Personally, I think early voting should last up until the beginning of "normal" voting -- but then, I guess, what would separate that from early voting?
Honestly I am not a fan of early voting. I would rather have all voters have the chance of vote with equal information. Some voters got the chance to vote before the debates even began!
Well, starting points that early, excepting those absentee cases where starting that early is critical to overall turnout of the electorate, are kind of silly. I'm sure that a lot of people basically had made up their minds by then (yourself probably included), mind you.
Last edited by BigLutz; 5th November 2012 at 6:21 AM.
I'm voteing for Romeny cause the way things are in my life mainly I going need a job in a year I think he is the better pick.
Funny, because Obama's a Christian, too. Not that politicians understand what "Judeo-Christian" values are (or if they do, they don't act like it). How would Obama threaten our religious freedom? Make us all Christians? I think a majority of Americans already are. Or at least, a very large number.
Oh, I'm not even arguing that not all Americans are Christians (I sure am not), but that's sort of what I'm saying -- given that Obama has a religious view and it's the majority view... especially since Paul Ryan's talking to his own base (far as I can tell), who are most likely mostly Christian, why don't more of them shrug and say "okay" (other than the fact that they think he's a "secret Muslim," never mind how hard that'd be to keep secret anyway and that that could be alleviated via research)... or look at the Constitution (which would also tell them, if I recall correctly, that the President can't him/her/etc.self actually change the taxes like Romney promised at least once) and think "he couldn't sneak that one in anyway"?
Then again, I guess some people vote(d) for candidates in the past on whether or not they would "take their gun(s) away" -- an ersatz point to bury all ersatz points.
If a law that originates from Congress is passed and wholly conflicts with the Bill of Rights/Constitution, first the president can override that once. Congress can override the override and then pass it anyways. Then its up to the Supreme Court to declare void if someone brings up a case.
If the president wants to make a law, he can only recommend it to Congress and then they have to pass it.
So the president is powerless alone. And that was the point. So when candidates promise to "pass a law", they are making false or un-backed promises, since they can only be filled if Congress lets them.
Again, would have to dig out sources for these again.
That may be, but what does that have to do with it? That it would only hold if all Christians were women? That just because there's at least ONE MAN in the faith, suddenly the statistic that 90+% of Catholic women use contraceptives doesn't matter?Merely the first one that comes to mind, as I am debating it again on another forum. And by the way not all Christians are Women.
The Insurance Companies will pay for the Contraception, the Religious Entities will pay for the Insurance, creating a defacto payment for Contraception
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act was put in place for this one very reason, laws cannot create a substantial burden on a person's freedom of religion. That can be one person, it can be millions. Now there are two things that can be used to override the law: First, if the burden is necessary for the “furtherance of a compelling government interest. Second the rule must be the least restrictive way in which to further the government interest.
Seeing how insurance is available outside of a employer, and a person can buy contraceptive medicine over the counter at say Target for fairly cheap. The law does not rise to either of those exemptions.
As far as Contraception and Abortions go, I think I choose a more center opinion. Or not. I dunno.
I think that Contraception should be paid out of pocket and not be insurance. The day after pill should be legal, but also paid out of pocket.
Abortions should be legal, but also be paid for by the person EXCEPT in cases of rape and/or threat to the mother. In those situations, it should be paid by insurance.
Can anyone tell me why the heck you all are really voting for Obama please explain to me why you would like 4 more years like the last 4?
I would actually vote for Ron Paul really but I go Romney over Obama.