|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:12 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
Thomas Jefferson thought it was every 20.
|
Washington thought otherwise: This government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government. |
And the Founding Fathers thought otherwise again:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. � That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, � That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
No offense, but only an American could say that with a straight face.
|
Hope you didn't hurt your teeth while gnashing. |
Thanks. How could you hear the gnashing with all the harps and singing going on up there? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
| Washington was a Deist, as were most of the founding fathers. He was therefore religious beyond just role playing. |
Deists weren't "religious" in a sense that would be recognizable to most religious people. Deists believed God set the universe in motion and then walked away, leaving it to proceed on its own. The analogy used at the time (in keeping with their technology) was clockwork -- God as celestial watch-winder. Deists did not believe in a personal God that intervened in human affairs.
Deism was much closer to what we would today call "atheism" than to any established religion. Recall that, at the time, Darwin had not yet published Origin of Species, so there was no credible naturalistic explanation for life's diversity and complexity. Deism was an attempt to reconcile the perceived indifference of the universe with the perceived need for an intelligent designer.
I don't think George Washington was a deist. Jefferson was, and so were some of the other key figures in the Revolution, but Washington was a Christian as far as I can tell. He made a lot of explicit references to Jesus and Christian doctrine in his addresses.
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
| And God help us if we should ever become secular humanists to the extent of much of Western Europe (and parts of Canada and New Zealand). |
Why? They seem to be doing pretty well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stillnotking wrote: |
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
| And God help us if we should ever become secular humanists to the extent of much of Western Europe (and parts of Canada and New Zealand). |
Why? They seem to be doing pretty well. |
I guess it depends on what your definition of "pretty well" is. I certainly don't think Western Europe or Canada are anything to aspire to. But, hey, what do I know? I'm just a stoopid Amerikun. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
| stillnotking wrote: |
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
| And God help us if we should ever become secular humanists to the extent of much of Western Europe (and parts of Canada and New Zealand). |
Why? They seem to be doing pretty well. |
I guess it depends on what your definition of "pretty well" is. I certainly don't think Western Europe or Canada are anything to aspire to. But, hey, what do I know? I'm just a stoopid Amerikun. |
Let me put it this way: the people there seem pretty happy, the societies are not falling apart, and whatever difficulties they have would not appear traceable to their greater secularism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| And the Founding Fathers |
Are you asserting that Washington was not a Founding Father? Umm, the most Foundingest Father in fact? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Conservative
Joined: 15 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
| stillnotking wrote: |
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
| And God help us if we should ever become secular humanists to the extent of much of Western Europe (and parts of Canada and New Zealand). |
Why? They seem to be doing pretty well. |
I guess it depends on what your definition of "pretty well" is. I certainly don't think Western Europe or Canada are anything to aspire to. But, hey, what do I know? I'm just a stoopid Amerikun. |
Canada is the only nation in the G-7 to have a surplus and has for quite some time. What's America's surplus again?
I'd say our fiscal management policies are something for Americans and America to aspire to. Unfortunately given the economic agendas of the main candidates it looks like aspiring will be all they'll be able to do.
I like America as much as the next person but really now...most experts tend to be of the same opinion. America really needs to tighten its belt and stop living beyond its collective means. There WILL be a bill to pay...and it looks like it's about due now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Justin Hale
Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Location: the Straight Talk Express
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jkelly80
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
1.Small sample size. Canada has as many people as California.
2. And no inherited racial problems or a massive land border with a third world country.
It's like a big fantasy island with tree and denim. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jkelly80 wrote: |
1.Small sample size. Canada has as many people as California.
2. And no inherited racial problems or a massive land border with a third world country.
It's like a big fantasy island with tree and denim. |
1) Canucks are getting fat fat fat. Especially the women/men from the Prairie and Atlantic provinces.
2) We are going out of our way to import one.
I've been in and out of Miami over the past year. Several times. Hardly any fat folks there (non Black). NYC and Southern California too.. Maybe it is an interior thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jkelly80
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thepeel wrote: |
| jkelly80 wrote: |
1.Small sample size. Canada has as many people as California.
2. And no inherited racial problems or a massive land border with a third world country.
It's like a big fantasy island with tree and denim. |
1) Canucks are getting fat fat fat. Especially the women/men from the Prairie and Atlantic provinces.
2) We are going out of our way to import one.
I've been in and out of Miami over the past year. Several times. Hardly any fat folks there (non Black). NYC and Southern California too.. Maybe it is an interior thing. |
I think it is an interior thing. I'm from Chicago and I think it's a world class city, not as good as NY but better than LA. But lots of fatties. And if not fatties, just big. Big people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, from what I understand it would be damn hard not to get fat in Chicago. NYC, SF and Miami (where I've spent good amounts of time) are culinary wonderlands and if reputation is at all correct, Chicago tops them all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thepeel wrote: |
| Well, from what I understand it would be damn hard not to get fat in Chicago. NYC, SF and Miami (where I've spent good amounts of time) are culinary wonderlands and if reputation is at all correct, Chicago tops them all. |
I think they did a study a few years ago. They found that in bigger cities and along the coastlines there was significantly less obesity in these areas. People in larger cities have easy access to mass transit and tend to walk more. People that live along the coasts tend to eat more seafood and get out more by, well, going to the beach.
I do remember being in Las Vegas a few years back and seeing that half the people there were like pigs straight from the farm. A local told me that is how they know who the tourists are as in all of the enormous people you see along the strip are most likely from out of town. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When I lived in Edmonton during the winter (a good 8 months of the year) I would drive .25km to the 7-11. Too cold to do walk. Also, most Canadian cities (less Toronto and Montreal) have mass transit systems that would stun a Korean or Japanese person (or Londoner, Parisian etc) in how useless they are. You have to drive.
I'm quite positive (as is Pluto, I think) that suburbs are the main culprit to all this. They are soul-sucking terrible places that one must have a car to navigate. I hope I never have to live in one again. In Singapore, despite the humidity, I'd walk home everyday (unless it was raining). Took me more than an hour. But the city is clean, orderly, safe, concentrated and interesting. Walking for an hour in Edmonton, Calgary, or many American cities would be among the most boring things I can imagine.
Anyways, this is off topic now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I have a classmate from Shanghai whose first time outside the country was this past summer. First stop: LAX. As he was walking through the airport to get to his connecting flight, he thought, "Wow, is all of America this fat??" When he arrived in San Diego he thought, "Wow, there are a lot of fit people here." He was a bit perplexed at the difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
