Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
Top Secret Researcher
#26 Old 24th Feb 2008 at 11:09 PM
Quote: Originally posted by palabravampiress
If education is going to be mandatory, though, then I don't think you can turn around and regulate the kind of work that kids do outside of school or after school hours. Kids are not resources to be used as the government sees fit; kids are citizens of this country, albeit minor ones. As such, they have free will. If you can't force an adult to perform free labor unless he or she breaks a law, then you shouldn't be able to force a kid to do so.



That is so true. Since when does the government have the right to tell the people what they should and shouldn't do wit their education, or anything for that matter? I thought it was the other way around. The government should be taking orders from the people. And if I lived in Connecticut, I would find a way to get that jerk Chris Dodd impeached.

The country perspectively is ridiculously taxed and so undereducated that you wonder why they're implementing this bull. If this is a scheme to turn our kids into "robots" then I would so love to go to Washington and protest against this. This is not the America our founding fathers intended it to be. Abe Lincoln would be disappointed if he knew that the children of America were going to be treated as slaves for the NeoCratic and NeoCon agenda. Why must we be the government's puppets!? This is not America, this once great nation is becoming an allusion of Nazi Germany. I cannot stand for this. I will not stand for this. And if I'm forced out of my school for not obliging and being a slave to the government I will fight back with the vengence, because our founding father would want America's kids to have a good future ahead of them. Not this future of Fascism where children are slaves to do the government's "dirty work." Mandatory Volunteer-ism? Not unless I want to. America, loves to be sugar coated in deception.

Excuse my rant. I get into these things that I forget I go off topic.


Advertisement
Top Secret Researcher
#27 Old 24th Feb 2008 at 11:34 PM
Fway... comparing having to do a hundred hours of work in high school to Nazi germany is a bit unfair IMO. And ifyou dot he math its A third of a percentage point of your time for the four calendar years. Not that much.

Volunteering does help students, and its not fascism to encourage it!

The humor of a story on the internet is in direct inverse proportion to how accurate the reporting is.
Top Secret Researcher
#28 Old 24th Feb 2008 at 11:53 PM
Quote: Originally posted by FurryPanda
Fway... comparing having to do a hundred hours of work in high school to Nazi germany is a bit unfair IMO. And ifyou dot he math its A third of a percentage point of your time for the four calendar years. Not that much.

Volunteering does help students, and its not fascism to encourage it!


It's discouraging to me when Volunteering is forced though. That's not volunteering if you're forced to do it. Volunteering isn't a forced aspect. Volunteering is done at one's -free will-.

You may be right that it does help students, but I'm not saying encouraging it is bad. FORCING it is wrong and can be deemed slavery. I understand it's only 100 hours, but that doesn't cut it for me. Why should I be forced to do something, if I don't want to do it. It makes me want to resist it more if it's forced upon me and my peers.

Definition 4a explains my point:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=volunteer

Read the antonyms:
http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/volunteer


Top Secret Researcher
#29 Old 24th Feb 2008 at 11:58 PM
Good lord, Fway. It's really really really not that big of a deal. For the kids who have to do it, it's a fact of life and relatively easy to accomplish - plus it does give them experience doing community service and helping others. I have seen nothing in this issue to necessitate Dodd's impeachment, nor have I noticed any similarities whatsoever with Nazi Germany or fascism. Period.

Now, calm down, all right?

Edit: If it wasn't called volunteering, would it make a difference to you? Because you're right, it's not really volunteering, even though there's no money involved.

Top Secret Researcher
#30 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 12:29 AM
Quote: Originally posted by Daisie
Good lord, Fway. It's really really really not that big of a deal. For the kids who have to do it, it's a fact of life and relatively easy to accomplish - plus it does give them experience doing community service and helping others. I have seen nothing in this issue to necessitate Dodd's impeachment, nor have I noticed any similarities whatsoever with Nazi Germany or fascism. Period.

Now, calm down, all right?

Edit: If it wasn't called volunteering, would it make a difference to you? Because you're right, it's not really volunteering, even though there's no money involved.


I know it doesn't seem like big of a deal to you, and I know that this can be accomplished within a school year; however, the point is, you just don't put the word mandatory next to the word Volunteer. It's things like these that are turning our once beautiful and amicable nation into a fear mongering, bomb dropping, gas guzzling, tyrannous nation, which are controlled by the corporations and banks. America needs to wake up to defend our children's future. Watch, they're probably going to have something worse than "Mandatory Volunteer-ism" if this one gets passed. The sheeple have been controlled by the big machine called the banking system since 1913. Anyway, I suppose I went off topic with that one, but I can't understand why you think this situation isn't bad. For the sake of it, it's being forced on the nation's children! Do you want you and your kids to be told what to do by the government any longer!? I thought there were child labor laws that prevented this from happening? It can't be called mandatory volunteerism, since it's one step closer to slavery. The word mandatory doesn't ring a bell? It is "authoritatively ordered," which means that the lawmakers can make (in a general sense) anyone volunteer at anytime. I wouldn't be surprised if this bill does get passed, or even something bigger than this, only for the fact that the mainstream media will not cover it, and will only be more decieving towards the sheeple of the United States.


Top Secret Researcher
#31 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 12:34 AM
FWAY! Shhh! In all schools that ahve it they don't call it mandatory volunteering they call it service learning hours. You can get them by volunteering, you can get them by lying through your teeth to the guidance counselors, you can even get them by repairing computers. It's not nescessarily "labor" either. I've gotten nearly all of my hours (180 and counting) form working with little kids and being on a few hotlines. Hardly intensive manual labor.

It isn't impining on a kids rights to make them help out a little in the community any more than it impinges on their rights by making them pass standardized tests (gads how I hate them). And do you really think that its going to hurt anyone to force a bit of charachter development on them? Is mandating some oppurtunity outside the home to develop a work ethic such a horrible thing?

The humor of a story on the internet is in direct inverse proportion to how accurate the reporting is.
Mad Poster
#32 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 12:43 AM
At my school, there was a Key Club for kids who wanted to get involved with the community and volunteer, but no one forced us to join it. I like that system better; if people are forced to volunteer, they will associate volunteering with negativity and might not choose to do it again during a crisis after graduation (like sandbagging at a flood) when it really matters. Once you start mandating that people volunteer, it's no longer volunteering. I think this is a stupid idea; there's no chance in hell that it would work. You can't force people to be nice, you just can't. Not everyone is going to turn into an altruistic philanthropist who takes in abandoned puppies, nor does everyone want to.

Do I dare disturb the universe?
.
| tumblr | My TS3 Photos |
Top Secret Researcher
#33 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 12:45 AM
Quote: Originally posted by FurryPanda
FWAY! Shhh! In all schools that ahve it they don't call it mandatory volunteering they call it service learning hours. You can get them by volunteering, you can get them by lying through your teeth to the guidance counselors, you can even get them by repairing computers. It's not nescessarily "labor" either. I've gotten nearly all of my hours (180 and counting) form working with little kids and being on a few hotlines. Hardly intensive manual labor.

It isn't impining on a kids rights to make them help out a little in the community any more than it impinges on their rights by making them pass standardized tests (gads how I hate them). And do you really think that its going to hurt anyone to force a bit of charachter development on them? Is mandating some oppurtunity outside the home to develop a work ethic such a horrible thing?


You're not understanding my point, if something like "mandatory volunteerism" get's passed, what's going to be next for our children's future? I am still not saying volunteering is bad, but if something like this gets passed, it can only mean more government in your lives telling you your future is ruined if you do not do this or that. What if the government one day passed a law that said that all citizens ages 8 and up of the United States must work at least 90 out hours a week without pay, and called it "Mandatory Volunteerism." It's called sugar coating dear, and people love sugar coating. <-sarcasm. What would you think then? Would you call it "raising the standard" or "raising the status quo"? I say, once again, what would you think of that? Oh how patriotic.


Top Secret Researcher
#34 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 12:55 AM
Quote: Originally posted by fway
You're not understanding my point, if something like "mandatory volunteerism" get's passed, what's going to be next for our children's future? I am still not saying volunteering is bad, but if something like this gets passed, it can only mean more government in your lives telling you your future is ruined if you do not do this. What if the government one day passed a law that said that all citizens ages 8 and up of the United States must work at least 90 out hours a week without pay, and called it "Mandatory Volunteerism." What would you think then? Would you call it "raising the standard" or "raising the status quo"? I say, once again, what would you think of that? Oh how patriotic.


The government doesnt have the ability to do that fway. And no one except the OP is calling this mandatory volunteerism. It's service learning. And between school, my extracurriculars (none of which i fill that damnable service learning form out for), homework and chores I have a seventy hour week anyway. I would not think that that's possible fway, it would require a constitutional amendment. Minors have no rights, but in a case like that a new voting block would form- parents. No one in their right mind would pass a bill like that. Ninety out of one sixty-eight is very different than one hundred out of thirty five thousand forty. And the governemnt is not saying you ahve to work 100 hours on THIS project, you have to work a hundred hours. I don't think that theyre similar situations at all, the one is possible, easy to implement and rather harmless. The other is a logistical nightmare that would cost billions.

The humor of a story on the internet is in direct inverse proportion to how accurate the reporting is.
#35 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 1:06 AM
Well, I guess I'll get a little more serious this time.

First off, let's quit with the euphemisms and Orwellian Newspeak. It's not volunteering in any legitimate definition of the word, and there is nothing patriotic about it. What it is, is mandatory community service under the threat of not getting a HS diploma. In other words, it is COERCED labor.

I'm not even certain that the message it is sending is a good one. Keep in mind that this is the same type of mandatory service that convicts often have to perform... the difference is that one group is being punished for committing a crime.

Davious is right, there isn't even any real incentive for the students to do the work in the first place. Even in Marxist societies, there is still the philosophy of "from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs". The students performing this community service aren't even getting that much. I would also add that one of the facets of communism is the elimination of child labor.

Also, I can't help but wonder about the atrocious state our public schools are in to begin with. Although my information is slightly old (about 5-7 years), American schools at the beginning of the millennium were right at the bottom out of all the industrialized nations. Also my understanding (and apparently this hasn't changed much) is that roughly one quarter of all students graduating high school are functionally illiterate. To me it suggests that if nothing else, instituting programs like this only demonstrate how far out of whack our priorities are.

Finally, there is absolutely nothing wrong with actual volunteering in the true meaning of the word, and there is likewise nothing wrong with encouraging it. I've done volunteer work for many hours in my life, and I do feel that it helps build character. However, never have I had the feeling of someone putting the proverbial gun to the back of my head for me to do the work.
Top Secret Researcher
#36 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 1:10 AM
Quote: Originally posted by FurryPanda
The government doesnt have the ability to do that fway. And no one except the OP is calling this mandatory volunteerism. It's service learning. And between school, my extracurriculars (none of which i fill that damnable service learning form out for), homework and chores I have a seventy hour week anyway. I would not think that that's possible fway, it would require a constitutional amendment. Minors have no rights, but in a case like that a new voting block would form- parents. No one in their right mind would pass a bill like that. Ninety out of one sixty-eight is very different than one hundred out of thirty five thousand forty. And the governemnt is not saying you ahve to work 100 hours on THIS project, you have to work a hundred hours. I don't think that theyre similar situations at all, the one is possible, easy to implement and rather harmless. The other is a logistical nightmare that would cost billions.


Do you see how lopsided our government is? Do you realize that people would not know that there would be a bill like this, because the mainstream media wouldn't want you to know. So the parent's could still be aware of this, possibly until after it gets passed, of course because some, if not most Americans are too busy watching reality shows. And how would it be a logistical nightmare if people don't get paid? If the people don't get paid, then what's there to pay for, right? It may not be happening at this moment, but it could be happening sooner than you think. You'll either see fascism, communism or even worse, totalitarianism, neither of which I want. Are you sure you want your government telling you what to do? It's time to end the government's fascist laws and time to bring back America to a time before 1913, where government didn't control what you said, did, ate, drank, or smoked. Go ahead and live in your "Brave New World," but I'm going to fight this with every chance I can get. If you want someone else's future to be ruined (well it shouldn't matter to you because you already did more than the unoffiical requirement...) because the goverment forced them to do something they didn't want to do then I take pity for the next generation of Americans.


Top Secret Researcher
#37 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 1:25 AM
Fway, itll be a logisticall nightmare that ll cost money because you have to give A HUGE UNSKILLED LABOR FORCE SOMETHING TO DO! If there were unskilled jobs needing to be done doncha think that the noncolelge bounds would snap them up? If you don't pay them, yay all the benefits of slave labor, but theres still ntohing for them to do! And if you give them skilled jobs then you have to train them (costs money). It won't happen,t he gov't isnt that idiotic.

And fway, the mainstream media wouldnt cover it in committee true. but parents would still block when the law is passed, get rid of everyone who voted on the bill and replace them with thsoe who camp[aigned under getting rid of the idiot thing. but I ahve faith that the gov't wouldn't try something that done. And a smidgen of federally enforced charachtr building is a long long long way away from child labor.

The humor of a story on the internet is in direct inverse proportion to how accurate the reporting is.
Top Secret Researcher
#38 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 1:43 AM
Quote: Originally posted by FurryPanda
Fway, itll be a logisticall nightmare that ll cost money because you have to give A HUGE UNSKILLED LABOR FORCE SOMETHING TO DO... If you don't pay them, yay all the benefits of slave labor, but theres still ntohing for them to do!


(If we were talking about the other theory I had this is what I'd say)

But that's why they would have the "mandated volunteers " train them. See, what I'm trying to get at is, there's no way to get around that issue. Yes, you're right, the government -isn't- idiotic. That's why they have won everyone over, over the past 94 years, because the mainstream media doesn't want you to know what's going on with our nations fate, and the US Citizens in general are just plain ignorant. I will reiterate myself again, I wouldn't be surprised if our and whatnot with an issue like Mandatory Volunteerism is just one step closer to a nation under seige of some elitist dictatorship or something like it.


Lab Assistant
#39 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 1:52 AM
Like "The Great Wall of United States of America"? Or GWUSA?
Top Secret Researcher
#40 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 1:53 AM
Fway, forcing kids to dvote a fraction of a percent of thier time is not leading to an elitist dictatorship. Why do you think there's an elitist dictatorship? CAUSE OF STUFF YOU KNOW ABOUT.

If it was truly an elitist dictatorship you wouldn't know about it, becasue you wouldn't ahve been given the ability to think about it and if you did you'd disappear. The United States is a bastion of freedom. Every six years we can ahve a completely different set of people ruling. Bossing around a bunch of sulky teenagers (like you) who have never directly experienced a worse alternative (I haven't either, but service learning/mandatory volunteerism has given me an idea of it) does not make for a dictatorship. Hell, slave labor doesn't make for a dictaorship either. The antebellum southern united states was no dictatorship, but it had slavery. The roman republic had slavery and was mostly republican.

You can't make the leap between "make kids devote a teeny portion of their lives to being useful" to "governemtn tells us nothing OMG, we're all F**d"

The humor of a story on the internet is in direct inverse proportion to how accurate the reporting is.
Lab Assistant
#41 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 1:58 AM
I think I see your point, but if we have to work on mandatory work for 5 days...Woah! You better watch your grades, as they could plummet. Trust me, I went to my dad's workplace for 3 days and my grades dropped from A- to D.

I really don't think it's a good idea.
Top Secret Researcher
#42 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 2:00 AM
Quote: Originally posted by ~Clarrisa~
I think I see your point, but if we have to work on mandatory work for 5 days...Woah! You better watch your grades, as they could plummet. Trust me, I went to my dad's workplace for 3 days and my grades dropped from A- to D.

I really don't think it's a good idea.


Its not 100hours in a single go, its a hundred hours over four years.

The humor of a story on the internet is in direct inverse proportion to how accurate the reporting is.
Lab Assistant
#43 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 2:01 AM
Wha? Okay, then forget about the plummeting grades, but still...mandatory is not volunteerism. You still have to do it, and I don't want to do mandatory work, because that can lead to some problems, like when exams come up.
Top Secret Researcher
#44 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 2:05 AM
Quote: Originally posted by ~Clarrisa~
Wha? Okay, then forget about the plummeting grades, but still...mandatory is not volunteerism. You still have to do it, and I don't want to do mandatory work, because that can lead to some problems, like when exams come up.


It wouldn't cause grade issues really. If for all four years of high school you spent four hours on a saturday doing something, and you did it for any five weeks in that school year (including summer time) youd be fine for graduation. And you can choose what work to do. You could pick up trash, you could volunteer at a soup kitchen, help the suicide hotline, work at your church or youth group, organize a school club, garden... theres lots of possibilities, and 100hours is not that much. It's .3% Three tenths of a percentage point of your time in high school.

The humor of a story on the internet is in direct inverse proportion to how accurate the reporting is.
Top Secret Researcher
#45 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 2:19 AM
Quote: Originally posted by FurryPanda
Fway, forcing kids to dvote a fraction of a percent of thier time is not leading to an elitist dictatorship. Why do you think there's an elitist dictatorship? CAUSE OF STUFF YOU KNOW ABOUT.

If it was truly an elitist dictatorship you wouldn't know about it, becasue you wouldn't ahve been given the ability to think about it and if you did you'd disappear. The United States is a bastion of freedom. Every six years we can ahve a completely different set of people ruling. Bossing around a bunch of sulky teenagers (like you) who have never directly experienced a worse alternative (I haven't either, but service learning/mandatory volunteerism has given me an idea of it) does not make for a dictatorship. Hell, slave labor doesn't make for a dictaorship either. The antebellum southern united states was no dictatorship, but it had slavery. The roman republic had slavery and was mostly republican.

You can't make the leap between "make kids devote a teeny portion of their lives to being useful" to "governemtn tells us nothing OMG, we're all F**d"


First off, I didn't say our government at the moment was an elitist dictatorship. I did say I wouldn't be surprised if there were one, or something like it coming. I appreciate you calling me a sulky teenager and all, but let me tell you something, it may sound like that, but I know that the government is up to something. Can you please tell me what you're going to do when the "Real ID" comes out? That's approximately a few months away.
EDIT1: By the way, that's one thing your government hasn't told you.
EDIT2: So did you find out about this mandatory volunteerism by your mainstream media and government or did you have to find out by someone outside of the media?


So how can you say that slave labor or mandatory volunteerism doesn't make for a dictatorship? Well then what was the Roman Empire if they had slave labor? And I can't say that they've kept secrets from us, but I also can't say that they haven't. The way the government is portrayed on television is a total farce. Which brings my point as to why the ignorant sheeple of the United States are going to realize that they will make a giant mistake if this law gets passed. It will only bring more laws because the folks will not speak up, and the downfall of the United States will be sooner and sooner as each day progresses! The citizens of the United States need to wake up, and get their act together, before America as we know it is gone, I'm telling you it's one step closer to eternal slavery, dictatorship, wars, etc.


#46 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 2:42 AM
Quote: Originally posted by boolPropped
I think it's ridiculous. Well maybe that's a little too harsh, but I certainly don't think it's a good idea.


No, I think ridiculous sums it up quite nicely. If you want to teach people how great volunteering for community service is, forcing it down their throats under the threat of no diploma is NOT the way to go about it.

Sorry to say, but people are, deep in the reptilian part of their brain, basically selfish. It's hardcoded into our genes. Sorry if that offends anyone. On a very basic level, people share, cooperate and act altruistically because the benefits to them outweigh the effort. Not to say that there aren't some genuinely selfless people out there, but they tend to the be exception, as opposed to the rule.

I guess the best way to go about it would be to appeal to their enlightened self-interest and show them what's in it for them, as opposed to just issuing a diktat from on high.
Top Secret Researcher
#47 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 3:23 AM
Quote: Originally posted by fway
The citizens of the United States need to wake up, and get their act together, before America as we know it is gone, I'm telling you it's one step closer to eternal slavery, dictatorship, wars, etc.
Eternal slavery and dicatorship are not going to happen in the US. Period! There are 3 million of us, and several hundred, maybe a thousand government officials in this country, and even if they all wanted this to happen (and only the most evil ones would, anyway) they couldn't make it happen. Ever heard of the Bill of Rights?

Also, to the ones saying that service learning/community service would hurt grades - it wouldn't. I could only see that happening in the last quarter of senior year, when grades - if they were decent at all to begin with - don't really matter anyway. Over 7 years, not counting summers, which actually do count, 75 or 100 hours is not a lot. It will not hurt your chances of graduation to spend one weekend studying instead of picking up trash, since undoubtedly you'll have many more weekends to get the hours in. Actually, it's almost impossible not to have a good start on the requirement just by coming to class and participating. Seriously.

Also, as Panda (maybe?) said, it's not hated by students. It's just... there. The forms are annoying, but you write about what you learned and who you helped and you get a signature and then you're done. Easy. The work itself is not hard labor, either. When I was in the school play in middle school (lol) they got high school kids to come and "help," which mainly constituted playing around and shushing us once in a while. They got 55 hours of SSL, I believe, for each play.

Top Secret Researcher
#48 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 3:37 AM
Quote: Originally posted by Daisie
Eternal slavery and dicatorship are not going to happen in the US. Period! There are 3 million of us, and several hundred, maybe a thousand government officials in this country, and even if they all wanted this to happen (and only the most evil ones would, anyway) they couldn't make it happen. Ever heard of the Bill of Rights?


Yes I have, but the government -now- has no regard for the Constitution, which is what I'm getting at. This brings me to say something about the "Patriot" Act. Weather or not congress passed the patriot act, that violates the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments. So this law could be passed just like the Patriot Act. And when our freedoms and liberties our birth rights, are taken away, there's more chances that laws like the Patriot Act get signed by the president. Slavery is just like having your rights taken away, and this Mandatory Volunteerism, well is a form of sugar-coated slavery. It may sound good to some, but if you look into the the deeper definitions of both words, it doesn't make sense.


Lab Assistant
#49 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 8:54 AM
I understand the point of view of those who say that 100 hours of community service work over the course of 4 years or so isn't likely to do much harm and might, in fact, do some good. I don't think anyone is trying to argue an inherent hardship. Most of the people that I knew in high school probably accomplished 100 hours of service on their own without realizing it. I certainly logged many more than that. I, at least, don't think 100 hours of community service is likely to harm kids. You're right. It's probably well-intentioned and it doesn't mean there's some wacky Orwellian conspiracy theory.

The fact that something isn't harmful and may even be helpful, however, does not make it right to make it mandatory. Orange juice is reputed to have a great many health benefits. It's not going to hurt you to drink it. Does that mean the government should pass a law requiring you to drink one glass of orange juice daily? Of course not! You are a private citizen; your choice in beverage is your own. The harm here is not in the act itself, but in the fact that it is forced on citizens of a "free" nation -- especially when those citizens have not yet reached voting age and therefore have no vote. At its heart, this is the type pf thing that caused our nation to break with England. "No taxation without representation," the people cried, angry that the colonies had no voice in Parliament and yet were used as a cash cow for England. To force citizens to do anything, no matter how seemingly inconsequential, against their wills and without their democratically obtained consent stands in direct contrast to the ideals on which our country is based. The fact that something may not be Orwellian does not make it desirable or compatible with the ideals on which the U.S. is based.

What people are arguing is anything having to do with words like "compulsory," "mandatory," "required," and "forced." As I understand them and certainly as I state as the core of my own argument, those who oppose the program do so because of a belief in the building block of the United States: the idea of individual freedom. To mandate education is in itself in violation of the idea of personal sovereignty - especially in a system that is continually lambasted for its poor performance (I don't think the test scores accurately reflect our performance, but that's another topic for another forum). To add forced labor of any kind (the level of difficulty or the type of labor is not at issue here) is deemed dangerous by the opposition because it further erodes individual freedom. What we have, then, is a system in which prior to being granted the full rights and responsibilities of citizenship, citizens spend roughly 18 years learning to obey the dictates of the government even when they do not have the right to participate in the political process. Even without submitting the typical slippery slope argument or bringing up for debate Guantanamo Bay, the Patriot Act, the North American Union, and Real ID, I think I can safely point out that the idea of forced anything is fundamentally incompatible with the idea of individual sovereignty. In conjunction with those and other recent developments, however, I can easily understand how one might reasonable worry about the erosion of American freedoms. So, while I don't think we need to be worried that we're going to wake up in the Handmaid's Tale tomorrow, I also don't think that the fact that this isn't a big deal or that it isn't that much to ask (err, I mean *require*) means that it is okay for a U.S. senator to suggest that the government ask (err, *mandate*) it.
#50 Old 25th Feb 2008 at 10:53 AM
"Congratulations... you've been voluntold."

Although I do know a few people who would do well to give a :censored: about something other than themselves.
 
Page 2 of 3
Back to top