or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by SDW2001

Cool feature, but misleading headline.  "Snoop?"  Total sensationalism designed to drive traffic.  It's voicemail call screening.  That's all.  
 That's a ridiculous and needless comment.  I didn't support the bill for several reasons.  However, it was not an "anti-gay" bill, nor does this veto suddenly prevent discrimination.  It is already legal under AZ law to discriminate against gays.  That is simply a fact.  The intent of this bill was to give businesses added protection from being compelled to violate their religious beliefs (as has happened in CA and NM).  Having said that, it was redundant and created...
What a stupid and biased headline/article.   I'm not sure I support such a bill, but it's not a bill that "legalizes discrimination."  Under existing Arizona law, gays are not a protected class.  It's already legal to refuse service on those grounds.  This bill simply clarifies that businesses are free to claim religious expression as a reason for refusing service.    This is a result of cases around the country where some businesses are being forced to serve gay...
The market is so absurd. Apple had a ridiculous quarter...again. They are selling iPhones and iPads as fast as they can make them, and sold nearly a million more Macs than a year ago. But the quarter was "disappointing" because analysts "expected" more. If I had the cash, I'd buy too.
That doesn't seem to be true. It doesn't say anything about having to trade in a phone.Option. And it also says nothing about paying full price for your next device.
 I know what "at will" employment is. Even as a teacher I am at-will. It's quite likely he's not at-will though, because that's how TV contracts tend to go (same with college and pro coaches). They have guaranteed contracts. The same applies in most states to school superintendents and business managers. If they are fired without cause, they have to be paid the balance of their contract. In fact, with these contracts, the situation is exactly the opposite of what...
 You can't "disagree" with a fact. He did not make a "direct verbal association." At best, he made an indirect one, and even that is pretty weak. He was talking about types of sin. That's what he was asked. It's the act of sinning that "morphs out." At no time did he draw an equivalence. He listed different types of sins. In his view, and in the view of millions of Christians, both ARE. This includes Time's Man of the Year himself.As for the network, what in the...
 That's what I thought initially. However, I now wonder if they really are free to fire him. He's presumably under contract. Unless his contract prevents him from discussing his, uh,  "traditional" views on gay marriage, they may be guilty of  religious discrimination.   There is no way they'd make a sort of "conduct unbecoming" charge stick with what he said, nor did he disparage the network.  He wasn't charged or convicted of a crime.  How does his termination have any...
 It would be clumsy and dumb if he were a politician, but he's not. The flow of the words? Come on. He didn't link anything, except to note that in his view, both are sins. He was essentially fired for talking about what many view as the biblical view of marriage.
Alternate title:  Freedom of Speech:  A Postmortem  As many have heard recently, "Duck Dynasty" start Phil Robertson has been indefinitely suspended (read: fired) from the show after stating his Christian belief that homosexuality is a sin.   Here are (most of ) the comments made:    And here is the response from GLADD:   So, here's my take.  First, as a Christian myself, I don't agree with his comments.  I do not consider homosexuality a sin, and believe that in the vast...
New Posts  All Forums: