Tuesday, May 25, 2010
What do you think of the United State's policy on gay marrige?
Answers:
There is no policy. I think there should be one. I am with the right on this one though.
WHAT POLICY?
There isn't a policy on gay marraige in the United States of America. Maybe one of the states has one but that's why it's a federation. Power is in the state.
I think the attitude is that marriage is a matter left best to the laws of the individual states, and that the US Federal Government will take no action in requiring one state to recognize or accept gay marriages granted in one state to be accepted in a second state.
I don't think it is fully developed as a matter of law at this time. And probably as is will continue to ban gay marriage as a 'must accept' alternative lifestyle.
You mean the "pass the buck" policy?
It's NOT up to the state, because the states who do have marriage doesn't amount to diddly squat on the federal level.
The "policy" should be inclusive of all Americans... not just a chosen few.
Someday it will, of that I have no doubt.
It's a shame we don't have a policy on gay marriage. Come on people get in the 21st century. What are people afraid of? I don't understand. If you think only in monetary terms, if you allow gay marriages those spouse could be placed on their spouses medical insurance if they have none of their own.
That could take some people off medicare if they are low income. A whole new way do look at things. Why too does the govt have to agree with a life style to allow it legally? If not allowing gay marriages a policy I do not approve of it.
1. There is no such policy.
2. There is no such thing as 'gay marriage'. You must be talking about 'homosexual marriage'. Please don't contribute to the further corruption of my native language.
What do you think of the smoking ban?
- 1st of July, smoking ban UK.
Answers:
it is wonderful. They should ban smoking all together
i agree with it
i want to live longer
forget them if they re emssing up their lungsand cutting their lifespans by 10-50 YEARS!!
let them die
not me
first off, im not a smoker, and i dont like people who single out an entire group, people say we need to be more tolerant to gays, muslims, etc. but they cant see that they tax and ban these people
i am against the smoking bans. i feel it should be up to the businesses to ban smoking in their establishments.
One day isnt' going to do a lot. You want to make a stand, then make it more than one day. Personally, I don't care
we had a smoking ban in columbia missouri, and its great. im allergic to smoke and so when i go in places its fresh air, and you dont have to sit in the back because of smoking or w.e! i love it way more! and it doesnt make your food taste nasty
I like it. I like it a lot.
I think that it is wonderful. Wherever you are, whether teh US, the UK or elsewhere, I think people should be allowed to breathe clean air. It may be your choice to smoke, fine if you choose to do, but don't make otehr people wo have chosen not to smoke breathe it in
its pretty oppressive to me but we smokers are second class citizens according to the health nazi's look we are all gonna die anyways why not go out with a smoke in your hand and medicine is advancing so quickly youll be able to get fake lungs soon so quit complaining and light up people say its bad and it causes cancer and they want to be able to breath free. well i want to be able to enjoy my smoke. and are we gonna ban everything thats dangerous to us. what about mcdonalds what about beer (tried the beer thing in america and that only got us more crime) are we gonna ban the sun it causes cancer. why dont you take your head out of your butt and put your lips on one
its good. i think its rude to smoke in public places. not only are u killing urself but u r killing the ppl around you by secondhand smoke. its a good thing that it is now banned.
Great idea. Second hand smoke causes cancer, and breathing problems for those who do not smoke. If smokers want to kill themselves, fine, but don't kill others with their filthy habit.
I think that it is great. It is so much nicer now to go into a bar or even a restaurant or bowling alley and not walk out and smell like a big cigarette. I am not a smoker but I had friends that were and even they thought that it was a lot nicer. It is especially helpful for people that have bad Asama and can't be around smoke, not to mention how bad second hand smoke is for people to inhale. That passed in Washington before I moved and I loved it.
I like that the restuarants have clean air in the US. I'm not sure how stricked the ban in the UK is but I wouldn't want peoples rights to be taken away completely. I do want my child to breath fresh air though.
I'm not sure what your smoking ban involves...but in the state of Maine, smoking is not allowed in any public buildings, including bars. It's so nice not to have to sit in a restaraunt with that stench.
Thats great! I only wish it would spread to the United States. My docter said I have a strange diasease type thing that if I smell smoke I will hold my breath until its gone. Now I really want to take a trip to the U.K
Tobacco is Extremely harmful and dangerous. Only the profiteers want to keep it legal.
We will have a similar ban here in Minnesota, United States, starting on October 1. It will be good for those who work in places like bars, restaurants, or pubs, as they are not exposed to potentially dangerous second-hand smoke every day. It is almost a violation of the business owners right to privacy and freedom to make decisions that affect his/her business (not sure what kind of rights or freedoms are guaranteed in UK, but this could be considered a violation of the property rights here in the USA).
As with anything, there are pros and cons. Overall, I think it will be a good thing. People still can choose to smoke, they is only restrictions on where they can or cannot smoke.
i like the idea of a smoking ban in public places. people who choose not to smoke should not have to be in places where those who have chossen to smoke are. likewise with children, they cannot tell us that they don't want to be exposed to the smoke, and they haven't yet made their choice as to whether or not they will smoke.
i live in Canada and we have a smoking ban for public places, and any business. theres been talk that they want to extend it to personal vehicles. because of the kids thing
Great.
It's just another freedom lost. Non smokers love it - but wait until there are laws forbidding them to walk their dog on city streets or drink coffee!
For the record, I don't smoke!
I agree with any ban of smoking anywhere outside your own home. You have the right to chose to smoke, but those of us subjected to second hand smoke are never asked if we'd like to breathe it. You should not be allowed to smoke outside your own home, where you and your family make the choice to shorten your lives.
I am for the smoking ban.
The fact is it should be illegal to smoke, it doesnt just damage your body but others too.
My mother smoked while she was pregnant with my sister, but only like a pack a week.
My sister has terrible asthma and is in and out of the hospital all the time with pnuemonia, ear infections, etc. My sister has to go through all that by no choice of her own.
Thats what smokers put the public through.
I love to sing kareoke and I no longer can because even though there's a ban, they dont listen and so I cant go because my best friend has a brain hemmorhage and if she breathes in just a little smoke a few times it can cause her to stroke again.
So Im for the ban. Once it goes into affect that they'll be fined if they dont obey it, we'll finally be able to enjoy life.
And excuse me, but I take offense to the fact that you consider muslims to smokers. I am Jewish and often get singled out, and its very different. Smokers choose to slowly kill themselves for a few minutes of pleasure (basically a fix from drugs), whereas this is my religion and lifestyle, and its a positive healthy thing.
If people want to kill themselves with it.. that's their decision. But they have no right to do it to the rest of us.
I think that private businesses should be allowed to declare themselves as "smoking" or "non-smoking" and let the customer choose which to patronize.
Next the big brother government will ban sugar or sushi.
Leslie G. - I live in Springfield, and there is a city-wide ban on smoking in public place. That is fine with me, but when they say that smoking is eliminated in private establishments (restaurants, bars., etc.) that's where it goes too far. It's not the gov'ments business to tell private businesses how they're going to run their business. If one doesn't like smoking in an establishment, then they don't have to go there. Let economics decide how they're going to run their business. (It's called the free enterprise system.) By the way, I'm a non-smoker. Have been all my life. Hate it. But not to the point that private businesses need to be told by the gov'ment how to run it.
i have a very sad news to any one who thinks smoking is the only cause of dirty air or pollutions.
if we all gather all smokers who smoke from every where and put them on only one place, still the rest of you none smokers will breath toxic air.
so do not accuse us that we the smokers are the only ones who are responsible for the toxic air on the planet.
look around i am sure you all can find much more dangerous
fumes coming out of factory's, toxic waist planes and so on and on.
I wish they'd expand it.
Answers:
it is wonderful. They should ban smoking all together
i agree with it
i want to live longer
forget them if they re emssing up their lungsand cutting their lifespans by 10-50 YEARS!!
let them die
not me
first off, im not a smoker, and i dont like people who single out an entire group, people say we need to be more tolerant to gays, muslims, etc. but they cant see that they tax and ban these people
i am against the smoking bans. i feel it should be up to the businesses to ban smoking in their establishments.
One day isnt' going to do a lot. You want to make a stand, then make it more than one day. Personally, I don't care
we had a smoking ban in columbia missouri, and its great. im allergic to smoke and so when i go in places its fresh air, and you dont have to sit in the back because of smoking or w.e! i love it way more! and it doesnt make your food taste nasty
I like it. I like it a lot.
I think that it is wonderful. Wherever you are, whether teh US, the UK or elsewhere, I think people should be allowed to breathe clean air. It may be your choice to smoke, fine if you choose to do, but don't make otehr people wo have chosen not to smoke breathe it in
its pretty oppressive to me but we smokers are second class citizens according to the health nazi's look we are all gonna die anyways why not go out with a smoke in your hand and medicine is advancing so quickly youll be able to get fake lungs soon so quit complaining and light up people say its bad and it causes cancer and they want to be able to breath free. well i want to be able to enjoy my smoke. and are we gonna ban everything thats dangerous to us. what about mcdonalds what about beer (tried the beer thing in america and that only got us more crime) are we gonna ban the sun it causes cancer. why dont you take your head out of your butt and put your lips on one
its good. i think its rude to smoke in public places. not only are u killing urself but u r killing the ppl around you by secondhand smoke. its a good thing that it is now banned.
Great idea. Second hand smoke causes cancer, and breathing problems for those who do not smoke. If smokers want to kill themselves, fine, but don't kill others with their filthy habit.
I think that it is great. It is so much nicer now to go into a bar or even a restaurant or bowling alley and not walk out and smell like a big cigarette. I am not a smoker but I had friends that were and even they thought that it was a lot nicer. It is especially helpful for people that have bad Asama and can't be around smoke, not to mention how bad second hand smoke is for people to inhale. That passed in Washington before I moved and I loved it.
I like that the restuarants have clean air in the US. I'm not sure how stricked the ban in the UK is but I wouldn't want peoples rights to be taken away completely. I do want my child to breath fresh air though.
I'm not sure what your smoking ban involves...but in the state of Maine, smoking is not allowed in any public buildings, including bars. It's so nice not to have to sit in a restaraunt with that stench.
Thats great! I only wish it would spread to the United States. My docter said I have a strange diasease type thing that if I smell smoke I will hold my breath until its gone. Now I really want to take a trip to the U.K
Tobacco is Extremely harmful and dangerous. Only the profiteers want to keep it legal.
We will have a similar ban here in Minnesota, United States, starting on October 1. It will be good for those who work in places like bars, restaurants, or pubs, as they are not exposed to potentially dangerous second-hand smoke every day. It is almost a violation of the business owners right to privacy and freedom to make decisions that affect his/her business (not sure what kind of rights or freedoms are guaranteed in UK, but this could be considered a violation of the property rights here in the USA).
As with anything, there are pros and cons. Overall, I think it will be a good thing. People still can choose to smoke, they is only restrictions on where they can or cannot smoke.
i like the idea of a smoking ban in public places. people who choose not to smoke should not have to be in places where those who have chossen to smoke are. likewise with children, they cannot tell us that they don't want to be exposed to the smoke, and they haven't yet made their choice as to whether or not they will smoke.
i live in Canada and we have a smoking ban for public places, and any business. theres been talk that they want to extend it to personal vehicles. because of the kids thing
Great.
It's just another freedom lost. Non smokers love it - but wait until there are laws forbidding them to walk their dog on city streets or drink coffee!
For the record, I don't smoke!
I agree with any ban of smoking anywhere outside your own home. You have the right to chose to smoke, but those of us subjected to second hand smoke are never asked if we'd like to breathe it. You should not be allowed to smoke outside your own home, where you and your family make the choice to shorten your lives.
I am for the smoking ban.
The fact is it should be illegal to smoke, it doesnt just damage your body but others too.
My mother smoked while she was pregnant with my sister, but only like a pack a week.
My sister has terrible asthma and is in and out of the hospital all the time with pnuemonia, ear infections, etc. My sister has to go through all that by no choice of her own.
Thats what smokers put the public through.
I love to sing kareoke and I no longer can because even though there's a ban, they dont listen and so I cant go because my best friend has a brain hemmorhage and if she breathes in just a little smoke a few times it can cause her to stroke again.
So Im for the ban. Once it goes into affect that they'll be fined if they dont obey it, we'll finally be able to enjoy life.
And excuse me, but I take offense to the fact that you consider muslims to smokers. I am Jewish and often get singled out, and its very different. Smokers choose to slowly kill themselves for a few minutes of pleasure (basically a fix from drugs), whereas this is my religion and lifestyle, and its a positive healthy thing.
If people want to kill themselves with it.. that's their decision. But they have no right to do it to the rest of us.
I think that private businesses should be allowed to declare themselves as "smoking" or "non-smoking" and let the customer choose which to patronize.
Next the big brother government will ban sugar or sushi.
Leslie G. - I live in Springfield, and there is a city-wide ban on smoking in public place. That is fine with me, but when they say that smoking is eliminated in private establishments (restaurants, bars., etc.) that's where it goes too far. It's not the gov'ments business to tell private businesses how they're going to run their business. If one doesn't like smoking in an establishment, then they don't have to go there. Let economics decide how they're going to run their business. (It's called the free enterprise system.) By the way, I'm a non-smoker. Have been all my life. Hate it. But not to the point that private businesses need to be told by the gov'ment how to run it.
i have a very sad news to any one who thinks smoking is the only cause of dirty air or pollutions.
if we all gather all smokers who smoke from every where and put them on only one place, still the rest of you none smokers will breath toxic air.
so do not accuse us that we the smokers are the only ones who are responsible for the toxic air on the planet.
look around i am sure you all can find much more dangerous
fumes coming out of factory's, toxic waist planes and so on and on.
I wish they'd expand it.
What do you think of the judge who sued the drycleaner for 65 million bucks?
for a pair of pants?
I think this is an abuse of his authority and frankly he should be stripped of his license and should be charged with criminal harrassment.
Answers:
He's the poster boy for frivolous lawsuits. I agree, it was one of the most idiotic suits I've ever seen filed. He should be disbarred.
he should be disbarred, he is an idiot, and last of all he is a liberal.
A moron that deserves to be disbarred; he is wrecking the lives of those Koreans for a pair of frigging pants.
Gimme a Flipping break! Doesn't he has better things to do? Like judging real criminal cases? Jeez! Get over it; is just a pair of pants!
he's a racist, picking on Asian immigrant.
I think he made a mockery of the system by being so ridiculous with a stupid lawsuit, taking up the court's time and wasting the taxpayers money that way. Like so many judges, he let his power go to his head.
I don't think he should be disbarred but he should be sanctioned for his idiotic actions.
He was not really using his authority since it was not in his court as he is an administrative judge. But he shows arrogance to the whole judicial process, the judge in the court he filed should of thrown the case out for being stupid. And he should be held accountable in his court for this wasting of taxpayer's money to handle the case.
It has nothing to do with his authority since he is suing as a private citizen.
But, besides that he is a blooming moron.
I think he must be an idiot,
He's a piece of crap. I think I'm going to sue him for 65 million for tying up our legal system with frivolous lawsuits.
we are sue happy people now adays and he just proves it. if they were his lucky pair they weren't so lucky since they got lost. i hope whatever judge gets this case chews him out and embarrass him
People should be allowed to sue to recover loss...nothing more than that.
Were his pants covered in 24kt gold and diamonds? lol
You're right, this is abuse of power and he should be held accountable for his actions.
I think this is an abuse of his authority and frankly he should be stripped of his license and should be charged with criminal harrassment.
Answers:
He's the poster boy for frivolous lawsuits. I agree, it was one of the most idiotic suits I've ever seen filed. He should be disbarred.
he should be disbarred, he is an idiot, and last of all he is a liberal.
A moron that deserves to be disbarred; he is wrecking the lives of those Koreans for a pair of frigging pants.
Gimme a Flipping break! Doesn't he has better things to do? Like judging real criminal cases? Jeez! Get over it; is just a pair of pants!
he's a racist, picking on Asian immigrant.
I think he made a mockery of the system by being so ridiculous with a stupid lawsuit, taking up the court's time and wasting the taxpayers money that way. Like so many judges, he let his power go to his head.
I don't think he should be disbarred but he should be sanctioned for his idiotic actions.
He was not really using his authority since it was not in his court as he is an administrative judge. But he shows arrogance to the whole judicial process, the judge in the court he filed should of thrown the case out for being stupid. And he should be held accountable in his court for this wasting of taxpayer's money to handle the case.
It has nothing to do with his authority since he is suing as a private citizen.
But, besides that he is a blooming moron.
I think he must be an idiot,
He's a piece of crap. I think I'm going to sue him for 65 million for tying up our legal system with frivolous lawsuits.
we are sue happy people now adays and he just proves it. if they were his lucky pair they weren't so lucky since they got lost. i hope whatever judge gets this case chews him out and embarrass him
People should be allowed to sue to recover loss...nothing more than that.
Were his pants covered in 24kt gold and diamonds? lol
You're right, this is abuse of power and he should be held accountable for his actions.
What do you think of Mr. Speaker's actions?
I have many questions regarding the travels of Mr. Speaker, the TB infected Lawyer who traveled to Greece for his wedding.
When did he become aware of his condition? Why did he wait til the day before he was to leave the country to visit his doctor? Why did he tape record the Doctor's visit, if he in fact really did? If he did tape the Doctor's visit, what would you bet it sounds like a legal proceeding in which he and his father knew what to ask and the Health Official answered the questions in a legally correct way? Were his orginal travel plans to leave from Atanta, Ga. and return to North America through Canada? Who paid for his travel to Denver, him or we, the taxpayers? Who's paying for his Medical Care? Does anyone find it suspicious that he is an attorney and also related to an expert TB epiditomologist employed by the Federal Governemnt at the CDC in Georgia? If Greece was good enough to get married in, why wasn't it good enough to receive Health treatment in?
Answers:
I can answer all of that easily. Mr. Speaker is from my town of Atlanta, so I've been hearing about this guy constantly.
Professionally, Mr. Speaker is a lawyer, more precisely a "personal injury lawyer".
We all know that by the numbers, historically , personal injury lawyers are predominantly socialist/libs.
Socialist libs think and act only in their best interest, be dammed with anybody else. If it feels good, they do it.
After he was diagnosed by his personal doctor, his physician was obligated to report his condition to the local health department, which in turn reported it to the CDC. He was told to begin immediate treatment and should have been isolated at that point. But there is no law that says he must do this. He insisted that he travel to get married and was told to at least wear a mask which he did not do.
I'm sure we are now all paying for his travel and care now that it has become a national story.
Just like libs like to do. They act on their own desires regardless of how it affects others.
I find the whole thing very suspicious,especially when it came out that his father in law worked for the CDC and was researching TB.I really hate conspiracy theories...but...it makes me wonder.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt when he said he didn't know when he flew over seas that he was contagious,although I do not believe him.But,while he was over there he was told in no uncertain terms not to fly back,and he did anyway.He flew into Canada so he wouldn't get caught.He was thinking of only himself and not the innocent people he could infect with this possible fatal disease.
Something about this whole thing just doesn't sit right with me.
When did he become aware of his condition? Why did he wait til the day before he was to leave the country to visit his doctor? Why did he tape record the Doctor's visit, if he in fact really did? If he did tape the Doctor's visit, what would you bet it sounds like a legal proceeding in which he and his father knew what to ask and the Health Official answered the questions in a legally correct way? Were his orginal travel plans to leave from Atanta, Ga. and return to North America through Canada? Who paid for his travel to Denver, him or we, the taxpayers? Who's paying for his Medical Care? Does anyone find it suspicious that he is an attorney and also related to an expert TB epiditomologist employed by the Federal Governemnt at the CDC in Georgia? If Greece was good enough to get married in, why wasn't it good enough to receive Health treatment in?
Answers:
I can answer all of that easily. Mr. Speaker is from my town of Atlanta, so I've been hearing about this guy constantly.
Professionally, Mr. Speaker is a lawyer, more precisely a "personal injury lawyer".
We all know that by the numbers, historically , personal injury lawyers are predominantly socialist/libs.
Socialist libs think and act only in their best interest, be dammed with anybody else. If it feels good, they do it.
After he was diagnosed by his personal doctor, his physician was obligated to report his condition to the local health department, which in turn reported it to the CDC. He was told to begin immediate treatment and should have been isolated at that point. But there is no law that says he must do this. He insisted that he travel to get married and was told to at least wear a mask which he did not do.
I'm sure we are now all paying for his travel and care now that it has become a national story.
Just like libs like to do. They act on their own desires regardless of how it affects others.
I find the whole thing very suspicious,especially when it came out that his father in law worked for the CDC and was researching TB.I really hate conspiracy theories...but...it makes me wonder.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt when he said he didn't know when he flew over seas that he was contagious,although I do not believe him.But,while he was over there he was told in no uncertain terms not to fly back,and he did anyway.He flew into Canada so he wouldn't get caught.He was thinking of only himself and not the innocent people he could infect with this possible fatal disease.
Something about this whole thing just doesn't sit right with me.
What do you think of lawyers?
I find that attorneys are scum who will help others sue someone whether it is warranted or not or pursue a guilty plea even if they have doubt as long as they think they have a chance to win and make a buck. Isn't this really the equivalent of someone who would steal if they don't think they will get caught?Have you seen the pathetic personal injury attorneys just fishing for "customers". It is disgusting. Due to our litigous society, doctors are being forced from medicine due to skyrocketing insurance premiums. Doesn't anyone ever take responsibility for themselves anymore...why is everything someone elses fault. Example, a woman spills coffee on herself at a drive through and sues McDonalds
These are people that have basically given their souls to the devil yet they seem to feel as if they are in an esteemed profession...why is that?
Answers:
Well my sister is a lawyer and she is lovely I know that most are revolting people who would try to set free a guilty rapist
You obviously don't know any public interest lawyers. But there's also two sides to every story and I hear the woman who sued McDonald's was not the first to be severely burned, that the McDonald's had been told the coffee was too hot and didn't give a d@mn, she was a diabetic and, therefore, took a long time to heal, the whole time lying in bed with her legs wide open because the burn was where your underwear elastic goes around the leg and they'd had to scrape melted elastic out of her flesh.
But, yeah, there's greedy and unscrupulous lawyers just as there are greedy and unscrupulous people in every profession and pedophile teachers or soccer coaches.
I know a lot of folks feel this way, but not all attorneys do Personal Injury, and not all do Litigation, and some work for free for people that are being oppressed by bullies with or without licenses to practice Law.
The McDonald's case wasn't that simple. I used to agree with you, but the facts go beyond a simple cup of coffee. The fact is that McD's coffee at that time was extremely poor quality. I know this because I, an old Infantry soldier, found it undrinkable, and I've had some really bad coffee in my time. To counter the awfulness of the taste, they served it forty degrees hotter than anyone else served coffee, to cover the taste. Within that forty degree range is the difference between a minor irritation and a serious third degree burn injury.
McDonald's was wrong, and they paid for it, and they've changed their coffee because no one would buy it at safe temperatures.
Yes...all lawyers are scum...they are all personal injury attorneys...there are no prosecutors, public defenders...pro bono attorneys, legal aid attorneys, civil rights atttorneys and so forth...no attorneys do anything good.,.all other professions are spotless.no priests molest children, no police officers are corrupt...no doctors are money grubbing...Wow young lady you really need to think before you speak.
I see you are blonde...should we take you as a dumb blonde because of your hair color, or take you as an individual
Yes, there are bad lawyers that do whatever they can just to make a buck.But they are the very small majority, even among personal injury lawyers. Would you rather live in a world where people who get injured due to the negligence or recklessness of another have no way to be compensated for their injuries?
I've often said that lawyers are like dentists. Everyone hates them until they need them. The difference is that if you get a good lawyer, you'll love lawyers after that. If you get a good dentist, you'll still hate dentists.
BTW, it has been shown time and time again that insurance premiums do not rise in response to payouts, they rise in response to the performance of the underlying investments. Just because the insurance companies have been able to convince the doctors doesn't mean anyone else should fall for it.
i have news for you, miss--bad things happen unexpectedly to the best of people, who can suddenly find themselves unable to work and feed their families and pay the rent through no fault of their own. this could be you, or someone you know. so, if you are ever in an unimaginably difficult situation, does this mean you will suffer in silence rather than call a lawyer? your screed is a lame bunch of recycled stereotypes and half-truths that you read in a wrinkled old magazine at the beauty shop. did you speak to the lady who spilled the coffee, or her lawyer? if not, then how can you assume to know all about that case? why don't you tell us the truth about nuclear physicists or architects, since you have no clue about those fields, either?
To "clarify" your "clarification" -
If a person comes to a lawyer and wants him to do a certain case, and hires him, as long as the case has the slightest sliver of merit and it would not violate the ethics of the profession or the law to continue on with the client's wishes, the lawyer doesn't have a say in it.
It is our culture of victimology, brought about by the feminization of our country, among other things, that has made us litigious. Lawyers are merely the soliders in the trenches doing the work of this litigious society while their clients are the generals directing the battles.
Assuming all legal situations fit your ridiculous description, it would still only mean that 1/2 of lawyers are bad... Don't forget, in the McDonald's case, McDonald's had lawyers working for them and saying what you said. Did you ever consider that?
By the way, it's funny that you think lawyers that advertise are automatically evil... What, lawyers don't need to make money? I see doctors and dentists advertising in my town... GASP! They are making money by "fishing" for sick people!
These are people that have basically given their souls to the devil yet they seem to feel as if they are in an esteemed profession...why is that?
Answers:
Well my sister is a lawyer and she is lovely I know that most are revolting people who would try to set free a guilty rapist
You obviously don't know any public interest lawyers. But there's also two sides to every story and I hear the woman who sued McDonald's was not the first to be severely burned, that the McDonald's had been told the coffee was too hot and didn't give a d@mn, she was a diabetic and, therefore, took a long time to heal, the whole time lying in bed with her legs wide open because the burn was where your underwear elastic goes around the leg and they'd had to scrape melted elastic out of her flesh.
But, yeah, there's greedy and unscrupulous lawyers just as there are greedy and unscrupulous people in every profession and pedophile teachers or soccer coaches.
I know a lot of folks feel this way, but not all attorneys do Personal Injury, and not all do Litigation, and some work for free for people that are being oppressed by bullies with or without licenses to practice Law.
The McDonald's case wasn't that simple. I used to agree with you, but the facts go beyond a simple cup of coffee. The fact is that McD's coffee at that time was extremely poor quality. I know this because I, an old Infantry soldier, found it undrinkable, and I've had some really bad coffee in my time. To counter the awfulness of the taste, they served it forty degrees hotter than anyone else served coffee, to cover the taste. Within that forty degree range is the difference between a minor irritation and a serious third degree burn injury.
McDonald's was wrong, and they paid for it, and they've changed their coffee because no one would buy it at safe temperatures.
Yes...all lawyers are scum...they are all personal injury attorneys...there are no prosecutors, public defenders...pro bono attorneys, legal aid attorneys, civil rights atttorneys and so forth...no attorneys do anything good.,.all other professions are spotless.no priests molest children, no police officers are corrupt...no doctors are money grubbing...Wow young lady you really need to think before you speak.
I see you are blonde...should we take you as a dumb blonde because of your hair color, or take you as an individual
Yes, there are bad lawyers that do whatever they can just to make a buck.But they are the very small majority, even among personal injury lawyers. Would you rather live in a world where people who get injured due to the negligence or recklessness of another have no way to be compensated for their injuries?
I've often said that lawyers are like dentists. Everyone hates them until they need them. The difference is that if you get a good lawyer, you'll love lawyers after that. If you get a good dentist, you'll still hate dentists.
BTW, it has been shown time and time again that insurance premiums do not rise in response to payouts, they rise in response to the performance of the underlying investments. Just because the insurance companies have been able to convince the doctors doesn't mean anyone else should fall for it.
i have news for you, miss--bad things happen unexpectedly to the best of people, who can suddenly find themselves unable to work and feed their families and pay the rent through no fault of their own. this could be you, or someone you know. so, if you are ever in an unimaginably difficult situation, does this mean you will suffer in silence rather than call a lawyer? your screed is a lame bunch of recycled stereotypes and half-truths that you read in a wrinkled old magazine at the beauty shop. did you speak to the lady who spilled the coffee, or her lawyer? if not, then how can you assume to know all about that case? why don't you tell us the truth about nuclear physicists or architects, since you have no clue about those fields, either?
To "clarify" your "clarification" -
If a person comes to a lawyer and wants him to do a certain case, and hires him, as long as the case has the slightest sliver of merit and it would not violate the ethics of the profession or the law to continue on with the client's wishes, the lawyer doesn't have a say in it.
It is our culture of victimology, brought about by the feminization of our country, among other things, that has made us litigious. Lawyers are merely the soliders in the trenches doing the work of this litigious society while their clients are the generals directing the battles.
Assuming all legal situations fit your ridiculous description, it would still only mean that 1/2 of lawyers are bad... Don't forget, in the McDonald's case, McDonald's had lawyers working for them and saying what you said. Did you ever consider that?
By the way, it's funny that you think lawyers that advertise are automatically evil... What, lawyers don't need to make money? I see doctors and dentists advertising in my town... GASP! They are making money by "fishing" for sick people!
What do you think of labor unions?
I have a notion that labor unions may soon see a resurgence. I'd like to know your opinion but PLEASE in your answer list your state of residence. Thank you.
Answers:
I live in California and labor unions are a good thing they help the worker by getting them higher wages and humane conditions to work in. They are one of the things that make this country great.
They had their day.
The union management has become management, and is just as greedy and unconcerned about the workers as management is.
IN and PA
I think they are a crutch for mediocre people. They suck the life out of the human spirit.
FL
If it weren't for Labor Unions we'd probably be working for 2 dollars an hour, 16 hour days now. But they got too big, and too greedy, so I'm not sure how I feel about them
They should be abolished
Unions are counter-productive in this world economy. Employers should decide how much they are willing to pay to labor. The company has to make money, go out of business, or move to a foreign country.
Unions do not add anything to productivity. They spend way too much money on political campaigns of liberals.
I think labor unions are too worried about politics and getting as many liberal ideals adopted as possible that they ruin the companies their employee's work for. Labor unions are a front for political unions to collect money from millions of people to fund an agenda of a few people that only benefits a few people. Unions served their purpose in the past but have overstepped their bounds in today's society and are nothing more than a liberal political action group now.
The State of New Jersey is in hock because of the
Municiple Workers Union. NYC was near bankrupt because of the City unions. Unions killed the US steel industry, and have just about dispatched Ford, Chysler, and GM. Unions drove many railroads into insolvency.
They took way too much. They were out for themselves and destroyed great american companies. If they would have understood that what was good for the company, with effective management, would have been good for the union. They have now destroyed the opportunity for their sons and daughters to find the abundant career opportunities that they had.
I live in Ypsilanti, MI.
Labor unions had their place back in the days of child labor and unsafe working conditions, but now there are too many unions who have taken it to the extreme and are now paying the price for it. Case in point: The UAW. Being an auto-line worker is the only job I know of where you can get a starting wage of around $18.00 an hour and bring absolutely nothing to the table in terms of education, training, or skills. These people basically get paid a king's ransom for doing a job a trained monkey can do. And they have the gall to blame the corporate executives of the Big Three for being too greedy! Unions also bring the worker base down to the lowest common denominator -- no one is allowed to work harder or do a better job than the laziest slob in the union because "you're making the others look bad." I don't think we'll see a resurgence in unions because the executives and company owners will take their bases of operations elsewhere. People gripe about losing jobs to Canada and Mexico -- well, when people there make 25% to 50% less in pay and benefits and are thankful to have the jobs (and therefore work harder and do a better job), what's the point of continuing to throw money at a bunch of overpaid whiny-butts who think they're entitled to live in the lap of luxury while providing next to nothing in return?
(IL/NV)The Labor Unions had lost lots of American support because of their positions on Illegal Immigration. They started by sending American jobs to other countries by okaying outsourcing of jobs and prosperity for Americans. Labor Unions stopped Supporting Americans and Veterans that have had previous training in those fields. ( The Automotive and steel industries almost gone, as examples) It is an insult and slap in the face to American Workers. These moves by Labor Unions are also setting Women back 40 years in the advances they have made. Practically everybody is working 2 or more jobs to make ends meet.
A USA News Today ( 6/2007- Titled "Don't Waste U.S. brainpower by hiring Foreign Workers for Coveted Jobs) says that American Workers are being wasted for cheaper foreign labor through the H-1B visa program. Most don't even have a high school education or are here Illegally, using someone else's identifying information and school or college information. Still Congress refuses to Secure the borders and stop the influx of workers that had broken the law by entering the country illegally, which is a felony.
If Labor Unions don't return to American values, they will completely go under. People cannot afford to live a Third World lifestyle and won't stay on the bottom, for the sake of the greedy. It has been them supporting Illegal Aleins!
Unions had their days. People who join think of all the great benefits of being part of union has. However, they soon forget that the Union THINKS for them. They will have to abide by whatever the Union wants. Most of the time unions only care about themselves and not the workers. They tend to be greedy. Plus industrialism is seeing a steady decrease in America because of subsidized labor in foreign countries.
Answers:
I live in California and labor unions are a good thing they help the worker by getting them higher wages and humane conditions to work in. They are one of the things that make this country great.
They had their day.
The union management has become management, and is just as greedy and unconcerned about the workers as management is.
IN and PA
I think they are a crutch for mediocre people. They suck the life out of the human spirit.
FL
If it weren't for Labor Unions we'd probably be working for 2 dollars an hour, 16 hour days now. But they got too big, and too greedy, so I'm not sure how I feel about them
They should be abolished
Unions are counter-productive in this world economy. Employers should decide how much they are willing to pay to labor. The company has to make money, go out of business, or move to a foreign country.
Unions do not add anything to productivity. They spend way too much money on political campaigns of liberals.
I think labor unions are too worried about politics and getting as many liberal ideals adopted as possible that they ruin the companies their employee's work for. Labor unions are a front for political unions to collect money from millions of people to fund an agenda of a few people that only benefits a few people. Unions served their purpose in the past but have overstepped their bounds in today's society and are nothing more than a liberal political action group now.
The State of New Jersey is in hock because of the
Municiple Workers Union. NYC was near bankrupt because of the City unions. Unions killed the US steel industry, and have just about dispatched Ford, Chysler, and GM. Unions drove many railroads into insolvency.
They took way too much. They were out for themselves and destroyed great american companies. If they would have understood that what was good for the company, with effective management, would have been good for the union. They have now destroyed the opportunity for their sons and daughters to find the abundant career opportunities that they had.
I live in Ypsilanti, MI.
Labor unions had their place back in the days of child labor and unsafe working conditions, but now there are too many unions who have taken it to the extreme and are now paying the price for it. Case in point: The UAW. Being an auto-line worker is the only job I know of where you can get a starting wage of around $18.00 an hour and bring absolutely nothing to the table in terms of education, training, or skills. These people basically get paid a king's ransom for doing a job a trained monkey can do. And they have the gall to blame the corporate executives of the Big Three for being too greedy! Unions also bring the worker base down to the lowest common denominator -- no one is allowed to work harder or do a better job than the laziest slob in the union because "you're making the others look bad." I don't think we'll see a resurgence in unions because the executives and company owners will take their bases of operations elsewhere. People gripe about losing jobs to Canada and Mexico -- well, when people there make 25% to 50% less in pay and benefits and are thankful to have the jobs (and therefore work harder and do a better job), what's the point of continuing to throw money at a bunch of overpaid whiny-butts who think they're entitled to live in the lap of luxury while providing next to nothing in return?
(IL/NV)The Labor Unions had lost lots of American support because of their positions on Illegal Immigration. They started by sending American jobs to other countries by okaying outsourcing of jobs and prosperity for Americans. Labor Unions stopped Supporting Americans and Veterans that have had previous training in those fields. ( The Automotive and steel industries almost gone, as examples) It is an insult and slap in the face to American Workers. These moves by Labor Unions are also setting Women back 40 years in the advances they have made. Practically everybody is working 2 or more jobs to make ends meet.
A USA News Today ( 6/2007- Titled "Don't Waste U.S. brainpower by hiring Foreign Workers for Coveted Jobs) says that American Workers are being wasted for cheaper foreign labor through the H-1B visa program. Most don't even have a high school education or are here Illegally, using someone else's identifying information and school or college information. Still Congress refuses to Secure the borders and stop the influx of workers that had broken the law by entering the country illegally, which is a felony.
If Labor Unions don't return to American values, they will completely go under. People cannot afford to live a Third World lifestyle and won't stay on the bottom, for the sake of the greedy. It has been them supporting Illegal Aleins!
Unions had their days. People who join think of all the great benefits of being part of union has. However, they soon forget that the Union THINKS for them. They will have to abide by whatever the Union wants. Most of the time unions only care about themselves and not the workers. They tend to be greedy. Plus industrialism is seeing a steady decrease in America because of subsidized labor in foreign countries.
What do you think of Georgia laws and Genarlow Wilson ?
thank goodness georgia has closed that law down where if you are teenagers and have oral sex (even consensualy) that it is considered aggravated child molestation! that is crazy!!! it's good that the judge freed him from serving some more years but that atty general needs help!! i understand if the guy is 22 and the girl is 15 BUT when you have 2 teenagers who have sex..even though it isn't right (pre-marital sex) that's doesn't make it a CRIME! What are your thoughts?
Answers:
I'm a Georgian and I can tell you 2 things. At the same time he did this another dude was in the SAME SITUATION. Dont you think he should have learned from the other guy's mistake?!
At any rate, this dude has 2 cards that will be thrown in his face...
1 is the race card
2 is the bible belt politics
most ridiculous case I've read about in years, it's why I avoid red states at all costs, their legal systems reek of an almost fundy talibanic interpretation of the law
It shows how racism is still a big part of our society. The DA has filed an appeal. The law was changed because if was an obscene law. Unfortunately for Mr Wilson his fight continues.
Answers:
I'm a Georgian and I can tell you 2 things. At the same time he did this another dude was in the SAME SITUATION. Dont you think he should have learned from the other guy's mistake?!
At any rate, this dude has 2 cards that will be thrown in his face...
1 is the race card
2 is the bible belt politics
most ridiculous case I've read about in years, it's why I avoid red states at all costs, their legal systems reek of an almost fundy talibanic interpretation of the law
It shows how racism is still a big part of our society. The DA has filed an appeal. The law was changed because if was an obscene law. Unfortunately for Mr Wilson his fight continues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)