What are your state's "hot issues?"

[KristyHall]

Okay then, I want to engage in a civil union with Monsanto, so I can kick its butt. I wonder if two companies could get around anti-monopoly laws by saying they were in love and were getting married. Can you imagine the divorce court file for Apple and Samsung?

OldRooster, thank you for the amusing departure into speculation. Anything that can make me laugh before the coffee is done is good.

You can't kick its butt. That would be domestic violence. You can make it scrub the toilets though.

 

[KristyHall]

I guess they meant they wanted to marry a corporation and under IRS and certain federal laws is a person. I don't want to think about where the conversation could go form there.

Hey according to some, corporations are people.

Now I'm thinking about soylent green and I don't know why.

 

[mom'sfolly]

There is actually a huge lawsuit going on here in Texas, again, about school funding and who gets the money. The issue is that when school funding is based almost exclusively on property tax, how to you keep the property poor districts funded? How do you allow growing, property rich districts to raise funds for new schools, and facilities? How do you make sure that the funding is as equitable as the fund raising? In my community, there is no will to raise school taxes, because it means that our money would just be funding a poorer district. Everything then becomes a bond issue because those funds are particular to the bonding authority. But you can't pay for day to day expenses with bonds.

 

[mom'sfolly]

A scrub brush big enough for Monsanto's toilet has yet to be invented...

 

[sezjasper]

Texas has a reputation as a "good ol' boys" state, the kind where if you don't "belong," you could find yourself in a Twilight Zone sort of situation. Keep in mind I've never set foot in Texas, and I don't know anyone who lives there. This is just the perception (stereotype?) from the east coast. Any truth to it, or too much tv?

 

[Kevin565]

Texas has a reputation as a "good ol' boys" state, the kind where if you don't "belong," you could find yourself in a Twilight Zone sort of situation. Keep in mind I've never set foot in Texas, and I don't know anyone who lives there. This is just the perception (stereotype?) from the east coast. Any truth to it, or too much tv?

This is true in some areas. Here in Waco it's not much different than any other city in the US. However a few near by cities would fall under the "Good ole boy" stereotype,

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

I dont know what is on the ballot for Georgia this election cycle but I know private property rights of churches is a hot issue right now. Churches are the only privately owned property in the state that does not get to chose who can carry a gun on there property. The state mandates that guns are illegal at church.
http://www.11alive.com/news/article/261799/3/Debate-Should-guns-be-allowed-in-church

 

[oldrooster]

I dont know what is on the ballot for Georgia this election cycle but I know private property rights of churches is a hot issue right now. Churches are the only privately owned property in the state that does not get to chose who can carry a gun on there property. The state mandates that guns are illegal at church.
http://www.11alive.com/news/article/261799/3/Debate-Should-guns-be-allowed-in-church

Here in Indiana the state government a few years back passed a law in essence states if you have a gun that's unseen in your automobile and you don't say anything about having a gun in your car your employer cannot fire you for having a firearm in your auto. The exemptions are places already restricted guns on property by law such as post offices, government offices (state and federal) schools, a few other places (most of which is common sense you don't bring a gun there like the ones mentioned above) the only one I thought was slightly odd was church employees cannot have firearms in their automobiles, which I thought was odd because how often do you find employees outnumbering the members of a church? Most of the churches in my area the only paid staffers are the minister, the janitor, grounds person and a secretary if they employ that many people to begin with and don't use volunteers or a contractor for cleaning/grounds maintenance (ie mowing and or snow removal), and I thought it odd because most of the time in the churches I know of those people are in the building or on the premises alone and may want to have a gun on hand for their own protection.

 

[sezjasper]

I used to be 100% anti-gun, but the older I get, and the more I hear, the more I think I'm wrong about that. I don't think allowing guns in the churches would have saved the life of the victim, but I bet someone in the congregation could have "culled the flock" and saved the Georgia taxpayers a lot of effort and expense. It seems the shooter was already in custody--here in Maryland, back in 2004--and "treated" in a psych hospital. So now Georgia will have a chance to take that man out of circulation but he'll probably get off because they'll claim he's mentally ill. You know, I don't care if we're talking people or potatoes...there comes a time when it's rotten enough that you've just got to toss it in the trash.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

I used to be 100% anti-gun, but the older I get, and the more I hear, the more I think I'm wrong about that. I don't think allowing guns in the churches would have saved the life of the victim, but I bet someone in the congregation could have "culled the flock" and saved the Georgia taxpayers a lot of effort and expense. It seems the shooter was already in custody--here in Maryland, back in 2004--and "treated" in a psych hospital. So now Georgia will have a chance to take that man out of circulation but he'll probably get off because they'll claim he's mentally ill. You know, I don't care if we're talking people or potatoes...there comes a time when it's rotten enough that you've just got to toss it in the trash.

Didn't know the guys back story. A preacher filed a case to be heard by the supreme court right before this shooting. The preacher wants the right to carry in his own church. Lower courts have sidestepped his case. First one said he could carry the way he reads the law an the second said he had no right to force other churches to let guns in. The law does ban guns in church an the preacher does not want to force anyone to do anything, he just wants the churches to have the right to make there own choice like every other peace of private owned property in the state.