Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Law school, Brv. For her, sports scholarships are not an option at all.Sports scholarships generally are earned by prowess in that sport. It's not free. You had to work at that sport for years.There are minority organizations that offer scholarships but again you have to apply and earn them.As an aside, listing all athletic activities does not equal a thousand reasons. That's one reason, you were good at a sport.
Bullshit. College lineman are big and fast. It doesn't matter if they played football in high school.Some kids don't grow until late in adolescence. A fast 7-footer with no prior basketball experience has no shot at a college scholarship? Manute Bol would disagree. (if he wasn't dead)
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What's the difference between a particular gene sequence in an abstract sense and a particular gene sequence that exists within a cell? Can you explain the difference in a way that doesn't boil down

This is pretty funny. The problem isn't the itty bitty details. The problem is Romney refuses to say if he's going to play Poker or Go Fish with the cards, and is on record as saying he doesn't know

I see.   I'd rather give the poor tax breaks than give them welfare. As a general rule. Let them keep their money to live on rather than take their money and then provide for them.

Watching Zealous go completely in the bag for Catholicism on these issues is one of my favorite things. Oh sure, the media trumps up priest abuse but no one takes on the case of Corey Haim's mystery attacker!You say they are attacking religion, I say religion has been attacking women's rights for years and is whining when they fight back.Lol Brv, yeah kids who don't play in high school get scholarships all the time. Like 6 foot 5, 330lbs kids don't get automatically steered to football these days. It's not 1950. You are grasping at straws. You have correctly pointed out that there are one in a million outliers like Manute Bol. The other 99.9999999% probably played the sport a lot and put in a lot of effort.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Watching Zealous go completely in the bag for Catholicism on these issues is one of my favorite things. Oh sure, the media trumps up priest abuse but no one takes on the case of Corey Haim's mystery attacker!You say they are attacking religion, I say religion has been attacking women's rights for years and is whining when they fight back.Lol Brv, yeah kids who don't play in high school get scholarships all the time. Like 6 foot 5, 330lbs kids don't get automatically steered to football these days. It's not 1950. You are grasping at straws. You have correctly pointed out that there are one in a million outliers like Manute Bol. The other 99.9999999% probably played the sport a lot and put in a lot of effort.
Yes, actually my point was that Joe Paterno was a media villain but hundreds of Hollywood producers, actors, ect sign a petition in support of Roman Polanski who admitted to drugging and raping a young girl yet none of the people who sign this petition are harassed and run out of their jobs. Catholicism is completely responsible for priests that have abused children, but the public school system isn't responsible for the many more sexual abuse cases that occur in that system. If you want to have an honest debate about these things, I am game. Please don't misrepresent my arguments though. Listen! I am all for priests being punished for abuse and cover-up. The bishops who knew about abuse and sent these pedophiles to other parishes deserve anything they get. But I object to the accusation that Catholicism is the cause of the abuse. That kind of behavior is against everything the Church teaches.Men have been abusing women throughout history, to pretend that this problem is somehow unique in religion is bullshit. Again Catholicism is against any kind of mistreatment of women. Have members of the Church ever abused women, yes, have they done so in the name of religion? Yes, is that the fault of Catholic teaching, absolutely not, it is for a number of reasons, including that human beings are Rat Bastards, and some of them have taken positions in the Catholic Church the same way they have taken positions in every other organization throughout the world.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Found out today her name is pronounced Fluck.....yea, gonna leave this nutcase to be the poster child for freedom for the left.No matter how much I love Cane arguing that a poor law student from Georgetown deserves more free stuff from others since her future is in jeopardy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
See what happens when you mix sex and religion and add in a dash of politics
yeah, this is a perfect storm.I haven't read much on the story, but it *sounds* similar to something I encountered at KU. one of the student parties wanted KU med to provide free STD testing for students, funded by a mandatory campus fee. yes, it is a public health issue, but people like me and LG who didn't go out to the bars and sleep with random people shouldn't have to bear the costs of that behavior as a condition of getting an education. so I am kind of leaning toward shake's argument about this person attempting to spread the costs associated with a certain behavior over the whole group.I like cane's argument that anti-abortion people should be heavily pro-free contraception, too. I want contraception to be free nationally because it does help with a bunch of public health problems... some of which do present themselves in medicare's bottom line. if you want to not eat for a few meals, you should look into STD rates among the elderly in assisted living facilities. they GET. IT. ON.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Your so completely full of shit. So why doesn't she make arrangements with one of the many other insurance companies that routinely cover such things? She doesn't have to associate with such "archaic" religious organizations if she doesn't want to. This has nothing to do with health or birth control this is an attack on religion. Of course she isn't honest enough to come out and say that, so we get this bullshit about it being about women who take the pill for things other than birth control, yeah right.
I'm not full of shit, as I have accurately described what she was talking about. Note that I haven't taken a position on the issue yet except to clarify that the woman was not asking for "free contraception". However, we should probably agree that the presence of an alternative option for acquiring birth control has nothing to do with whether or not the school has a right to exclude specific items from their healthcare based on their religion. Let's say the school was founded by a religion which does not believe in antibiotics, so that they prevent their health insurance partners from covering antibiotics for their students when needed. Does the fact that the patient can make other arrangements to pay for cipro have anything to do with whether or not its right for this employer to do this? I don't think so. I think your only valid point is that she could choose to attend an institution which is not beholden to archaic values that conflict with modern health care standards. But I'm not convinced this is a definitive answer. There's probably some subtle legal issues to be discussed here, but it seems to me that an employer does not have the right to do anything they want simply because there are other employers available and their justification is religion. For instance, if the religion is racist, they cannot say that birth control will only be provided for black people because that is what their religious values require. Also, I wish she were making an attack on religion, but unfortunately I don't think she had any intention of doing that.
If this is specifically about forcing Georgetown or other religious groups to include stuff against their religions in their insurance, then I'm against it more than ever. The government has no right to tell a religious institution what they can believe. If they want to, then every courthouse in America that wants to display the 10 commandments should be allowed to do so.
At least now we are talking about the issue instead of the stupid red herring discussion Limbaugh led us on to. The government has no right to tell a religious institution what they can believe. It does have a right to tell a religious institution how they must act regardless of their religious beliefs. Obviously my religious belief that all short people should die is not legally actionable simply because it is a religious belief.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess President Obama is going to be busy now. He's set the precedence that someone calling a woman a slut demands a phone call from him to make sure she's okay.A MSNBC host called Laura Ingraham a right wing slutBill Maher said Michelle Malkin should call her vibrator 'Obama'Obama supporters wore T-shirts calling Palin a c###Letterman said Palin was a slutty flight attendant I guess when it comes to misogyny, the left is miles ahead of the right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not full of shit, as I have accurately described what she was talking about. Note that I haven't taken a position on the issue yet except to clarify that the woman was not asking for "free contraception". However, we should probably agree that the presence of an alternative option for acquiring birth control has nothing to do with whether or not the school has a right to exclude specific items from their healthcare based on their religion. Let's say the school was founded by a religion which does not believe in antibiotics, so that they prevent their health insurance partners from covering antibiotics for their students when needed. Does the fact that the patient can make other arrangements to pay for cipro have anything to do with whether or not its right for this employer to do this? I don't think so. I think your only valid point is that she could choose to attend an institution which is not beholden to archaic values that conflict with modern health care standards. But I'm not convinced this is a definitive answer. There's probably some subtle legal issues to be discussed here, but it seems to me that an employer does not have the right to do anything they want simply because there are other employers available and their justification is religion. For instance, if the religion is racist, they cannot say that birth control will only be provided for black people because that is what their religious values require.
A private school can have lots of policies that you must agree to before you attend. Surely you aren't advocating that the government nationalize the schools are you?
Also, I wish she were making an attack on religion, but unfortunately I don't think she had any intention of doing that.
In fact she EXACTLY had that intention.
At least now we are talking about the issue instead of the stupid red herring discussion Limbaugh led us on to. The government has no right to tell a religious institution what they can believe. It does have a right to tell a religious institution how they must act regardless of their religious beliefs. Obviously my religious belief that all short people should die is not legally actionable simply because it is a religious belief.
Are you a member of the Strawman religion?
Link to post
Share on other sites
if you want to not eat for a few meals, you should look into STD rates among the elderly in assisted living facilities. they GET. IT. ON.
all the dumbass parts of catching up on this thread were worth it for this.
Obviously my religious belief that all short people should die is not legally actionable simply because it is a religious belief.
um, what's the, uh, cut off here?
Link to post
Share on other sites
A private school can have lots of policies that you must agree to before you attend. Surely you aren't advocating that the government nationalize the schools are you?
It is also prevented from having certain policies that you must agree to before you attend. Surely you aren't saying the fact that an institution is private gives it carte blanche to do whatever it wants?
Please find the part of that for me that shows she was trying to attack religion? I don't see where it says anything about that.
Are you a member of the Strawman religion?
Actually, you are! Doesn't this look like someone you love? Scarecrow.jpg
Link to post
Share on other sites
Watching Zealous go completely in the bag for Catholicism on these issues is one of my favorite things. Oh sure, the media trumps up priest abuse but no one takes on the case of Corey Haim's mystery attacker!You say they are attacking religion, I say religion has been attacking women's rights for years and is whining when they fight back.Lol Brv, yeah kids who don't play in high school get scholarships all the time. Like 6 foot 5, 330lbs kids don't get automatically steered to football these days. It's not 1950. You are grasping at straws. You have correctly pointed out that there are one in a million outliers like Manute Bol. The other 99.9999999% probably played the sport a lot and put in a lot of effort.
Cane: If you get free schooling, are only two options. You were either a super duper hard worker or got super good grades.brv: Um, no. There are tons of ways you can "earn" scholarships with minimal work or mediocre grades.Cane: Wrong.brv: Here's some examples.Cane: HAHA. Those don't happen very often so they don't count. Idiot.brv: But, you said those were the only options?Cane: They are. Idiot.brv: But... ok.
The government has no right to tell a religious institution what they can believe. It does have a right to tell a religious institution how they must act regardless of their religious beliefs. Obviously my religious belief that all short people should die is not legally actionable simply because it is a religious belief.
Thankfully not providing birth control isn't the same as murder, so we don't even have to bring this up in our discussion. In fact, I'm fairly sure that freedom of religion and separation of church and state have always been held accountable to laws and stuff so that that line of discussion is completely worthless.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Be good at sports without having played that sport much by 18 is "Tons of ways?". Oh.That's almost as good as BG saying this woman wants "more" free stuff without establishing what the original free stuff was.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Be good at sports without having played that sport much by 18 is "Tons of ways?". Oh.That's almost as good as BG saying this woman wants "more" free stuff without establishing what the original free stuff was.
I didn't say anything about being good at sports*, but now that you mention it: Yes, that's yet another way to get free tuition.*although one of my examples did include hiking a football, which is being good at a sport.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't say anything about being good at sports*, but now that you mention it: Yes, that's yet another way to get free tuition.*although one of my examples did include hiking a football, which is being good at a sport.
Yep, all those kids on full athletic rides who aren't good at sports. Tons of ways. Tons!You said she was on free tuition. Which was false. Now you have insisted that you provided numerous examples of how to get a full ride with minimal effort, even though you have described what we call walk-ons (bc kids who have never played the sport much dont get full rides). Just say you were wrong and college isn't some place teeming with kids who got a free ride for little effort.
Link to post
Share on other sites
What??? Abortion and Contraception are two seperate things for conservatives. You said he wanted to outlaw birth control.
An SC case way back ruled that states cannot outlaw contraception; he has, on several occasions, said the SC should not have made that ruling.
Link to post
Share on other sites
college isn't some place teeming with kids who got a free ride for little effort.
You're still doing it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

ummm I think you just agreed with me brv, which would mean disagreeing with yourself.

The government has no right to tell a religious institution what they can believe.
In fact, I'm fairly sure that freedom of religion and separation of church and state have always been held accountable to laws and stuff so that that line of discussion is completely worthless.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You're still doing it.
You've still provided exactly one example of a person who magically got a college scholarship with minimal effort: Manute Bol. You have described walk-ons (in between insinuating people get free college money based on race which is false and insisting that listing a number of different athletic attributes are "tons of ways".) So, when you have something other than semantics dancing around my original use of the word "only" (when I guess it should have been "except for under wildly rare circumstances"), let me know.
ummm I think you just agreed with me brv, which would mean disagreeing with yourself.
it hasn't been his best day.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This 30 yr old woman, posing as an unbiased coed, who is only concerned about health issues, outed herself when she referenced media matters during an interview.Had some conservative student referenced fox news for their inspiration, Cain and co would still be laughing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...