PatriotAfire, Not sure where you're coming from, but as much as I am against abortion, I protest your post on the following points: 1. Not ALL those who promote abortion are calloused-hearted and with no conscience. You won't convince any of the latter anyway (Tbrennan, for example) but if you want to convince any of those who promote abortion with sincere, altruistic motives, you shouldn't ignore that they exist. 2. "Abortion destroys . . . a divine life." ¿Really? This wouldn't be where you should defend that religious concept but by saying it here (and repeating later that "abortion is the murder of God") is at least a distraction and could be the undoing of any good argument about abortion that you could have

any group because they have been so persecuted in the past. I remember getting to know a new member of a Rotary Club in South America who was that country's ceo of the Bayer company. One week I met him and the next weeks he did not show up. Having a business reason to go and see him I told him I had missed him. He said, "You may remember the last day we sat together that a guest speaker had told a joke against the Jews. I won't go back to a Club that allowed that kind of talk." He was a German.

any group because they have been so persecuted in the past. I remember getting to know a new member of a Rotary Club in South America who was that country's ceo of the Bayer company. One week I met him and the next weeks he did not show up. Having a business reason to go and see him I told him I had missed him. He said, "You may remember the last day we sat together that a guest speaker had told a joke against the Jews. I won't go back to a Club that allowed that kind of talk." He was a German.

any group because they have been so persecuted in the past. I remember getting to know a new member of a Rotary Club in South America who was that country's ceo of the Bayer company. One week I met him and the next weeks he did not show up. Having a business reason to go and see him I told him I had missed him. He said, "You may remember the last day we sat together that a guest speaker had told a joke against the Jews. I won't go back to a Club that allowed that kind of talk." He was a German.

Three comments: 1. The word "Jesus" was probably chosen because it was thought that most of the students would have had a Christian background/upbringing; otherwise, if Mohamed had been chosen, few of the students would have got the message of the exercise which was to learn why they hesitated. 2. It was expected, according to the textbook, that most of the students would refuse (or at least hesitate) to stomp/stand on the name of Jesus; the importance of symbols in culture was the lesson to be learned. 3. It is disturbing that not more students protested, whether their beliefs were Christian or not; all groups should have been quick to condemn what would be offensive to one group. Jews today are so keen to condemn discrimination against

"investing" should read "investor".

So, an investing needs (above all else) some knowledge of the kind of characteristics of a Company that make it likely to stick around through ups and down for the long haul. Or, trust his investments to the judgment of people like Charles Payne. Oh, and have enough money left over at the end of the month to buy a share here and there. One and three leave me out, so two is out also. But, I appreciate this little tidbit of financial education.

Excellent, John. It just occurred to me to add that no one in Congress ever needs to take a trip out of the country (unless it's personally-paid vacation). Congress only passes laws and confirms appointments by the president. Stick to that.

If no one could have two consecutive terms, he/she wouldn't need to spend the last year of the first term trying to get re-elected. We could even legislate that a sitting president could neither organize nor attend any fund-raising events for his/her party. And I also would add to the requirements for a presidential candidate that he/she must have spent at least one full term in military service - after all, he/she would become the Commander in Chief, and it would be good to have SOME knowledge of military life. I also believe that one of the best deterrents to wanting lifetime career in politics, would be to keep the pay very low (including the perks). A servant of the people shouldn't make more than the people do.

If no one could have two consecutive terms, he/she wouldn't need to spend the last year of the first term trying to get re-elected. We could even legislate that a sitting president could neither organize nor attend any fund-raising events for his/her party. And I also would add to the requirements for a presidential candidate that he/she must have spent at least one full term in military service - after all, he/she would become the Commander in Chief, and it would be good to have SOME knowledge of military life. I also believe that one of the best deterrents to wanting lifetime career in politics, would be to keep the pay very low (including the perks). A servant of the people shouldn't make more than the people do.

Sorry,DCM, but "demanding that relationships be officially deemed marriage in spite of failing to meet the most important conditions," IS REDEFINING MARRIAGE.