberty to encourage your children to volunteer service (and what kind of service) or not. I fear losing my Liberty. This bill is paving the road for it.


....a few hours per year dont hurt anyone..


How about a few hours a week? ...or a day? Giving is good for the soul. But only when it is of your own free will. Or it isn't giving, right?


I didnt intend also to say EVIL Xbox360.. I play WoW for instance, so i know all you said about what your child learns.. Thats good.. but should be balanced with some "local action"


...well, sometimes I could debate the "evilness" of it.
I agree. We saw to it that he played organized sports.




posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
You will only give of free will if you feel compelled to it.. If you have some "pleasure" in doing it (im calling helping others a pleasure).. Its not something that borns with you..

The "compelling" felling borns from engagement.. from creating relationships with others and creating roots with the community..

Again i may be generalising.. but kids that spend their time playing games and not interacting socially.. will not gain (on general sense) that "compellingness" to "give"..

Of course we can promote that engagement in many ways.. im not saying that what Obama proposes is the only way to do it.. Im certain it will have flaws.. its made by humans anyway.. But i agree with the "spirit" of it..

That gives me an idea thought.. Instead of crying out loud (this is not for you
), why dont parents react to this saying "We want to have a say in it?.. Just dont say "NO".. Get actively involved (on a state level probably) and contribute to improve it.. Thats how a democracy should work.. Not just saying YES or NO..

I really dont think the objective of it is to make some brainwash on your children..

quote]Originally posted by glad_to_be_His

Originally posted by Picao84
reply to post by glad_to_be_His
 


See, IMO that is exactly what we are discussing here. The liberty to encourage your children to volunteer service (and what kind of service) or not. I fear losing my Liberty. This bill is paving the road for it.


As i said, from what i understand, you and your child are going to have a say on what he/she will do. And why does it take the liberty to you to encourage your children? Its not like he/she will be taken from you


[edit on 23-4-2009 by Picao84]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Krypto69
 


The quote in that post I made says:


Some Republicans complain it is too costly and is an unnecessary intrusion by government into something Americans already do eagerly and in great numbers


Yes I agree with the Republicans who said it's too costly, we don't have two pennies to rub together as a country right now. We don't have $1.1 billion to put into getting people to do something they are already doing.

Yes I agree that this is an unnecessary intrusion by the government. People already volunteer. They already donate time, money, items, etc. to people and places that need it. The government has no place stepping in and telling us who is going to volunteer where, when they are going to do it, and how long they will be there.

How exactly does agreeing on those two points mean I still believe in the two party system? I agree with both parties on some points, and on others I don't agree with either of them. What does that have to do with the thread or my opinion on this bill or any other similar bill?



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Picao84
You will only give of free will if you feel compelled to it.. If you have some "pleasure" in doing it (im calling helping others a pleasure).. Its not something that borns with you..


This becomes an existential discussion; one that I certainly am not equipped to have and my guess is would reap some backlash if we got off on a tangent here. So what compels you to give? Do you differentiate b/w being compelled and being forced? The issue here is about a mandated requirement. That, in my vocabulary, goes beyond being "compelled."


The "compelling" felling borns from engagement.. from creating relationships with others and creating roots with the community..


...I think we are all compelled by different things. My faith encourages me to be socially and morally responsible - which compels me to do good. For others it may be nature, others it may be the law. Some may be compelled from engagement as you say, others may react directly the opposite. That isn't the issue. The issue is choice.


Again i may be generalising.. but kids that spend their time playing games and not interacting socially.. will not gain (on general sense) that "compellingness" to "give"..


...as a parent, I will be the one to compel my child until he is of age to make, and bear the consequences of, his own decisions.


...why dont parents react to this saying "We want to have a say in it?.. Just dont say "NO".. Get actively involved (on a state level probably) and contribute to improve it.. Thats how a democracy should work..


I think that is what we are doing. We are saying we don't want the government being any more involved with the moral choices of our kids. They have already stuck their nose in too far and finally people are waking up and saying enough is enough. Once this becomes mandatory, we no longer have a say in it; that's what we are upset about.


I really dont think the objective of it is to make some brainwash on your children..


There is no way you can make that statement with any certainty. That may be your opinion, that doesn't make it the motive of the TPTB. The sentiment fueling this thread is to "nip it in the bud" before it gets to that point.

Is anyone asking why all the talk about mandate? We throw money (usually unsucessfully) at everything else in this country. Why not develop some comission to "encourage" kids to volunteer. Make a national push to expliot the benefits of it. Give them incentives (I know this was alluded to), you know like we do in school to get them there, keep them there, make them apply themselves. (sarcasm) There is no reason it couldn't be approached that way. I am sure in many schools that is what is going on now. Why the shift toward mandate? There is and can only be one reason, and that is CONTROL. (caps are for emphasis, I am not shouting at you
)

Are you aware that in this country, many of the city schools don't even give grades? My son's friend gets an A if he turns in his math project. Content doesn't matter, only obedience. My son quit soccer when they pulled the goalie and declared there would no longer be winners and losers. There are other things leading people to think the way they do about this bill and related legislation.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   

This becomes an existential discussion; one that I certainly am not equipped to have and my guess is would reap some backlash if we got off on a tangent here. So what compels you to give? Do you differentiate b/w being compelled and being forced? The issue here is about a mandated requirement. That, in my vocabulary, goes beyond being "compelled."


Yes i do differentiate.. But mandate is one of the possible ways to make it "compellable".. Look for instance.. my bother didnt want to go to school at the beginning.. he was forced of course.. then after few days he was compelled to go school by himself



...I think we are all compelled by different things. My faith encourages me to be socially and morally responsible - which compels me to do good. For others it may be nature, others it may be the law. Some may be compelled from engagement as you say, others may react directly the opposite. That isn't the issue. The issue is choice.


I dont deny that.. but all has the same roots.. you say that it is your faith.. but were you born with faith? Were not it created on the context of the community?


...as a parent, I will be the one to compel my child until he is of age to make, and bear the consequences of, his own decisions...


Yes of course and i kudos you for that

But i bet many many parents dont do that...


I think that is what we are doing. We are saying we don't want the government being any more involved with the moral choices of our kids. They have already stuck their nose in too far and finally people are waking up and saying enough is enough. Once this becomes mandatory, we no longer have a say in it; that's what we are upset about


You are saying "NO", not what i am saying.. What i meant was that you could approach them saying "hey, i understood the logic of that initiative, BUT i dont like its current form.. i want to help make it better.. more acording to our values, etc..."


There is no way you can make that statement with any certainty. That may be your opinion, that doesn't make it the motive of the TPTB. The sentiment fueling this thread is to "nip it in the bud" before it gets to that point.

Is anyone asking why all the talk about mandate? We throw money (usually unsucessfully) at everything else in this country. Why not develop some comission to "encourage" kids to volunteer. Make a national push to expliot the benefits of it. Give them incentives (I know this was alluded to), you know like we do in school to get them there, keep them there, make them apply themselves. (sarcasm) There is no reason it couldn't be approached that way. I am sure in many schools that is what is going on now. Why the shift toward mandate? There is and can only be one reason, and that is CONTROL. (caps are for emphasis, I am not shouting at you
)


Ok, i cant say that for sure.. About the shift to mandate i would repeat the answer.. You are saying "NO" to all of it.. at least as far as i can tell.. not only the mandate part.. I understood caps for emphasis.. this conversation is enough to understand your pacific stance



Are you aware that in this country, many of the city schools don't even give grades? My son's friend gets an A if he turns in his math project. Content doesn't matter, only obedience. My son quit soccer when they pulled the goalie and declared there would no longer be winners and losers. There are other things leading people to think the way they do about this bill and related legislation.


No i dont know that

And i thought portugal was now bad enough on that: As the government started a process of evaluation of professors, where one of the criteria is the sucess of the students, they started easying exams.. but nothing like it..

[edit on 23-4-2009 by Picao84]

[edit on 23-4-2009 by Picao84]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Picao84
 





You are an extremist.. But well i should be used to it.. ATS is full of them..


There you go. As a last resort, call someone names.
However, let me remind you....

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue. Barry Goldwater, acceptance speech as Republican candidate for President, 1963 US politician (1909 - 1998)


www.quotationspage.com...


As to the IBM case, I have posted that many times here, if you had bothered to check my posts. I know a lot more about IBM and the Nazis than you ever will.

Furthermore, did I ever say that the US is not complicit?
No, in fact, my concern is that the US has been heading to FASCISM for many, many decades. In fact, Obama is speeding up the process.

However, that is the problem of American citizens.
You, not being an American citizen, have no say in what happens to the internal policies of our country.

You to not have to live the consequences of what happens here. If this were an issue not concerned with US internal policies and liberties, then of course, you have every right to speak your mind, but it is not, and you are not.




[edit on 23-4-2009 by ProfEmeritus]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


Well Well Well.. You did call me Nazi didnt you?

And as far as i can tell Internet is still free.. So i can say what i want where i want.. Who are you to say to me to shut up just because im not american?

The issue at hand is not a national one.. The issue at hand is universal.. Just aplicated to the USA..

And that quote my means absolutly nothing.. As does mine or your opinion..

If you think that i called you names by saying you are extremist, why did you quote something to justify extremism? If you are extremist and proud of it why saying i called you something?

Again you fail to make a real argument against mine.. dont you?



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Picao84
 





Well Well Well.. You did call me Nazi didnt you?


You really must have a reading comprehension problem.
Nowhere did I call you a Nazi.
Nowhere did I tell you to shut up.
You have a very vivid imagination.

[edit on 23-4-2009 by ProfEmeritus]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Originally posted by Picao84


... But mandate is one of the possible ways to make it "compellable"..


Eeek! Read that three times out loud. It sounds like "we have ways of making you talk." I think your heart is in the right place here, I really do. But forcing complicity is not what American values are supposed to be about.


I dont deny that.. but all has the same roots.. you say that it is your faith.. but were you born with faith?


Let's just say I believe I was born with the free will to choose to have faith or not. My free will is what I wish to keep. It is what our American forefathers fought for and died for.


...as a parent, I will be the one to compel my child until he is of age to make, and bear the consequences of, his own decisions...

Yes of course and i kudos you for that

But i bet many many parents dont do that...


So you are saying it is OK to take away my right to make my own choices because of those who don't?


You are saying "NO", not what i am saying.. What i meant was that you could approach them saying "hey, i understood the logic of that initiative, BUT i dont like its current form.. i want to help make it better.. more acording to our values, etc..."


That is exactly what we are saying. And the sponsors of the bill knew this would happen which is why they removed the most sinister portion so they could try to put it through another way. They knew it would never pass, yet, in its original form. This bill doesn't "invent" the concept of volunteerism and service it already exists. Americans are known for their generosity worldwide. We give our money, our time, our food, and our lives. Encourage it more, promote it - fine. Mandate it. No.


Ok, i cant say that for sure.. About the shift to mandate i would repeat the answer.. You are saying "NO" to all of it.. at least as far as i can tell.. not only the mandate part.. I understood caps for emphasis.. this conversation is enough to understand your pacific stance


No I am not saying 'no' to all of it and I never got the impression that the general consensus was such. We do not want it forced upon us. ...and thanks for giving me the benefit



No i dont know that

And i thought portugal was now bad enough on that: As the government started a process of evaluation of professors, where one of the criteria is the sucess of the students, they started easying exams.. but nothing like it..


Just look at the evolution of the school system in this country...but that's another thread.
[edit on 23-4-2009 by Picao84]

[edit on 23-4-2009 by Picao84]

[edit on 23-4-2009 by glad_to_be_His]

[edit on 23-4-2009 by glad_to_be_His]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


So what is this?


Of course, you (Dinamo, StellarX and Picao84) approve of Obama's Give Act- with a Nazi and Fascist history, I would expect no less.


And this?


You, not being an American citizen, have no say in what happens to the internal policies of our country.



If this were an issue not concerned with US internal policies and liberties, then of course, you have every right to speak your mind, but it is not, and you are not.


Its equivalent! Dont act naive and victim now!

If i have reading compreension problems you must have memory ones



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


only ignorant imbecil with no history background can call people from Croatia and Portugal Nazis.

That is like i call you slave owner.

you have just confirmed my thesis of morale crisis when volounteering is compared with nazism.

by the way check your history of WW2 and see all antifascist movements. and then check again and see in what country all nazi scientists have gone.
then read some books.

and maybe just then come back and be smart.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Picao84
 


ignore ones with no history background.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Eeek! Read that three times out loud. It sounds like "we have ways of making you talk." I think your heart is in the right place here, I really do. But forcing complicity is not what American values are supposed to be about.


Again i say.. Why do you force kids to learn and such then, if they dont wanna? its the same logic



Let's just say I believe I was born with the free will to choose to have faith or not. My free will is what I wish to keep. It is what our American forefathers fought for and died for.


Thats not what i meant.. What i mean is that you have all those values because your learned them through the learning of your faith.. on the community where your faith is practiced.. I didnt mean you didnt choose your faith.. Faith, is as you said, related to morals.. We learn morals in society.. its those processes of chicken and egg.. what comes first?


So you are saying it is OK to take away my right to make my own choices because of those who don't?


Of course not!.. One of the changes you can propose to the law is to turn it only "mandatable" (or not, in the context of a negotiation between you and the government) to those people who dont have a record of it or are "registered" as bad parents or something like that..


That is exactly what we are saying. And the sponsors of the bill knew this would happen which is why they removed the most sinister portion so they could try to put it through another way. They knew it would never pass, yet, in its original form. This bill doesn't "invent" the concept of volunteerism and service it already exists. Americans are known for their generosity worldwide. We give our money, our time, our food, and our lives. Encourage it more, promote it - fine. Mandate it. No.


Im not saying AMERICANS (just emphasis
) are not generous.. Im talking about its youth and future..(Thats why i started by asking you how you were raised
) And its not only america that has this problem.. This is a consequence of the extremist capitalism (as bad as extremist communism).. This is not exclusive to america


[edit on 23-4-2009 by Picao84]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by StellarX
 


I'm only trying to explain to that person that the arguement was going nowhere because she was taking everyone's opinion the wrong way, simple as that. She was implying that everyone thought volunteering is bad when it is, in fact, not what they were saying.

I do find military work to be considered service. My father jumped out of airplanes for the military and it cost him his knees. Imagine it costing someone their lives. Not all military people are not out there killing innocent people. My father CHOSE the military to serve his country. Don't belittle all the vets out there just because of corrupt government officials and some military people that don't understand their job is to protect. Not trying to be offensive, just saying.

I'm glad we agree that the curriculum (excuse me if i spelled that wrong) at a high school is not to be trusted
.

"Your smug arrogance will get you nowhere."

"Like it didn't get Clinton, Bush and Obama ( and practically ever other politician) into office? 'Smug arrogance' will get you far in this world as there are hundreds of thousands of honest hard working suckers born every minute for you manipulate or just outright exploit. In fact isn't any such a problem on her side largely as result of the American educational establishment? Where else would Americans get this high and mighty impression of themselves and 'their' country?"

Yeah but she isn't trying to get into office is she? Smug arrogance may get you far in this world, but it doesn't mean it's right.

"The Army's refusal to release tens of thousands of soldiers who have completed their terms of service amounts to drafting them on the very day they fulfill their obligations. These men and women have already risked their lives. They should not have to risk them a second time through involuntary service, through being forced to stay in Iraq. This is a draft. A draft forces people to serve involuntarily."—Dennis Kucinich, December 31, 2003.

I agree whole heartedly with Kucinich. This GIVE ACT I think will do the exact same thing. It's just another draft and as Mr. Kucinich puts it "A draft forces people to serve involuntarily."

How long until this mandatory service isn't just servicing sandwiches in a soup kitchen or picking up trash? How long until the whole bill is rewritten or added to so it can become a civilian military force? Then how long after that until you are getting knocks on your door and the civilian military force decides that what you are reading at that moment is deemed not appropriate with the way things are run then or even terrorism? (Yes, I'm a conspiricy nut.)

If you haven't already, I suggest you read George Orwell's 1984. I don't want to have to be afraid that my child is going to turn me over the government because I don't agree with its practices. This bill has the potential to become something much, much more and it scares me.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Originally posted by Picao84


Again i say.. Why do you force kids to learn and such then, if they dont wanna? its the same logic


Kids learn naturally. They are like sponges and absorb everything around them. We don't structurally force babies to speak, they learn it on their own. We are born with the capacity to learn. Why do we force them to go to school today? To control them... All control isn't bad. You have to control a small child from putting its hand on a hot stove until he is old enough to know on his own. From that one nurturing experience he learns a wealth of information that he will apply to many scenarios. That's different than forcing it to comply with some indoctrination techniqe. It's comparing apples to oranges.


Of course not!.. One of the changes you can propose to the law is to turn it only "mandatable" (or not, in the context of a negotiation between you and the government) to those people who dont have a record of it or are "registered" as bad parents or something like that..


...so who/what determines who is a bad parent? Some think I am a bad parent for not allowing my child to "experience" a public education. We have no say in our law as Americans, there is no negotiation. The most control we have lies in our election process and that is flawed because it gives a voice to people who are often ill-informed or worse noninformed. There were people who didn't even know who was in control of Congress during our last election yet many of them voted based on its performance.


Im not saying AMERICANS (just emphasis
) are not generous.. Im talking about its youth and future..(Thats why i started by asking you how you were raised
) And its not only america that has this problem.. This is a consequence of the extremist capitalism (as bad as extremist communism).. This is not exclusive to america


I didn't think you were criticizing Americans...Many people I know and respect say that we havn't been a capitalist society for over 30 years. I'm no economist and I really should try to understand more about this....Ironically, I did my senior thesis on a comparison of capitalism vs. socialism. It impressed my teachers - I couldn't tell you one thing that I wrote. I simply 'produced' it for them...that's what happens when you are forced to do something


As for the youth and future of America and the world...if you want it to improve you have to go back to some sound moral basis....something we are becoming increasingly unable to even speak of in our "free" nation because it always ends up being discriminatory in some way. Now we are trying to legislate it and you can't, it has to be nurtured.
[edit on 23-4-2009 by Picao84]



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Picao84
 





Its equivalent! Dont act naive and victim now!

I won't waste any more time talking to someone who cannot tell the difference between having a country that has a history of fascism and being a Nazi.
You and your friends continue to bash the US, if you wish, I won't see it, since you three have made my ignore list.
If you want to have a say in what the US does internally, then try to apply to become a citizen. If not, you have no say in what our country does.



posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


Hell Brother, I did that three pages ago. Ignoring those that think they should have sway over our soverignty when they themselves have given up there own is a waste of brain space. I choose to deny them that power!!


Zindo



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


Tell me where did i bash the USA? As if i care that im on your ignore..



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by glad_to_be_His
 


I never said that kids dont learn naturally.. But they learn on the contact they make with the world.. In a process of interaction..

And if you agree with what i think is the spirit of this initiative.. Tell me how do you think you can promote it? How can you get them involved with the community? Without forcing them? Dont tell me again its their parents job.. Of course it is.. But many are not doing it.. What do you propose as a solution? Im not trying to force you to answer "mandate" here


Sometimes we have to put ourselves in the role of who has the power and think about it.. be creative.. just not react to them.. be constructive.. etc.. I really would like to hear some sugestions.. Instead of focus on the solution the government has.. think on the problem that solution is trying to address.. That is if you agree there is a problem (and i think you agree, at least partially)..

Maybe its my profession (Urban Planner, but from the anglo-saxonic "school", not french one) that make me see things this way.. Where citizen participation is very important.. and where i try to make the reverse.. When citizens say "we want a bridge", we try to find why.. because the bridge is the solution.. and sometimes the bridge might be the "obvious" solution but maybe not the better one.. Or maybe the problem to address can be solved with the bridge.. but maybe we can add something to that to turn it better.. And of course this ideas are discussed with the citizens too
This is just a simple example..

Well ok i believe this maybe difficult in USA.. bigger country (thats why you have states i think) and all the issues with the "shadow government".. But what i meant.. and what i tried to bring to this thread is the attitude to see beyond the proposed solution.. to see the problem..

In the end i can say im really glad because despite everything.. We have more liberties in Portugal (the community thing in Portugal is just another discipline.. as mandate as the other ones.. where the students choose what they want to do.. with ZERO indoctrination.. we dont even make the pledge to the flag like you do, there is nothing nationalist in it) and we seem to be more listened than you..

[edit on 24-4-2009 by Picao84]

[edit on 24-4-2009 by Picao84]



posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by h5mind
The biggest problem with the federal government mandating "benevolent service" (other than the fact it's creepy and outrageously hypocritical) is that such programs tend to weaken similar efforts already undertaken by other charitable groups. This has been the bugaboo with all such welfare state programs for many years.


Right, but according to the 'capitalist' system they force down our throats paid work is always more efficient than the community and volunteer work people used to do as part of a community? Why this protestation over the fact that people may now get paid to perform tasks that SHOULD be done but up until this point were unsupported and underfunded? The problem with the system is that there isn't all that much time left, to say nothing of energy, for volunteer work after a ten hour day away from your children and away from all the other tasks that awaits you at home.


The second problem is that the government has never, and will never, provide a service more efficiently or cost-effectively than actual volunteers, as opposed to the 'compensated volunteers' of the Give Act.


I don't believe that that is any more accurate than the claim that the private sector are always more efficient at distributing services and resources. In fact the leading cause ( as i recall ) of bankruptcy in the US is medical cost; so much for the private health care industry.


Government intervention, no matter how well-intentioned, invariably leads to undesireable long-term consequences.


You presume that their intentions are normally good. This is a terrible presumption to make of the state systems that we can clearly see not to be representing us or working in our interest. Government as it exists in the US is not very efficient at giving people back their money in services but it often beats the private sector ( no profit motive) and we know it can be done better IF we manage to get people into office that are truly trying to give us services for our tax dollars.


Although I imagine this new law wouldn't have had such rousing support if it were more accurately called the "Kill off True Volunteerism with Government Meddling Act".


You mean like the patriot act and similar measures which have been used to keep tens of thousands of republican guardsmen in iraq away from their oft public service orientated jobs as firemen, paramedics and police? Unless we make our governments more responsive they will turn our best intentions ( to say nothing of the bills they think up themselves) against us.


I suspect this legislation has less to do with helping one another and much more to do with setting the groundwork for the massive "civilian police force, as well-trained and equipped as the regular military" that Obama salivated over during his campaign.


That process has been ongoing since the civil rights and vietnam era demonstrations when the US government realised that it could not send all that many more troops overseas for fear of nationwide riots and upheavals at home. They have been turning ever larger sections of the state and federal police services into heavily armed para-military forces ever since and this bill will do nothing to speed up or slow down that process. Unless you believe SWAT teams are truly needed to fight the 'urban gangs' and knock down walls and doors instead of talking hostage takers out of creating a far messier situation for both the police and the hostage...

Stellar






top topics



 
29
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution