Litzy

You list some things that certainly should be protected and most of those things are already protected one way or another. And I'm in favor of "We have the right to refuse service" rights, I really am. But the rights the claim they need to be a lot stronger.

I'm with Suzie here. There would be a better leg to stand upon if we had random groups trying to force their way into people's religious practices. But, by and large, I think we have consumers simply looking to purchase goods and services. The whole "we reserve the right to refuse service..." does not seem to have all that much legal power. We either need to make that a much stronger policy or get rid of it altogether.

And I've no fault with that article or see any reason to disbelieve it. But I do have to give a sigh when I see that article and another doctor or medical office saying coffee should be kept to a minimum and that it causes obesity or anxiety. Which is it? Which study do I trust? What I'm saying, Maureen, is that EVERY SINGLE DOCTOR AND/OR STUDY ought to be reaching the exact same conclusions. If a study is done properly, it will be repeated with the same conclusions every single time, if it's accurate. All I'm saying that there shouldn't be different articles with different opinions on coffee. It's healthy or it's not. The entire medical community should agree on this. Not one professor with one opinion here and another committee with a different opinion there.

I never know what some of these ultra-natural health gurus are thinking. I have no idea if they're right or wrong, but it would be interesting to see if he's on the vaccine medical minority.

I think Christianophobia may be too strong a word here (though there is an excellent book out there that discusses the valid problem on a global scale also called Christianophobia). I'm tempted to take the majority at the word they don't want to discriminate against Christians. Our culture is becoming increasingly secular for good and for bad as well as the fact there is a liberal slant to our politics and social culture. Our society is looking for unity and acceptance for all (and I really do think that if you sat people down and asked them that specifically, they'd admit it). But as SoulSearcher was saying, we don't know the best way to go about it.

I suppose I don't understand what is so vague about "I've read articles against coffee". http://www.hungryforchange.tv/article/10-reasons-to-quit-coffee-plus-healthy-alternatives http://authoritynutrition.com/coffee-good-or-bad/ It seems to me that a substance ought to be either healthy or unhealthy without so much controversy. This is different from the water comparison that says water is healthy but says the 8 cups is a myth. That's a matter of quantity, not quality.

No, nothing similar to that. Some articles say Coffee is Good and here's why. Others say Coffee is Bad and here's why. Maureen, I have nothing against coffee drinkers, both my parents and several of my siblings drink coffee. You sound like you're defending the practice by panicking over the notion some articles have been written against coffee.

I usually do my own. Part of my job requires book keeping as it is, so I have very little problem with my own taxes.

My goodness, we may have seen the same lady. I'd say let's exchange her card information to make certain but the better part of me thinks that'd be against forum rules. This one also announced herself a volunteer, so I don't think she was being paid. I still think it's inappropriate for her position, especially when she found herself contradicting the organization's literature.

I think there's a cultural change here. Many in our society would like to follow the European model of "live and let live" where only things encompassing the whole of society should be discussed and promoted and individual laundry should be kept in the home. Of course, the twist is that many progressive ideologies are still considered novel enough to get a pass on this.

Last Friday, my school hosted a suicide prevention course, needed by teachers in my building for teacher licensing. Two volunteers from a suicide prevention group spoke to us and one was... extremely unprofessional and kept spouting things that had everyone exchanging awkward looks and lead to quite the discussion after that and today. Despite an official mention in the group's literature that religious organizations can help prevent suicide, this volunteer kept going on weird personal tangents about the horrors all these churches (listed specifically either by official religion or community church name) had committed. After her partner mentioned the official literature, she broke in with another tangent of "Well, that just isn't true..." It was very weird, to say the least. I suppose her bad experiences are as valid as anything, but it didn't seem to be the time or place for it. Some of us were wondering if we ought to bring this up to her superiors.

I think Backroads summed it up. I would point out that the ones that speak about the evils of coffee tend to be your more natural health stuff. I still don't understand the medical disconnect.

I'm sick to death of all these you should drink coffee for your health/coffee is bad for your health scientific articles. Seems they are just coming from different angles. You'd think the medical community could come up with a definitive coffee is bad/good status and stick to it. I'm with anatess. Outside the WoW, approach it holistically.

The ultimate variety of salads at any get-together.

When you wish upon a credit card

A bird is the thing with feathers...

This is probably true, though not in my immediate work, anyway. School employees communicate via email and all are expected to check email daily. Employees are also discouraged from giving out personal FB and phone numbers I'll argue one needs to be aware of the preferred communication of their immediate field.

I still find a phone call or email to be the most professional. And yes, I expect professional people to be aware those are the standard ways of communicating. When I say "professional" I don't mean job-wise, but an awareness of what the usual ways of communication are. If you are able to function, you ought to be able to regularly check the email account you give everyone as well as the voicemail to the phone number you give everyone. I realize things are changing, but I still feel those should be the default standards of communication. I abide by 9-8 rather than 9-9. Many people just seem to be settling down for the night around 8ish, or it being family/personal time. Just my own quirk. Texting... anytime. I assume those who don't want to be bothered by noisy texts will be proactive and turn off/silence their phones.

I also feel about the same as you, carlimac. Part of me says, trust the kid to not be a pervert and teach the other kids some basic self-defense principles. But in a public school setting the school does have the duty of protecting the kids. I'm not sure who's right.

Of course, it's not good when our loved ones do it. But we love them, so of course they get to be a moral/ethical exception. It's all relative. If someone else entirely was having an affair or gambling, that of course would be much more wrong.

I never saw it as racist, more like common sense. Our general American culture seems to be increasingly approving of diversity, making interracial marriages doable without too much drama, but even then many subcultures like to keep to themselves, for better or for worse. The quote isn't saying don't marry outside your race, just acknowledging that differences can be challenging. It's not a commandment from left field, just wisdom observant of social relations.

I'd say some elements of our society has evolved around coffee. Back when, the morning cup or two might give you a boost. These days, you need a greater boost. Not necessarily because it all starts with more work, but because of the assumption "If you would just drink more coffee, you could do more!" People do more with more coffee, so the workload rises a little beyond the current coffee level. Drink more coffee to catch up. Rinse and repeat.

I know how you feel. I don't think I could accept such a thing, either. And yet, what practical good is it for such a stranger to do such a kind, generous gesture and have no one willing to accept it? When you need help, it does you no good to turn away real help. Why praise the giver and condemn the taker? (I realize that's not what you were doing, Bini, I just went off on a train of thought!)

NeuroTypical beat me to it. Yes, what the Tribune said was technically correct: no one is going to lose out on a recommend for having no real beef with the politics of gay marriage. No one is going to lose out on a recommend for saying all legalities should be distributed equally. In my view, promotions of gay marriage are not actually working against the Church. But, yet, there is something about the Tribune article that feels off to me.

Speaking from someone who works in public education... The best thing you can do as a parent concerned about the fate of society is truly scrutinize who is teaching your child and what is being taught. I'm not going to needlessly defend public education as I see much good in homeschooling.