I’m not going to try and convince you of an opinion you’ve totally bought it. There are reasons this is important to you for which I have no idea. It doesn’t change the reality of the situation. THis is a multi-cultural and multi-religious country and there is (in theory, as there has always been) a separation of church and state. The Founding Fathers (both those religious and those not) intnded to have separation of church and state – which is a good thing – it’s just that the reality of the situation is you can put it down on paper, but it IS and it DID have an impact on our laws and the way this country was founded, created, and STILL operated. Just because you can take the boy out of the country, doesn’t mean you can take the country out of the boy. Also, you’re forgetting the all the political figures you sepak of were and still are elected by the nation’s people – they didn’t create the nation in a vacuum. These people, the nation, was and still is, a CHristian nation. Were they ALL CHristians? Of course, not. The majority were and are still CHristian.
To argue this fact with me is a waste of my time and yours. You can’t change what was and is just because you, for some reason, don’t like it, or perhaps because you’ve been indoctrinated by some liberal-minded socialists who want to rewrite history to sell a book or propagandize young minds.
It’s a free country. You can believe what you want. I can’t take that away from you.

But there should be no obligation at all for any employer to listen to a Union. Quite simply, if you sign a contract with an employer, all things equal, then you agree to the terms of condition of your employment. Depending on the terms of your contract, your employer cannot arbitrarily decide not to pay or employ you. Likewise, you cannot change your mind regarding something and refuse to work, and still expect to be paid.

The state of the market generally determines who has the bargaining power between employee and employer, but then so do more obvious issues, like your skill.

I think it is very good (i.e.: moral, because it’s in an employer’s self interest) so listen to its workforce and keep them reasonably happy, i.e.: motivated to work and happy to come to work and feeling appreciated and not exploited, but also not overly appease its workface at the expense of efficiency. Giving everyone a 200% payrise for example would please staff for about 1 week, before the company went out of business and everyone was out of a job altogether. These decisions are an employer’s to make, and his alone. No one has the right to enforce anything else on him.

Because everyone wants a job, employers generally have greater bargaining power than their employees. However when jobs are needed on a grand scale, skilful employees gain the upperhand and can demand more of employers. When this happens, you don’t see companies running to the government asking for special treatment because the nasty individal is asking for more wages or better working conditions. So why should it be any different when Unions make demands of employers?

“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen…”

So you think that although the US was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, it WAS founded as a Christian nation? Now who’s being silly.

To say the US was founded as a Christian nation just because SOME (you will find many of the founding fathers were deists or even outright atheists if you do your research) of its founders were Christian, is like saying that the US was founded as a white nation simply because its founders were white! It’s ridiculous, and it’s such an obvious attempt at twisting words to fit in with your agenda, which is clearly to give Christianity some special status in America (even more so that it already has).

It doesn’t matter that some of the Founders were Christian, or the effort over the last 200 years of Christians with too much power and a political agenda to slowly distort the constitution and the history of the US to sneak their 2000 year old myths into the government. “In God We Trust” on currency? Tell me the Founders would have approved of that. The issue is only this: what did the Founders INTEND to form with the United States? A secular republic or a Christian nation? You don’t need to answer; the Founders already have! The evidence is above in that quote, and elsewhere if you bother to look.

But here’s the biggest hypocrisy of all: WHY? If America is a free secular nation with NO special consideration to any set of beliefs, but a nation of objective laws that favour only the man who wants to respect the Rights of another man, what does it matter to you? Can you still practice your religion? Yes. Are you still free to believe whatever you want? Yes. Is everyone else entitled to believe whatever Bronze Age faith-based superstitions they want to? Of course. Why would you bother trying to convince people that the very thing that should make America the greatest nation in history (its establishment as a free secular republic to protect the people from the government) is actually not true?

Despite what personal beliefs some of the Founders had, they were wise, and they knew that if American was to be truly free, then NO set of people should have any governmental power over others based on religion, or for that matter, anything else. That the government should be a government of laws not of men, and that it should be objective and give no support or special consideration to any religion. It seems that you’re trying to convince people of just how christian some of the important figures in America’s history were… but so what? What does it matter? All this proves is that many Americans were and are, Christian. Shock! Does that contradict the fact that the US was simply NOT FOUNDED as a christian nation? No. So what is your point? Perhaps it’s you that has an axe to grind.

(By the way, I’m English.)

Just read here and hit the links

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/07/20583/

The real kicker is this: She is collecting food and health assistance from the State but is concealing her assets to collect these benefits illegally. Apparently, she sees nothing wrong with stealing tens of thousands of dollars from the State, but I am an outcast for simply refusing to read any more Watchtower literature. Of course, I will be moving out of her home soon because she is afraid that I will “bring demons into the home. It just sickens me that she is treating me so badly in the name of “Jehovah.”

You need to use the old smiley/sarcasm more then Evan.

Cue debate about death penalty. . .

Psi

Perhaps lethal injection or shooting would be more efficient; whichever imposes the least financial burden on the taxpayer.

Surely you are not serious about throwing him out of a plane?

Psi