Recent Posts

Show posts from buddies only

Around 1881, the Republican party was heavily split into 2 factions. The Half-Breeds were generally more progressive while the Stalwarts were more conservative. However, the Stalwarts were more pro civil rights, so I guess civil rights was seen as a right wing issue then.

From a quick look, if you were born in february 1837 you would be 40 years old in february 1877 and be alive during 12 presidents (Jackson, Van Buren, Harrison, Tyler, Polk, Taylor, Fillmore, Pierce, Buchanan, Lincoln, Johnson, and Grant), and just one month later you would add number 13 (Hayes).

So here you would hit 10 presidents by the time you are 24 years old.

24 years and 2 days, to be precise if you were born on March 3, 1837 and made it to March 4 1861.

The term "genocide" is thrown around way too loosely by the left these days

Don’t think Nevada was a Dem dummymander. The three Dem seats are based in an urban area and unless that urban area as a whole starts voting Republican regularly, then they’re not in huge danger. There’s not really been any indication that Clark County will start voting Republican. The last Republican to win it in a partisan race was in 2014. Just for reference.

As I said before the way Trump is acting in CRT, he is acting Maga when he is accused of cheating on Melanie Trump

[Same with the Catholic Church, but I'm not as familiar with how strict the RCC is when it comes to degree requirements. But there is already a shortage of priests, at least for most of the West, and I don't see that problem going away soon.]

As mainline Protestant denominations and Roman Catholicism fail to attract as many would-be priests and ministers, MDivs will decline.

A better question would be "Why is there a priest/minister shortage?" for these denominations, and there are plenty of good answers to that question.

Yup. M.Divs are a requirement for (I think) most mainline denominations and the Catholic Church. It's definitely cheaper to become a pastor for a nondenominational one since there are obviously -- for better or worse -- no requirements. And it's the nondenominational churches which are, of course, "growing" (or declining slower, to be more precise) in influence for American Christianity.

One has to wonder if eventually the mainline churches will discard M.Divs as a requirement, or replace it with a church-administered training program, in the future in order to make that vocation more attractive to candidates. Same with the Catholic Church, but I'm not as familiar with how strict the RCC is when it comes to degree requirements. But there is already a shortage of priests, at least for most of the West, and I don't see that problem going away soon.

The European Equilvalent of the Mdiv for the Catholic Church is the Bachelor of Sacred Theology.

The Mdiv was only " added " in the 1960s as Catholic Seminaries became accredited by the protestant dominated seminary acreddiation groups like ATS.

So even if the Catholic Church drops the Mdiv, it will still offer the STB.

And besides, the Vatican mandates at least 6 years of seminary training for all seminaries around the world, so it's regulated from the top.

As mainline Protestant denominations and Roman Catholicism fail to attract as many would-be priests and ministers, MDivs will decline.

A better question would be "Why is there a priest/minister shortage?" for these denominations, and there are plenty of good answers to that question.

Counterpoint : The Overplethora of Priests post WW2 and before Vatican II has never actually been the norm in Catholic life at least. Before the 1940s-1950s, there was always a shortage of priests.

The Republican Party was the party of business from the Civil War onward.  Democrats were more socially conservative in many ways, but the GOP was the business party.

No objections, but to be more general for a moment I am operating on the assumption that the Governor still maintains their office thread, office actions etc. and merely has their own elected seat in the chamber as well. If the sponsor believes this to be correct I'll move forward on cleaning up the language with that in mind.

I am fully in favor of the first two, but what is the issue with having a governor who isn’t a member of the LGC? I would like either option to be a possibility. I would like to see Governor Liminal retained (my intention for this legislation was it to take effect after the end of the current gubernatorial term) but going forward the Governor being a member of the LGC could become something that’s customary but not required. (see: Speaker of the House irl)

the latest Amendment to the Amendment is adopted.

Well, if you look at my original post in this thread you will see I'm much more comfortable with the Governor not being a member of the LGC actually. But if we are moving toward a parliamentary system then there would be nothing stopping the Governor from taking up a seat.

If either having an LGC seat or not would both be possible I'll continue working on the amendment.

The "Joe Biden is Hamas" lady now blaming us for the dead hostages. We are so hostile that just the other day the House passed a bill making military funding contingent on Israel spending, placing Israel's security above our own, yet still most of Israeli society thinks we're horrible. Why is this? How much more of a sugar daddy must we be before this country is finally thankful?

https://twitter.com/CarolineGlick/status/1791491736121843847?t=PBBUi0pDc0frnP6Et...

Buddy MacKay (D) was a projected winner over Connie Mack (R) in the 1988 Senate Race.

Charlie Graddick (D) was the winner of the 1986 Democratic Primary for AL Governor, but it was overturned when it was determined that a large number of people who voted in a Republican Primary voted for Graddick in the runoff.