Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,878 Year: 4,135/9,624 Month: 1,006/974 Week: 333/286 Day: 54/40 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   This just in, Wisconsin Senators Pass Bill Pushing Abstinence Over Contraception
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 104 of 117 (640693)
11-11-2011 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by crashfrog
11-11-2011 7:10 PM


Re: Truth
You're completely wrong. What is ungracious is to send young men and women to die in countries with no capacity to attack us or "threaten my freedoms" and then act like they're engaged in some great noble defense of freedom so politicians can profit from a state of war.
If you re-read what I actually said, you'll see that I never challenged the proposition quoted above. But being sent to fight and die in other countries is not the sum total of what soldiers, jar-heads, airmen, and sailors do.
If it wasn't clear, let me say that we can thank our veterans and service men for sacrifices that have nothing to do with fighting in wars. I'm quite sure I made that point in my message.
They protect our freedom by sitting in a silo and never pressing a button, or by spending months on submarine patrol in the North Atlantic and never firing a torpedo or missile in anger, by securing our inter-coastal waterways, or by simply training hard and keeping fighting shape. None of that stuff deserves to be dismissed as nothing. And much of it comes at personal sacrifice of the type a life long civilian might not understand.
Your post is a complete straw man. Yeah, I'm a former submarine officer, but despite your disclaimer, you did benefit from what service men do, whether you deem to recognize it or not. Your suggestion that no service man had ever done anything to defend your freedom since WWII is completely off base.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by crashfrog, posted 11-11-2011 7:10 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by crashfrog, posted 11-11-2011 8:46 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 109 of 117 (640703)
11-11-2011 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by crashfrog
11-11-2011 8:46 PM


Re: Truth
I guess what I was confused by is that "veteran" means "somebody who fought in a war.
Yes, but veterans are also servicemen who do the same stuff that we former servicemen who never saw combat do. I'm glad to see we are on the same accord.
I disagree, since the context here is Veteran's Day, not Armed Forces Day. I'm sorry if I somehow gave you the wrong impression about what I was talking about, but surely a glance at a calendar might have addressed your confusion.
That kind of condescension is incompatible with my view of you from your other posts. Veterans are servicemen who also happen to have fought in a combat. I don't apologize for taking your comment at face value. I'll also note that I was completely clear about the exact reason that I objected to your initial statement. You simply missed it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by crashfrog, posted 11-11-2011 8:46 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by crashfrog, posted 11-12-2011 1:50 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 117 (640742)
11-12-2011 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by hooah212002
11-12-2011 11:26 AM


Re: In other, related, news
What's the process for amending the state constitution in WI?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by hooah212002, posted 11-12-2011 11:26 AM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by hooah212002, posted 11-12-2011 12:24 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 115 of 117 (640768)
11-12-2011 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by hooah212002
11-12-2011 11:26 AM


Re: In other, related, news
I regret the day I moved to this state. Slowly pushing reproductive freedom back to the stone age.
If it makes you feel any better, initiative to introduce these bills into state legislatures is being pushed by national organizations that probably don't include many Wisconsin natives.
Wisconsin's legislators have been awfully busy at this introducing reactionary bills this year.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by hooah212002, posted 11-12-2011 11:26 AM hooah212002 has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 116 of 117 (640769)
11-12-2011 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by hooah212002
11-12-2011 12:24 PM


How to amend the WI constitution
From Wikipedia:
quote:
Wisconsin does not have petition-based referendums or initiatives.
However, passing an amendment requires a lengthy three-vote process:
First, a majority of members in both houses of the state legislature must vote in favor of the amendment.
Once the proposed amendment passes both houses for the first time, any further progress in the amendment's adaptation must wait until after general elections have been held and the state legislature has reconvened with the members chosen in the new elections; then, both houses must vote a second time to accept the proposed amendment (without changes).
Should the amendment pass the legislature twice, it must be approved in a third vote, the popular vote cast by Wisconsin citizens.
Sounds like there is the opportunity for a lot of politics to go on if the bill can get out of the legislature.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by hooah212002, posted 11-12-2011 12:24 PM hooah212002 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024