Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why does it drive you crazy its a reality they are all contected.
If parents cant pay for it should we pay for it with our taxes or can we sponser another child that might not be able to afford it.
I would rather pay for our children to get off the streets then to pay to study the gentics of grapes
What drives me crazy is when people act as though one issue doesn't impact another (sorry if I wasn't clear) - I see a lot of posts/talk as if one issue exists in a vacuum, which we agree it doesn't.
Haha- haven't seen the genetics of grapes study yet
Ok, go team, now that we've "solved" this issue (tongue firmly in cheek here) - what's next??
Last edited by eastwesteastagain; 10-30-2009 at 12:02 PM..
Reason: can't type
The term hasnt been hi jacked you just think it has. Is there a reason a democrat cant clear it up? This is what I mean if democrats were helping or " cared" about family values they could help clear up that you just seem to think it means gay marriage and abortion which is doesnt.
Who are the ones in Congress and the Senate who throw the family values term around the most??
Its Bachmann, Coburn, Steve King, Inhofe, Demint, Vitter. That wing of the party which are the ones who go off on the family values tangents the most.
Also just because the Dems do not throw around the term family values, doesn't mean they aren't fighting for it in the ways I described earlier in the thread.
I do agree with a few of the things you mentioned later in the thread about resources and activities for children after school to keep them out of trouble and off the streets. I agree with you completely on this and do think we need to do more for this. I think it is worth pointing out however that those who tend to run on the family values type of campaigns are often the ones who vote against funding for the after-school programs.
What drives me crazy is when people act as though one issue doesn't impact another (sorry if I wasn't clear) - I see a lot of posts/talk as if one issue exists in a vacuum, which we agree it doesn't.
Haha- haven't seen the genetics of grapes study yet
Ok, go team, now that we've "solved" this issue (tongue firmly in cheek here) - what's next??
Who are the ones in Congress and the Senate who throw the family values term around the most?? It should be both
Its Bachmann, Coburn, Steve King, Inhofe, Demint, Vitter. That wing of the party which are the ones who go off on the family values tangents the most.This is part of the reason people say democrats dont support family values
Also just because the Dems do not throw around the term family values, doesn't mean they aren't fighting for it in the ways I described earlier in the thread. Yes you prove you are fighting for them just ignore most of your post
I do agree with a few of the things you mentioned later in the thread about resources and activities for children after school to keep them out of trouble and off the streets. I agree with you completely on this and do think we need to do more for this. I think it is worth pointing out however that those who tend to run on the family values type of campaigns are often the ones who vote against funding for the after-school programs.
Ok, what do you propose, other than bringing to the attention of others on c-d, friends/family and elected reps (which I am guessing we are both already doing)?
I actually think Smash has a fair point re: voting down social program funding. I would need to look up voting records on social funding to be able to confirm this, though. I wonder if part of the problem is that bills for social funding are attached to other bills or vice-versa. I would very much like to see separate issues/bills voted on separately.
As you say, Jadex, you don't know any Republicans who wouldn't want to help kids and I don't know any Democrats who wouldn't, but something is getting in the way of all of us who want this funding from getting it pushed through.
EDIT: An afterthought, after reading the last post: I think that the term "family values" has become problematic (not the concept or the broad underlying values, but the term). I do agree with Smash that Democrats don't use the term much although Democrats (some not all) tend to push social funding programs, which would be pro-family values in a functional sense. Does that make sense?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
