But Duncan Hunter is unelectable. He has all the charisma of Potato Buds.
>>>S.1952, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1996.
The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prev. Act has similar results as Same-Sex Marriage. Fred Thompson is FOR giving the rights on Same - Sex Marriage to the STATES. THAT would mean the marriage wouldn’t be federally recognized. This would change the legal definitions of parental rights to ‘family rights’. Parents become stakeholders of their own children with the schools and states becoming primary guardians.
In Canada, the controversial law that brought about same-sex marriage quietly included the provision to erase the term “natural parent” across the board in federal law, replacing it with the term “legal parent.”
With that law, the power in defining who a child’s parents are shifts precipitously from civil society to the state.
In Spain, after the recent legalization of same-sex marriage the legislature changed the birth certificates for all children in that nation to read “Progenitor A” and
“Progenitor B” instead of “mother” and “father.” With that change, the words “mother” and “father” were struck from the first document issued to every newborn by the state.
Similar proposals have been made in other jurisdictions that have legalized same-sex marriage.
In New Zealand and Australia, influential law commissions have proposed allowing children conceived with use of sperm or egg donors to have three legal parents.
In the United States, courts often must determine who the legal parents are among the many adults who might be involved in planning, conceiving, birthing, and raising a child. Judges in several states have seized upon the idea of “psychological” parenthood to award legal parent status to adults who are not related to children by blood, adoption, or marriage. They have done so even over the objection of the child’s biological parent. Advances in the same-sex marriage debate have encouraged group marriage advocates who wish to break open the two-person understanding of marriage and parenthood.
The National Health Education Standards has gone further and envoked in loco parentis by redefining parents as families. Families have been classified as stakeholders. Children’s stakeholders are being identified as any entity that is seen as a resource in a child’s community.
http://www.nationalguidelines.org/guideline.cfm?guideNum=0-12
>>Schools often have insufficient resources to provide a comprehensive and multifaceted continuum of interventions. By having direct contact with families and key informants in the community, schools are better able to identify barriers to student success and well-being and better equipped to develop solutions that overcome these barriers. Schools can enhance home-school links by sharing concerns with families and developing solutions that address students’ unique needs.
In addition to the benefits for students’ education and well-being, students’ families, and school staff, there are reciprocal benefits for community agencies who partner with schools. Businesses, the justice system, community health and safety systems, and others may benefit from a healthier population. Community agencies and organizations that provide services to children and families often gain a more visible profile when they become partners with schools.
Examples of neighborhood stakeholders in student health and well-being are students themselves, as well as their families and teachers. Other school staff, community business owners, police, faith-based institutions, universities and colleges, local health departments, health and mental health service providers, dentists, emergency medical services, educators of first-aid, departments of health, justice, education and social services, and other agencies that serve families have stakes in the well-being of the student population and school staff. Communicate regularly with partners and potential partners in order to learn what each has to offer.<<
Substance over style, consistency, confidence and competency.
Here's a good comparison.
While Duncan Hunter is a good cosnervative, he's proven himself to be a poor presidential candidate. Hunter`s 1%-3% of national support doesn't bode well for the future of his campaign.
Fred Thompson is also a good cosnervative and thus far, he's been doing very good. Fred is at 23% in the latest Rasmussen daily poll. Just a point back of Rooty. We conservatives asked Fred to run, because most of us didn't like the three alternative first tier choices. Now we'll see if Fred can sell himself to conservatives as the real deal. I like his chances.
Fred Thompson ping.
Please tell me no one actually believes this.
NOT good. The ESA has benefitted no one monitarily except lawyers (who run the envirofreak orgs). Has Fred ever hinted at his opionion of the Kelo decision?
Thanks, Cal. This Madison fellow does a nice job. I’m sure it’s going to annoy some.
Interesting comparison. Thank you for posting this.
You know, we could analyze the record presented in the thread and determine whether Hunter or Thompson is better in this instance.
Or we could just keep sniping at each other with pointless barbs and insults.
Madison does a great job of cutting through the spin and getting at the truth. You know I thought all this time, we, the people got to choose our nominee for POTUS. It seems it’s no longer “we, the people” but “they, the polls”.
I have seen taunts about polls yet no refutation or rebuttal of the facts Mr. Madison so eloquently presented. Instead, it’s the same old browbeating Hunter with poll numbers and conjecture about electability that the Rudy supporters utilized so readily.
When did conservatives become so enamored with polls? Why are we so willing to compromise our principles for poll numbers and empty promises? When did we become so easily seduced by spin and double-speak? When did we become spin doctors for trial lawyers and lobbyists? Do we understand that when we condemn Edwards yet spin for another we come off as hypocrites?
When did we abandon Ronald Reagan for Howard Baker? Why are we so willing to, once again, trust what someone says while discounting what another has done? Perhaps I will get some answers tonight during the debates, but I don’t watch O’really or Leno, so many questions, will go unanswered.
I hate when these threads turn into pissing contests.
Thank you for the work you did on this thread.