dadadavid has not created any debates.
Yes, young voters can be "swayed" by almost anything, but that doesn't mean we should protect them as if they are children. Celebrities are going to endorse candidates, and if it influences voters, that's just how people are.
That's fair. I see your point that whether he's changed or not, Disney still has the right to release him because of his comments.
I'd never thought about it, but I don't see why it should be allowed. It's clearly dangerous, and if it was banned, everyone would "move up" in weight class and so no one would be advantaged in a fight.
I think his jokes were stupid, but I agree with @Gary@TheHood that we can't just assume he hasn't changed as a person. That's like saying who you are when you're an adult is inevitable. Plenty of adults make massive changes in their life. I think if he really apologized and was sincere he shouldn't have been so harshly criticized.
I agree with the others. The cruise shouldn't have let people wander around that close to the bear's territory. Instead, they should just view the area from the ship. I see no need for the people to walk around the shoreline if the cruise line knows that there's a possibility that an endangered (and dangerous) species lives there.
I agree with this--there should be more discussion and regulation of these issues. I think it's so taboo that people aren't willing to talk about it at all, when just talking about it doesn't mean anyone's rights will be taken away or anything.
I disagree that young voters being "swayed" is an issue, as long as facts are presented with the endorsement. I don't see how that's different than them being swayed by a political attack ad or campaign. Also, we're talking about 18+ year old "young voters," not children.
Definitely better than a blind endorsement!
Did you really expect Taylor Swift to reference something like foreign relations? No offense, but she's a pop singer, not a politician or journalist or anything like that. I've seen other celebrities just posting "go vote" or "vote for ______". At least she provided some explanation.
I think her endorsement is fine. I think Sheffield is asking a lot of a celebrity Instagram post. Taylor Swift is free to do what she wants, and it seems to me like she did her research and posted about what she believes in. Again, Taylor Swift is a singer, not a political figure. People are welcome to agree or disagree with her views as they wish.
Yeah, angry parents are a lot to deal with! Thanks for your comment!
I think any steps to strengthen security and attempt to reduce school shootings are good, but I agree with another commenter that when you ask "will anything work?" the answer is probably "no." The world will always have psychos who want to hurt others, and although we can reduce violence and promote safety, we're never going to live in a world free of violence.
I think they probably should be illegal, but I also think the media has sensationalized this whole issue. As some other commenters have said: the current 3D guns that are available are pretty crappy and shouldn't pose a big threat. I do agree that there should be a larger conversation about registration etc. though.
I agree--like unregulated firearms are an issue, but I don't think we're in any "imminent danger" here.
I'd still use them. Honestly, I don't think I have enough money to be a big target :)
That's true, I hadn't thought of it in terms of liability. The school could be criticized for letting students "get involved."
Eh, I think we should wait and see. Trump has said he's going to do plenty of things that haven't ended up happening.
I agree that parents complaining alone shouldn't be enough to stop an activity. The school should consider whether or not the activity is actually inappropriate, and then take action. However, the reality of the situation is that schools want to avoid any sort of controversy and want the support of the children's parents, so I think parental complaints often are enough to stop something from happening. I think this has only been worsened in the age of social media, since now schools have to deal with not only the parents' outrage but also the outrage of thousands of unaffiliated strangers that now have a say. What do you think?
Agree. And if parents find out that their children have been asked to do this exercise, it'll blow up (like it has, haha) and only be counterproductive.
I'm no fan of Trump, but it's not clear to me how this is eliminates protections. Also, I think we should wait and see, since this was a leaked memo and nothing official. However, I do disagree with the sentiment of the memo and I agree that this will only anger people and do nothing useful.
Yeah, I honestly don't think there was any malice behind her actions, but she deserved the criticism she got.
I think it could be an interesting and useful assignment, but I think the age of the kids is the questionable part here. The idea of the world ending is a little dark, but I think they're old enough to know that's a hypothetical/fake situation. My main concern would be that at that age, these kids are just going to spew their parent's opinions, so it won't be productive.
They might have removed it just to avoid controversy. But yeah, it's definitely fishy.
Yeah, I think the whole "selfie" thing has gotten a little ridiculous. Have you seen the story that blew up a little bit back about the girl that took a selfie at Auschwitz... like seriously...
Well the court has to compare their actions, why shouldn't we?
I guess I agree with changing the language, I just don't think that media outlets should have to not report certain facts about the case, like the cause of death.
How can they tell that it was photoshopped? Maybe the model uses self-tanner or is just tan or something like that. That's my problem with calling it racism, because no one has proved and the company isn't admitted that it's photoshopped.
When a teacher tells a kindergartener to do something, they do it. That's just the nature of a teacher/young student relationship. Kids aren't able to make decisions like that, so they are basically "forced" into it. If they started doing the pledge in 6th grade or older it might be different, but young kids really don't have the same agency.
*doesn't need to be reported on
I agree the exact method doesn't need to be used but I don't think the media should cover anything up.
Yeah, her show was popular and had a bunch of people working on it that might not have shared her opinion. Plus she apologized.
I agree she was in the wrong but I still think her actions should be considered differently than, say, the actions of Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein.
Yeah, good point.
I think the facts should be reported. Facts are facts. It sucks that some people are affected negatively by this stuff but you can't expect the media to censor information.
That's true! I would imagine that most of the protesters (or at least many of them) intended to have a peaceful protest like you said and were not on board with the violence, unfortunately.
I don't think it should have an R rating if the target audience is for teens and pre-teens. However, you can't blame the MPAA for that. The film creators should cut the parts that make it an R-rated film if they want it to drop down in the ratings. They can't expect the MPAA to make an exception for their movie, even if they do have a good reason to encourage kids to see it.
Okay, I get what you're saying.
I think her crime is less serious since it's basically just sex not rape, the only issue was his age. I'm not excusing her actions but it's not the same as violent rape. I agree that she should be held accountable the same as any man.
I disagree, I think messed up people like that will find a way to connect somehow.
It's not a law that you state the pledge, but implementing it in elementary schools is basically making people do it. What 5 year old is going to resist doing what a teacher tells them to do? If our country was founded as a result of the pursuit of religious freedom, children of all religions should be able to say a pledge to their country without having to mention a God that they don't believe in.
I'm not saying anyone should be freaking out about it, but it does violate the clause in my view.
I don't disagree with any of that. I just think one way to implement the best gun laws is to look at places that have different gun laws then us, because we have no precedent to follow of our own.
Love or hate reddit, it can't call itself a haven for "free speech" and then ban subreddits. Obviously I think those subreddits are gross but if those people can't talk about it on reddit they'll just move to another website or whatever.
Yeah, I've seen some funny memes about it.
Yeah, but the notion of a "space war" is still so far away from what we can do technologically right now that wasting money on technology specifically intended for war seems like a waste to me. Does everything have to be an arms race?
I still think students should be treated like any other adults in that situation.
I think the tweet was rude, but I don't know about racist. I think the consequences she faced were a little harsh.
I can see why she backed down, though, as not backing down would make her the subject of some heavy criticism.
Yeah, why not? Should they pretend to be apolitical?
People who commit murders lack morals, you said that yourself. Why wouldn't a lack of morals be behind the murder rates?
I'm no fan of Trump but I doubt he said it. He would know (even before his political days) that something like that could ruin his career. Omarosa seems pretty suspicious herself too. Also, if there's a tape of him saying it but no one can release it, why even bring it up? If there's no proof there's no point in discussing it.
I don't think she should be prevented from doing it. Acting is call acting for a reason. However, I agree that minority voices like transgender people should be more represented, so it would be good to have a transgender actor play the role.
No, it definitely should not. I hadn't really thought about it before, but yeah, it definitely violates the establishment clause....
I'm not sure, other than firing racists when they pop up, lol.
I disagree, why shouldn't the students be allowed to participate? They're college students, not children, and they should be able to involve themselves in political protests if they want to. Yes, it did turn violent, but it was not by nature a violent protest.
Yeah, not sure what the government can do here if kids want to use them.
I guess that's true.
Okay that makes more sense.
Yeah good points on the blood clots too. That makes it worse that they banned it.
Yeah it's addictive, but I think a lot of people, especially teens, use the vapes without nicotine. I guess I'd like to see numbers on that. Also, regarding the chemicals, there are bad chemicals iin everything from sunscreen to produce.
But if we focus on it, won't we by necessity focus less on other drug issues?
Eh, I think it's an overreaction. Teens are always looking for the next "thrill"... at least it's vaping and not a worse drug. Also for the vapes that don't have nicotine, I'm pretty sure it's just water vapor or whatever.
LOL. Love the quote.
I always thought the glass of red wine thing was an old wives' tale, but good to know anyway.
I think psychopathy is a strong word. Yeah, it's not realistic, but companies have been photoshopping models for years. Think about toys like Barbie too. It's nothing new.
You've clearly never seen the NYC taxi rush if you're thinking they'll help with "coherence and flow"...
Clearly she was smart to get the internship in the first place, but I wonder about her common sense, haha.
Man, the tennis world has been really shit to Serena lately. No, I don't think it should have been banned. There's literally no good reason for it, and they couldn't even come up with one in their statement. How do you define "respecting the game"? How is one of the world's best tennis players not "respecting the game" by wearing a freaking cat suit? Also she's MORE covered up than other players, so they can't say it's distracting or something. This whole thing bothers me.
I disagree with the violence going on. If you want the statue removed, pursue it through diplomatic means, and vice versa. I don't personally think that confederate statues should stand but II'm also not going to go tear any down.
Agreed--let the market solve its own issues.
This seems like a "duh!" kind of moment to me. Is alcohol healthy? No. Will people continue to drink it? Yes. We know fatty foods, sugar, etc. is bad for us and we still eat it. We know tobacco is REALLY bad for us and people still smoke/vape etc.. I can't see this changing much.
I feel like the training was more of a PR stunt because people were upset about it than an actual move to address racism. If someone is really racist, a training is probably not going to do much. However, I can't say I think it's a bad thing overall, just that I don't really trust Starbucks' motives here.
I think it should be legal. Although there's some confusing llanguage (i.e. "natural death") that should maybe be changed or addressed, the general notion that people should be able to end their lives when they are in pain and have no hope of survival is a good one to me. Even though you mentioned that hospice care exists, most people don't want to spend weeks, months, or years slowly dying in a bed, even if they aren't in severe pain. Especially people in vegetative states, etc. It seems cruel to force people to live in that state.
I agree that there's a double standard, and I'd be more on the side of imitating accents is fine as a joke or in a school play, as long as it's not used directly to make fun of someone. Like if you're doing a bad Indian accent in order to mock an Indian person, that's messed up. If you're doing one from a TV show, that's whatever. Same with British accents etc.
I'd be bothered more if Kanye was offended but he went on Twitter and defended Kimmel and said he had a good time on the show, so I think it's not a big deal.
We can't really know because everything is just allegations and we don't know what he really did. However, it likely could be an attack on his politics. Everything is politicized these days and I don't know if anything can be separated from politics.
As a driver, I think they're dangerous even if the technology doesn't fail, because people drive them like idiots in the street. If the technology itself isn't tested for safety, that's even worse. If you want to get around easily without an environmental impact, get a bike.
I think it's a waste of government funds. I'm for better technology, but the creation of a "Space Force" is excessive and serves Trump's ego rather than any rational reasons.
I agree it was a lack of morals but I think his comments didn't help.
I think she shouldn't have been fired in my personal opinion, but I also think she was stupid to do it.