DanJLaf
@danjlaf.bsky.social
Philatelist & 50 yrs APS,Bookaholic,Mod GOP, Genealogy Buff, Fly the Flag! Descendant of Four Rev War Ancestors, Christian, Let's Go Mets!
Met Fan since 1962
Met Fan since 1962
Except the DEMS had the list under Biden and there was no demands for it be available. seems only now with trump in office...where for 4 Years Dems held it and never released it
so wonder what DEMS are in there
so wonder what DEMS are in there
November 15, 2025 at 2:03 PM
Except the DEMS had the list under Biden and there was no demands for it be available. seems only now with trump in office...where for 4 Years Dems held it and never released it
so wonder what DEMS are in there
so wonder what DEMS are in there
Kobo has a service like kindle unlimited but for less
August 16, 2025 at 6:23 AM
Kobo has a service like kindle unlimited but for less
I have Ebooks I have downloaded as Files and easy move between computers and devices
KIndle types propriety
EPUB is not Propriety and places like Project Gutenberg has books can wholly download
so once download the file can be read in any reader
Like kobos e-readers, I have a Kobo and a Kindle
KIndle types propriety
EPUB is not Propriety and places like Project Gutenberg has books can wholly download
so once download the file can be read in any reader
Like kobos e-readers, I have a Kobo and a Kindle
August 16, 2025 at 4:33 AM
I have Ebooks I have downloaded as Files and easy move between computers and devices
KIndle types propriety
EPUB is not Propriety and places like Project Gutenberg has books can wholly download
so once download the file can be read in any reader
Like kobos e-readers, I have a Kobo and a Kindle
KIndle types propriety
EPUB is not Propriety and places like Project Gutenberg has books can wholly download
so once download the file can be read in any reader
Like kobos e-readers, I have a Kobo and a Kindle
Disagree, Putin had his last chance, if he will not cease...then soon comes the sanctions and More support to Ukraine.
Putin was Stupid
Putin was Stupid
August 16, 2025 at 4:22 AM
Disagree, Putin had his last chance, if he will not cease...then soon comes the sanctions and More support to Ukraine.
Putin was Stupid
Putin was Stupid
USA isn't a democracy, Never has been, its a Republic.
So must refer to some other nation elsewhere
So must refer to some other nation elsewhere
August 16, 2025 at 4:17 AM
USA isn't a democracy, Never has been, its a Republic.
So must refer to some other nation elsewhere
So must refer to some other nation elsewhere
Different districts would go to appeal courts first and on to scotus. Not one judge in a district imposing HIS/HER Personal INTERPRETATION of a law! Over the USA!They basically act as if their the one and only authority over USA and other judges interpretations are blocked by their injunction!
June 28, 2025 at 3:27 PM
Different districts would go to appeal courts first and on to scotus. Not one judge in a district imposing HIS/HER Personal INTERPRETATION of a law! Over the USA!They basically act as if their the one and only authority over USA and other judges interpretations are blocked by their injunction!
No, you have a Judge in Alabama INTERPREATING a law one way where in RI a different judge might interpret it different, with then two or more differing it properly moves to APPEAL courts and then SCOTUS as final decider. Not ONE judge sole decider
June 28, 2025 at 3:24 PM
No, you have a Judge in Alabama INTERPREATING a law one way where in RI a different judge might interpret it different, with then two or more differing it properly moves to APPEAL courts and then SCOTUS as final decider. Not ONE judge sole decider
Basically yes because each judge has own individual interpretation, no ONE judge should be able injunction for all of USA. In above there would be other judges likely finding same and matter would move to appeals court and then SCOTUS
The reality is all over USA there would be lawsuits
The reality is all over USA there would be lawsuits
June 28, 2025 at 3:21 PM
Basically yes because each judge has own individual interpretation, no ONE judge should be able injunction for all of USA. In above there would be other judges likely finding same and matter would move to appeals court and then SCOTUS
The reality is all over USA there would be lawsuits
The reality is all over USA there would be lawsuits
Each district has own judge, a judge in Calif should not be making a whole USA ruling over what a District Judge in like East coast might. The judges are making INDIVIDUAL Interpretations and not all would AGREE! Its misuse of injunctions to make any at whim "all of USA"
June 28, 2025 at 3:18 PM
Each district has own judge, a judge in Calif should not be making a whole USA ruling over what a District Judge in like East coast might. The judges are making INDIVIDUAL Interpretations and not all would AGREE! Its misuse of injunctions to make any at whim "all of USA"
1943, scotus ruled 1A allowed for religious reasons expanded to any reason Not doing pledge, some states require parents to opt out their kids, Certain things in schools are "social" teachings that can go vs parents teachings and parents have a RIGHT to decide for their kids so OPT OUTS!
June 28, 2025 at 3:14 PM
1943, scotus ruled 1A allowed for religious reasons expanded to any reason Not doing pledge, some states require parents to opt out their kids, Certain things in schools are "social" teachings that can go vs parents teachings and parents have a RIGHT to decide for their kids so OPT OUTS!
No its that if a child is forced to under take some teaching
that goes vs such familiys religious ways and forced to answer on tests etc in ways thats AGREEING with such it does undermine ones religious rights to not have to agree if doing so gets one an "F" for not agreeing with such
that goes vs such familiys religious ways and forced to answer on tests etc in ways thats AGREEING with such it does undermine ones religious rights to not have to agree if doing so gets one an "F" for not agreeing with such
June 28, 2025 at 3:04 PM
No its that if a child is forced to under take some teaching
that goes vs such familiys religious ways and forced to answer on tests etc in ways thats AGREEING with such it does undermine ones religious rights to not have to agree if doing so gets one an "F" for not agreeing with such
that goes vs such familiys religious ways and forced to answer on tests etc in ways thats AGREEING with such it does undermine ones religious rights to not have to agree if doing so gets one an "F" for not agreeing with such
And the parents who are lbtq would be screaming if their kid they raising were read a story that pushs Hetero ways as good and the right way you can be certain and would be demanding such not be read...or their kid be excused.
The Courts simply ruled parents can OPT out their kids from having to
The Courts simply ruled parents can OPT out their kids from having to
June 28, 2025 at 3:01 PM
And the parents who are lbtq would be screaming if their kid they raising were read a story that pushs Hetero ways as good and the right way you can be certain and would be demanding such not be read...or their kid be excused.
The Courts simply ruled parents can OPT out their kids from having to
The Courts simply ruled parents can OPT out their kids from having to
Children's rights? Its a fact the brain doesn't fully develop till early 20's so a grade schoolers not fully developed enough to really know what is right, true and Parents have a responsibility to ensure what's taught in school away from parents supervision is what's truly necessary
June 28, 2025 at 2:57 PM
Children's rights? Its a fact the brain doesn't fully develop till early 20's so a grade schoolers not fully developed enough to really know what is right, true and Parents have a responsibility to ensure what's taught in school away from parents supervision is what's truly necessary
Parents have a right to opt out their kids from any "extra" thing thats not part of needed real teaching 3R's pushing
social mores should not be forced on minors, something up to parents to opt them out from , schools have gotten away from teaching NECESSARYS and wasting time with SOCIAL Extras
social mores should not be forced on minors, something up to parents to opt them out from , schools have gotten away from teaching NECESSARYS and wasting time with SOCIAL Extras
June 28, 2025 at 2:52 PM
Parents have a right to opt out their kids from any "extra" thing thats not part of needed real teaching 3R's pushing
social mores should not be forced on minors, something up to parents to opt them out from , schools have gotten away from teaching NECESSARYS and wasting time with SOCIAL Extras
social mores should not be forced on minors, something up to parents to opt them out from , schools have gotten away from teaching NECESSARYS and wasting time with SOCIAL Extras
be real, in fact islam would probably demand no woman teach, what was ruled is parents have a right to OPT OUT their kids from having (forced) to do for a grading something that goes vs the parents values. allowed to do it with those kids not opt outed but the opt outs cannot be like given an F
June 28, 2025 at 2:46 PM
be real, in fact islam would probably demand no woman teach, what was ruled is parents have a right to OPT OUT their kids from having (forced) to do for a grading something that goes vs the parents values. allowed to do it with those kids not opt outed but the opt outs cannot be like given an F
Thats taking what scriptures saying out of context, the money changers were within the TEMPLE grounds, not outside of it so were intruding on what should been holy ground with non-religious commerce. He did not overturn tables elsewhere not on temple grounds, the lords grounds.
June 28, 2025 at 2:42 PM
Thats taking what scriptures saying out of context, the money changers were within the TEMPLE grounds, not outside of it so were intruding on what should been holy ground with non-religious commerce. He did not overturn tables elsewhere not on temple grounds, the lords grounds.
Schools are in loco parentis, their not supposed to be teaching minor children anything but 3 R's the Needed things not pushing some SOCIAL agenda, The only Social type should be teaching how to interact with others, it should not be a place to
indoctrinate minors in extreme unconventional Mores
indoctrinate minors in extreme unconventional Mores
June 28, 2025 at 2:38 PM
Schools are in loco parentis, their not supposed to be teaching minor children anything but 3 R's the Needed things not pushing some SOCIAL agenda, The only Social type should be teaching how to interact with others, it should not be a place to
indoctrinate minors in extreme unconventional Mores
indoctrinate minors in extreme unconventional Mores
Pushing a SOCIAL More on minor kids who the parents entrust to a school to be teaching important things really needed is not just time wasted better spent on math,etc its a social indoctrinating in violation of Parents rights to bring up their kids the way want. SOCIAL STUFF at HOME not Schools!
June 28, 2025 at 2:32 PM
Pushing a SOCIAL More on minor kids who the parents entrust to a school to be teaching important things really needed is not just time wasted better spent on math,etc its a social indoctrinating in violation of Parents rights to bring up their kids the way want. SOCIAL STUFF at HOME not Schools!
Not really, its an extension of the 1943 ruling that 1A no student needs do pledge, some states require minors have parents consent to not do pledge, this just extends that to cover something that goes vs parents wishs allowing parents to opt out their children just like with Pledge
June 28, 2025 at 2:22 PM
Not really, its an extension of the 1943 ruling that 1A no student needs do pledge, some states require minors have parents consent to not do pledge, this just extends that to cover something that goes vs parents wishs allowing parents to opt out their children just like with Pledge