@blowe said:

Maybe we are finally getting beyond the post 9-11 mindset that had us willing to crush rights underfoot in our stampede to do something, anything to make ourselves feel comfortable.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/signs/sciencetest.asp

CISPA won't even reach a floor vote in the Senate. Think the people in Washington are finally starting to get it? First shooting down anti-gun legislature and now CISPA. Some faith in humanity has been restored? I'd like to think so

@the-cysko-kid said:

lol, as far as message goes, yes. Jonah and the Whale was about a guy whose dedication to prayer was good enough for Yahweh to command the whale to spit him out. The moral of Job's story is that Yahweh the sociopath doesn't want to lose a bet to Satan, so he lets Satan brutalize his family, but Yahweh provides a new one as a reward for his unrelenting faith. As crazy/stupid as those stories are, they are consistent with the message of the Old Testament where Yahweh takes names and kicks ass, and you'd better be on His side or else.

The prodigal son, on the other hand... Someone please tell me what that story is all about. The moral, as far as I can tell, is that not only should you forgive people for wasting their lives, but reward them for it. Those who are loyal and economical get the shit end of the stick. In my opinion, it really doesn't fit in with much else in either testament.

And frankly where the amendments of the constitution are concerned some of the ones under the most fire ,such as the second, are still 250 years old and thusly should looked at for updating to apply to todays world, which is vastly different than 1776. If the founding fathers time traveled to the present day there's a good chance they'd all immediately shit their pants out of abject terror. Technology has a way of changing old timey values don't you think?

@the-cysko-kid said:

Yeah but no one cares much for what was changed in the Bible and why, whereas the amendments are arguably the most important part of the Constitution. The book that Dante's Inferno is based off of didn't make the latest cut of the Bible yet the prodigal son (dumbest story I've ever read) still makes the cut. There's not really much transparency when it comes to changes in the Bible, you can't say the same about the Constitution.

@vaportrail said:

The Constitution is not simply a 250 year old document like the Bible is a 2000 year old document. We've been changing the Constitution for over 200 years, as needed, to keep up with the times. When the situation is dire enough, the Constitution bends to the will of its people.

@mld-woody said:

The Constitution is not simply a 250 year old document like the Bible is a 2000 year old document. We've been changing the Constitution for over 200 years, as needed, to keep up with the times. When the situation is dire enough, the Constitution bends to the will of its people.

@the-cysko-kid said:

It is inaccurate, but its what you say every time this debate comes up. You call the pro choice side "pro abortion" or "fans of abortion". That's not true at all. Your side calls themselves "pro life" as if the other is "anti-life" or something..

@the-cysko-kid said:

Yeah I pretty much agree with Cysko here. To look to a 250 year old document as the end all be all in policy and legislation is dumb. A lot has changed...

You want to look at the principles of the document, and the ideology, sure. But specifics? Idk...

Same with the Bible. Sure, there are a lot of good messages in there. But to take it all literally is foolish

@comeonman said:

Except a lump of 8 cells isn't a baby...

@comeonman said:

Not at all, not at all. I believe the Bible has a lot of merit, but to sit there and lean on it and call it the absolute doctrine of god that must be followed to the letter is just plain silly. Frankly the Constitution is much the same. It has undeniable merit, but to look to it 250 years later as an absolute is foolish.

By the way that's not that odd of a statement, especially around here. And don't worry, a lot of people don't know what the hell to make of a lot of things I say.

@westside-steve said:

Vague wording. The language of the bill allows ISPs to determine anyone's traffic is a risk to their network, and can hand your data to the government or put a hold on your account at will. CISPA isn't going to make it any tougher to be a cyber-criminal, it just adds risk to law abiding citizens. This bill makes your information obtainable to the government without a warrant. You might not have a problem with that, but I do.

@westside-steve said:

I see where you are coming from and you are right, probably nothing.

But it's the principle, CISPA is an invasion of privacy. And who knows what it could snowball into, best to nip it in the bud.

@comeonman said:

The point I'm trying to make is neither abortion nor murder are touched on by the Constitution. You mentioned "life without due process" but that's in the amendment pertaining to the rights of those who are being tried for crimes.

WSS

@vaportrail said:

Is murder unconstitutional?

@mld-woody said:

I don't think a clump of a two then 4 the 8 cells is a human being.

@the-cysko-kid said:

He appears to be a big fan of abortion, so ill guess his answer is thumbs up. Constitutional. I personally think the constitution is exactly as useful as the bible. I'll let you decide how useful that is.

Cysko... no one is a fan of abortion...

@comeonman said:

I would disagree that it is not covered in the constitution. No one shall be deprived of life without due process would be my argument. But I also believe that an unborn child once conceived is a human being with human rights. Not everyone sees it that way

I don't think a clump of a two then 4 the 8 cells is a human being.