[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite

hey mike. I truly have alot of respect for what you have said. But let me clarify: I am NOT in favor of gay marriage, however, I think that if we get some religious person in office, and that person overturns gay marriage, we are still at a loss because we wont have an answer to the problem.

(wut i'm about to say is very complex, bear with me) Im very familiar with Urban Voices, but I don't agree with how 93.7 goes about it. They use Hartford problems to air on connecticut radio, assuming everyone can relate to hartford. This is not true. Although the underlining problems are still the same (poverty, single parents, exposing kids to crime), Waterbury has alot of different problems with its public schools than hartford does. In a nutshell, I dont listen to the program simply because I dont think I can relate to it (having grown up in waterbury)

I hear ya. I think the reason they put Hartford in the pivot of their discussion is pretty simple. First of all, their station is in the capitol city. And secondly, the city's school system is shambles right now. Which is not to say other cities (Bridgeport, NewHaven, Waterbury) have their own issues. But Hartford's outlook is probably the most grim. It's now CT's most impoverished city and oneof the poorest in the country and unfortunately I don't see that changing dramatically anytime soon. What I found reassuring about the broadcast is there are people who acknowledge the problems and seem passionately committed to doing something about it - and they realize much of it is attributed to the values learned in the home (or lack thereof). They also realize that more funding doesn't necessarily mean better schools.

Anyway, I'm not sure what I said has to do with conservative towns in CT, so here's a list:
- most towns in Fairfield County: New Canaan, Greenwich, Wilton and Darien come to mind. In Hartford County I'd say Avon tends to be more conservative/Republican, elsewhere some of the smaller, more rural towns of New London and Litchfield counties.

[brasscitybluenwhite]

In my area, the conservative towns would be Watertown and Wolcott. Waterbury itself is probably the most conservative of the 5 largest cities.

mike I just wish the politicians would see those problems and put some heart behind the money that they throw at them.

[Tin Knocker]

Depends on what you mean by conservative. We have a suposedly conservative Governor.
In my view theres not much conservative about CT though. Theres people with conservative values & only a generation or so ago we were largely a rural state with a conservative thinking populace. In the past 50 years or so we turned into a suburb of NYC & with that came the liberal minded folks that metro areas generate. They bring their money & with that things changed. It always strikes me as odd that folks move out of an area for whatever reason & then set about changing their new home to resemble the old one.
the reality is that, as a hole CT is about as liberal as you can get. The wealthier town may be somewhat fiscally conservative but socially forget it. If conservative means freedom & liberty to live as you choose there are many better places. As soon as I can I'm out of here headed for NH.
they face a similar liberal infestation coming in from Mass but are a few years behind & I think that most Democrats up there are more conservative than our Republicans.

[Tin Knocker]

Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite

well, I'll answer ur question as soon as u can tell me how a liberal is suppose to act.

They are the ones that run around crying & screaming that the state should have all the answers. They are the ones that push to raise taxes because we all need to pay to fund their pet projects. They are the reason we have the highest taxes in the country. Open the paper, listen to the radio. Its easy to see the liberal at work ruining our state.

[JViello]

Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite

Here we go wit the flaming.

I think there should be laws against abortion (and murder too). But u gotta address these the underlining factor of these issues. why is murder rampant in hartford? Because there is poverty. And why is there poverty? Because there are people who grow up in it, trust it and never leave it. There has to be institutions (ie the Church) who do more than "care" about the poor; they have to get out there, show love, and make it look like they care. If not, they become their own interest group, sorta like how the gay marriage thing came about.

I don't think folks reading this who never lived it, really don't understand what you mean by "poverty".

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I see when you say "poverty" is a lifestyle, or more like being stuck in quicksand that makes it very hard to get out of.

In otherwords, living in and growing up in the ghetto (Like you and I did) brings along with it baggage on the family and person that would not normally be experienced.

It could be something as simple has a single parent household with that one parent working so much the kids are "on their own" to raise themselves...that same family really doesn't have any extended family to fill the gap either. And/or if they do, that extended family is usually disfunctional as well.

I personally did not come from multi-generational "poor" folks. My mother got into a position she was in - and it was bad. But I can honestly say I had grandparents and other extended family who were hard working lower middle class folks. Their influence had a major impact on my life. I can honestly say without having that in my life I'm not sure I would have turned out as well as I have.

So I suppose in the end, it comes down to the degradation of the family unit, and the root of that can be traced to many places such as slavery, government, lack of spiritual leadership etc etc.

Originally Posted by Eavd

Every child in America has a chance to get an education. There is not one state in this country that does not provide education for those who come from broke families. No one is standing at the doors of the school and saying "Go home kid you can't come here because your family is poor and will always be poor" States provide those things for those who live in their states, like Connecticut. If a State is failing blame the State not the President.

This is exactly what I was talking about above. You really don't get it. I don't mean that in a condescending way. If you REALLY want to see the problem, don't armchair it and get into the neighborhoods you speak of. I think you will find the problem is not that simple. It's a cultural and family problem with multiple layers of complication and no one/easy solution.

Originally Posted by PriscillaHR

If we go by the definition of not wanting the government to interfere in private citizens lives, then, in terms of gay rights, people who want less government interference should, by definition, be pro gay marriage because it is not at all the business of government who a person falls in love with and marries.

Well the problem there going by your definition is that the state got involved where it didn't belong by making marriage laws and definition of said union in the first place.

So perhaps you are correct that that government had no right to do so in the first place. (Remember that "wall of separation" all the libs keep misinterpreting and pounding on the table about? I guess it conviently doesn't apply here. )

In that end, it would be up to the "church" and "God" to define what marriage is. That works a lot better for me in the end. Thanks.

[teek777]

Originally Posted by Eavd

WOW! where in Waterbury do you live? And how do you get away with it? Do you have to act liberal around your black friends, or do they know were you stand?

i live on the east side but grew up in "the projects"... get away with it? this is america, right now we have freedom to believe and what we want
i dont have many black friends and the ones i do have are very liberal and so aggravating to talk with that we have grown apart and the other response to your question is yes, they do know where i stand. there are alot of blacks who are conservative, just not in waterbury.. lol

[teek777]

hear all this from someone who knows about being poor... it doesnt matter how poor you are, if you want your child to get an education your child will get an education... noone can do anything for your child that you wont allow.. so... if your child misses 30 -60 days out of school, that child will fail period. If your child is getting grades that are poor then its up to the PARENT to look into it and see whats going on.. Its not because they are poor that their education suffers... JMO

[PriscillaHR]

Originally Posted by JViello

In that end, it would be up to the "church" and "God" to define what marriage is. That works a lot better for me in the end. Thanks.

That would be AWESOME for me too. I would love it if only clergy were involved in the concept of marriage and that the government at all levels stopped granting special privileges to those who married in the Church. It isn't the governments place to go about defining unions and marriages in terms of any religion at all. I totally agree with you there.

really, the government should approach it the same way they do any of the other Sacraments and just keep out of it.

Can you imagine, tax breaks for those who are Baptized? Hospital visitation rights for those who have been Confirmed? health insurance benefits extended to those who have had their first Communion?

[JViello]

Originally Posted by teek777

hear all this from someone who knows about being poor... it doesnt matter how poor you are, if you want your child to get an education your child will get an education... noone can do anything for your child that you wont allow.. so... if your child misses 30 -60 days out of school, that child will fail period. If your child is getting grades that are poor then its up to the PARENT to look into it and see whats going on.. Its not because they are poor that their education suffers... JMO

Exactly.

But at the same time I think you can acknowledge that many - if not the majority of the "poor" don't have family that give a crap. I can remember myself being "on my own" more than I care to admit.

So then what? How do we address the issue of irresponsible parents and the fact these kids WILL become adults in our society? Is it the state's responsibility? Is it our own personal responsibilities? Is it the community of faith's responsibility?

Tough questions with no easy answer IMO.

Even tougher then that - what do you do about the single mother with 5 kids already from 2 different fathers who insists on "getting her's" and is pregnant with #6 from some weekend fling.

Can we expect that child to grow up and be a productive adult?

Sigh...all part of the madness we have embraced in this country. We have a long hard road ahead of us.

Originally Posted by PriscillaHR

That would be AWESOME for me too. I would love it if only clergy were involved in the concept of marriage and that the government at all levels stopped granting special privileges to those who married in the Church. It isn't the governments place to go about defining unions and marriages in terms of any religion at all. I totally agree with you there.

really, the government should approach it the same way they do any of the other Sacraments and just keep out of it.

Can you imagine, tax breaks for those who are Baptized? Hospital visitation rights for those who have been Confirmed? health insurance benefits extended to those who have had their first Communion?

I really can't argue with you on that point. A lot of Christians (Which I am) look at me like I have three heads sometimes when I wonder why they get upset at folks "removing God" from government. Our government is a reflection of the people, and the people are more and more leaving the God they once knew. No surprise. And at the same time, you can't ask the government to get involved with "God" things such as marriage and then get upset when they redefine something.

You can't have it both ways IMHO.

But on the other hand, we do need rule of law in this nation. So how do we give people rights and protection in things like divorce if we totally separate "church" from "state". I'm not sure that is possible.

[Tin Knocker]

Marriage as far as the state is concerned has nothing to do with religion I dont think. Its not like folks have to be married in a church or by a Christian minister.
I think its silly for people to get upset over trivial things like the ten comandments in a courthouse or a moment of silence, the mention of God in the pledge ect.

As far as the gov'ts are concerned marriage is generally regarded as a societal stabilizer & it perpetuates our existance. Its only for those reasons that a married couple gets a few perks that other couples seem outright jealous of. I have very little tolerance for such sillyness.