America

[TippyThomas]

Yup. The one person entered this thread, not by posting at first, but by passive aggressively posting laughing emjois to things he doesn't agree with....and so when I see that, I know the thread is about to go south with childish posts. There's a mean spiritedness to the dialogue in our society these days....and it's in these threads as well.

I've thrown in some passive aggressive laughing emojis myself over time so I can't really talk negatively about someone else doing it. I understand why it bothers some, but I also understand that it's much safer to do that than it is to engage in dialogue with some because it always ends with reports and points. It's sometimes easier not to play their game, laugh and walk away. I get what you're saying though as well.

 

[Suger Mag]

I've thrown in some passive aggressive laughing emojis myself over time so I can't really talk negatively about someone else doing it. I understand why it bothers some, but I also understand that it's much safer to do that than it is to engage in dialogue with some because it always ends with reports and points. It's sometimes easier not to play their game, laugh and walk away. I get what you're saying though as well.

have the laughing emoji's become the airplane seat recline option of the DIS? Yes, the option is there, but don't you dare use it ....

As far as engaging.... yup.... some comments are so out there, a laughing emoji is often the appropriate response. Frankly... if someone is going to get all bent about a laughing emoji... an actual 'discussion' of substance is not really likely to go well....

 

[lisaviolet]

. if someone is going to get all bent about a laughing emoji... an actual 'discussion' of substance is not really likely to go well....

Nah.

I am not sure I get bent out of shape, but I certainly think a laughing emoji to someone's serious post/viewpoint - even when one doesn't remotely agree with it - is both rude & passive aggressive.
And yet I am absolutely confident in my ability to have a conversation of substance with any differing viewpoint.

I will go further with my own judgemental ways on the issue. When someone uses the laughing icon & doesn't even remotely contribute in general on what their issue is in having such a stark differing opinion, I think that is weak. I am talking about those who stay silent most of the time through a conversation, yet love their laughing emoji.

 

[lisaviolet]

I love all those who are ignoring that Musk has three citizenships.

He went for his Canadian citizenship because he felt it would be easier to get to the States, as thousands of people do.

But that does not take away a fact of citizenship.

 

[lisaviolet]

As for the subject at hand -
I hope every American had a lovely holiday.

And I think we are all blessed - and should feel fortunate - to live in the countries that most of do on this board.

That does not negate the important issues and problems we have in our countries at all. That should be discussed, debated and fought against if that is how one feels about them, that they are a serious error in judgement.

 

[lisaviolet]

And can't leave this one. Yes women's health care is being taken away in many states. Newsflash -That has nothing to do with one's viewpoint on abortion.

It has to do with idiots not understanding that their inability to think through critical wordings in legislation will lead to the death of someone's loved ones. Pointe finale.

If you are not well-versed on a woman's reproductive issues & and often life saving needs, do not speak to what you do not know. That is just common sense.

It will unfortunately take someone's loved one dying to hit home. I have a loved one that would have died in these legislative errors and times; in some states. She was carrying a fetus that they did not realize early was not viable/no longer viable and was not alive inside her but was not leaving either (I might feel the need to edit this part out later, so please if one can not paste this part back, thank you.) She would have died herself going forward, the doctors knew that.
And if you say but they allow for these critical medical decisions. Tell that to the doctors who some are now scared ****less to make these timely decisions.Tell that to the legislators who proclaim "Oh that is not what we meant" when time is often critical. Tell that to your loved one who has a pregnancy that will never be a fetus, ie. ectopic pregnancy. And will often progress to sepsis & death. But the loonies used the word pregnancy instead of fetus in their legislation in one of the states. And then there was one looney that proclaimed the fertilized egg can be moved in an ectopic pregnancy, which it can not at our moment in medical procedures. 'Oh blah blah blah said it can be moved' travelling around social media. Not to mention an insurance issue & timing if it even could. Of course he was a man who knew all about women and their needs & health. Insert eye roll. And of course he was a politician and not a medical professional.
Educate yourself beyond your viewpoint on abortion. Have your absolute freedom to feel whatever you want about abortion, but do not confuse your viewpoints with a woman's health and sometimes life.

 

[GreatLakes]

I love all those who are ignoring that Musk has three citizenships.

He went for his Canadian citizenship because he felt it would be easier to get to the States, as thousands of people do.

But that does not take away a fact of citizenship.

Nor the fact he is African. Anyone from that continent is African. A black immigrant from Europe would be a European American.

This lady is an African American. She isn't black but she is African and even represent an African country in competitions. That some people use it as a synonym for black doesn't erase the reality of a geographic location.

We can post Dictionary definitions all day. Here is one from the Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary:

 

[CdnCarrie]

Nor the fact he is African. Anyone from that continent is African. A black immigrant from Europe would be a European American.

This lady is an African American. She isn't black but she is African and even represent an African country in competitions. That some people use it as a synonym for black doesn't erase the reality of a geographic location.

We can post Dictionary definitions all day. Here is one from the Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary:

View attachment 775416

Can't they just be American.

 

[Moliphino]

Nor the fact he is African. Anyone from that continent is African. A black immigrant from Europe would be a European American.

This lady is an African American. She isn't black but she is African and even represent an African country in competitions. That some people use it as a synonym for black doesn't erase the reality of a geographic location.

We can post Dictionary definitions all day. Here is one from the Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary:

View attachment 775416

How about Wikipedia, then.

African Americans (also referred to as Black Americans and Afro-Americans) are an ethnic group consisting of Americans with partial or total ancestry from any of the black racial groups of Africa.[3][4] The term "African American" generally denotes descendants of enslaved Africans who are from the United States.[5][6][7] While some Black immigrants or their children may also come to identify as African American, the majority of first generation immigrants do not, preferring to identify with their nation of origin.[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans

 

[lisaviolet]

Nor the fact he is African. Anyone from that continent is African. A black immigrant from Europe would be a European American.

This lady is an African American. She isn't black but she is African and even represent an African country in competitions. That some people use it as a synonym for black doesn't erase the reality of a geographic location.

We can post Dictionary definitions all day. Here is one from the Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary:

View attachment 775416

Huh? What are you going on about? I am aware of all that. Sigh. Before you even originally posted it. It is not some deep difficult concept Great Lakes.

And you have already explained it.

I was merely commenting that others' replies - off your original post - were not using Canadian as well as American. And in your own description if you were going there. That is all. And I was smiling how easily that fact gets omitted.

 

[LuvOrlando]

And can't leave this one. Yes women's health care is being taken away in many states. Newsflash -That has nothing to do with one's viewpoint on abortion.

It has to do with idiots not understanding that their inability to think through critical wordings in legislation will lead to the death of someone's loved ones. Pointe finale.

If you are not well-versed on a woman's reproductive issues & and often life saving needs, do not speak to what you do not know. That is just common sense.

It will unfortunately take someone's loved one dying to hit home. I have a loved one that would have died in these legislative errors and times; in some states. She was carrying a fetus that they did not realize early was not viable/no longer viable and was not alive inside her but was not leaving either (I might feel the need to edit this part out later, so please if one can not paste this part back, thank you.) She would have died herself going forward, the doctors knew that.
And if you say but they allow for these critical medical decisions. Tell that to the doctors who some are now scared ****less to make these timely decisions.Tell that to the legislators who proclaim "Oh that is not what we meant" when time is often critical. Tell that to your loved one who has a pregnancy that will never be a fetus, ie. ectopic pregnancy. And will often progress to sepsis & death. But the loonies used the word pregnancy instead of fetus in their legislation in one of the states. And then there was one looney that proclaimed the fertilized egg can be moved in an ectopic pregnancy, which it can not at our moment in medical procedures. 'Oh blah blah blah said it can be moved' travelling around social media. Not to mention an insurance issue & timing if it even could. Of course he was a man who knew all about women and their needs & health. Insert eye roll. And of course he was a politician and not a medical professional.
Educate yourself beyond your viewpoint on abortion. Have your absolute freedom to feel whatever you want about abortion, but do not confuse your viewpoints with a woman's health and sometimes life.

This isn't politics, it is a civics issue, a loaded one but a civics issue at the root.

I am a woman and think everyone should make their own choices just like Adam and Eve, however, there is a big misunderstanding about what happened that shouldn't snowball. It is easy to shoot the messenger, we should not.

The change in the laws had zero to do with the subject of womens healthcare and had EVERYTHING to do with the fact that the States actually have the discretion to control healthcare in their own region headed by their own elected officials who actually have more power so that we remain a free people able to self govern. It is very dangerous to centralize power too much, that is the point of the ruling and others like it, the topic itself was not relevant and was immaterial, the Supreme Court rules on Constitutionality of the way laws are written not the topic at hand. The Supreme Court ruled this directive/law etc, like many others, was an over-reach, Supreme Court did not rule that an individual state could not adopt the laws exactly as they were written only that individual states had to do it one by one with a nod from the individual voters in that state, no more and no less. People who want things in a certain way in their own states need to get to it and get more involved, grab a sign, go protest old laws and pay attention to your leaders, make them change antiquated state laws if that is what is desired, this is not a bad thing we got too lazy IMO. It got way too easy for our rights to be trampled with a single persons nod, that is dangerous and how dictatorships happen. It is unfortunate that rules reverted back to pre 70s but that is a separate issue from whether or not it is a states domain. This was a ruling over domain, no more and no less and should be separated from the subject involved. Every state is free to enact things exactly as they were, every single state.

How you want things to go is politics, the rules about how you get there, civics.

 

[ShirikiUtundu]

How do you figure? Africa is a geographic location, not a race. Anyone from the continent that becomes an American is an African American. One such person is the richest man in the planet.

it's disingenuous to pretend that "African-American" has only geographical implications
technically Elon Musk is a white South African with Canadian and South African citizenship by birth, and US citizenship by immigration

 

[Neapolitan Ice Cream]

Where do ultra wealthy Brits go when they want the best and most technologically advanced healthcare in the world? Wouldn't you think the people that can afford anything would gravitate towards the highest standard of care in the world?

From what I've seen, Spain.

 

[leebee]

This isn't politics, it is a civics issue, a loaded one but a civics issue at the root.

I am a woman and think everyone should make their own choices just like Adam and Eve, however, there is a big misunderstanding about what happened that shouldn't snowball. It is easy to shoot the messenger, we should not.

The change in the laws had zero to do with the subject of womens healthcare and had EVERYTHING to do with the fact that the States actually have the discretion to control healthcare in their own region headed by their own elected officials who actually have more power so that we remain a free people able to self govern. It is very dangerous to centralize power too much, that is the point of the ruling and others like it, the topic itself was not relevant and was immaterial, the Supreme Court rules on Constitutionality of the way laws are written not the topic at hand. The Supreme Court ruled this directive/law etc, like many others, was an over-reach, Supreme Court did not rule that an individual state could not adopt the laws exactly as they were written only that individual states had to do it one by one with a nod from the individual voters in that state, no more and no less. People who want things in a certain way in their own states need to get to it and get more involved, grab a sign, go protest old laws and pay attention to your leaders, make them change antiquated state laws if that is what is desired, this is not a bad thing we got too lazy IMO. It got way too easy for our rights to be trampled with a single persons nod, that is dangerous and how dictatorships happen. It is unfortunate that rules reverted back to pre 70s but that is a separate issue from whether or not it is a states domain. This was a ruling over domain, no more and no less and should be separated from the subject involved. Every state is free to enact things exactly as they were, every single state.

How you want things to go is politics, the rules about how you get there, civics.

In a perfect world, this is how it would work. However, in THIS world, state voting districts are gerrymandered beyond belief, to the point that in many states, minority rules- just like in Congress.

 

[GreatLakes]

Huh? What are you going on about? I am aware of all that. Sigh. Before you even originally posted it. It is not some deep difficult concept Great Lakes.

And you have already explained it.

I was merely commenting that others' replies - off your original post - were not using Canadian as well as American. And in your own description if you were going there. That is all. And I was smiling how easily that fact gets omitted.

I was building on what you said, not trying to contradict it. My apologies if I was unclear.

My bottom line, regardless of playing the dictionary game, is simple.
Any American from the continent of Africa, regardless of race, is African American.
Any American from the continent of Europe, regardless of race, is European American.
Any American from the continent of Asia, regardless of race, is Asian American.
And so on.

And the genesis of that was asking about what makes the USA so great and it was that an African-American immigrant came here and turned himself into the world's wealthiest man. That is all factually correct.

 

[Buzz Rules]

In a perfect world, this is how it would work. However, in THIS world, state voting districts are gerrymandered beyond belief, to the point that in many states, minority rules- just like in Congress.

Which was meant to prevent mob rule. It's a problem for both sides, since both sides want their views respected. It's not easy but I have faith a compromise will come and satisfy the majority in the middle on both sides soon. Just my thoughts.

 

[Buzz Rules]

I was building on what you said, not trying to contradict it. My apologies if I was unclear.

My bottom line, regardless of playing the dictionary game, is simple.
Any American from the continent of Africa, regardless of race, is African American.
Any American from the continent of Europe, regardless of race, is a European American.
Any American from the continent of Asia, regardless of race, is an Asian American. And so on.

And the genesis of that was asking about what makes the USA so great and it was that an African-American immigrant came here and turned himself into the world's wealthiest man. That is all factually correct.

South African American would be more factually correct.

 

[GreatLakes]

South African American would be more factually correct.

It would be more precise but equally factual. An Italian American is more precise than a European American but both are equally factual.

 

[rigs32]

Which was meant to prevent mob rule. It's a problem for both sides, since both sides want their views respected. It's not easy but I have faith a compromise will come and satisfy the majority in the middle on both sides soon. Just my thoughts.

Gerrymandering has nothing to do with mob rule. It's splitting up the districts to hand a majority to the party drawing the map, regardless of the actual popular vote if the districts were drawn in boxes rather than an etch-a-sketch blob. It makes absolutely no sense to have districts that look the way they do in most states.

 

[Buzz Rules]

Gerrymandering has nothing to do with mob rule. It's splitting up the districts to hand a majority to the party drawing the map, regardless of the actual popular vote if the districts were drawn in boxes rather than an etch-a-sketch blob. It makes absolutely no sense to have districts that look the way they do in most states.

Yet all parties do it.