After sharp criticism from Mitt Romney and Republicans, the Democrats have reinstated the language into their party platform that recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel as well as the words "God-given" that were removed in this year's platform.
The platform released by Democrats Monday evening dropped a clause included in the 2008 platform that read: "Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel." That platform went on to say, however, that "[t]he parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths."
CinnamonGirl wrote: Okay, I will give the real topic. Why did they take out the word god?
Why did they need it?
CinnamonGirl wrote: The platform released by Democrats Monday evening dropped a clause included in the 2008 platform that read: "Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel." That platform went on to say, however, that "[t]he parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths."
I'm sorry they changed it... THe original statement was the best answer.
CinnamonGirl wrote: Okay, I will give the real topic. Why did they take out the word god?
Why did they need it?
CinnamonGirl wrote: The platform released by Democrats Monday evening dropped a clause included in the 2008 platform that read: "Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel." That platform went on to say, however, that "[t]he parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths."
I'm sorry they changed it... THe original statement was the best answer.
I really don't know how it disappeared in the first place. There did not seem to be a vote.
CinnamonGirl wrote: Okay, I will give the real topic. Why did they take out the word god?
Just curious, why is this a real topic? I personally could care less about the inclusion or exclusion of this word when we have bigger worries like the economy, the continual erosion of our rights to privacy, wars we can't afford and shouldn't be fighting, our overburdened and inefficient justice system, our broken political system that is pervaded by corruption, pet projects, and useless laws that aren't enforced, a laughable healthcare system rife with incomplete overpriced care and a misplaced emphasis on drugs to fix everything, and the worsening environment to contend with.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
CinnamonGirl wrote: Okay I have a better question. Should the government continue to subsidize Renewable energy?
Yes. The government's job is to proactively move this country forward and help generate products that will improve our economy. That's how fossil fuels were launched, and their subsidies should've ended decades ago. If there isn't money pumped into innovation, and we continue to feed fossil fuel companies who make record profits despite their "costs to explore", and whose products' use are conclusively driving us toward an increasing burden of disaster relief debt and whose products will continue to increase in price as they become harder to access and more scarce in quantity, then we are working backwards. It's logical to help increase implementation of, and research into, alternative energy sources that drive down energy costs so as to better our economy and our environment.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
CinnamonGirl wrote: Okay I have a better question. Should the government continue to subsidize Renewable energy?
Yes. The government's job is to proactively move this country forward and help generate products that will improve our economy. That's how fossil fuels were launched, and their subsidies should've ended decades ago. If there isn't money pumped into innovation, and we continue to feed fossil fuel companies who make record profits despite their "costs to explore", and whose products' use are conclusively driving us toward an increasing burden of disaster relief debt and whose products will continue to increase in price as they become harder to access and more scarce in quantity, then we are working backwards. It's logical to help increase implementation of, and research into, alternative energy sources that drive down energy costs so as to better our economy and our environment.
CinnamonGirl wrote: Okay I have a better question. Should the government continue to subsidize Renewable energy?
Yes. The government's job is to proactively move this country forward and help generate products that will improve our economy. That's how fossil fuels were launched, and their subsidies should've ended decades ago. If there isn't money pumped into innovation, and we continue to feed fossil fuel companies who make record profits despite their "costs to explore", and whose products' use are conclusively driving us toward an increasing burden of disaster relief debt and whose products will continue to increase in price as they become harder to access and more scarce in quantity, then we are working backwards. It's logical to help increase implementation of, and research into, alternative energy sources that drive down energy costs so as to better our economy and our environment.
There are many different companies out there and in solar especially, there are no technologies out there and there was a bubble with companies that were just trying to get in on the trend. They need to be more selective or have some sort of plan instead of just throwing money to anyone. IMO.
CinnamonGirl wrote: Okay, I will give the real topic. Why did they take out the word god?
Just curious, why is this a real topic? I personally could care less about the inclusion or exclusion of this word when we have bigger worries like the economy, the continual erosion of our rights to privacy, wars we can't afford and shouldn't be fighting, our overburdened and inefficient justice system, our broken political system that is pervaded by corruption, pet projects, and useless laws that aren't enforced, a laughable healthcare system rife with incomplete overpriced care and a misplaced emphasis on drugs to fix everything, and the worsening environment to contend with.
It is all over the news. It just disappeared without explanation. It is fixed. Last thing I want to do is get into another bottomless pit subject because someone is hurt at the question.
:thumbsup:
