Narrow Search

Comment Archives: Stories: News+Opinion: Last 7 Days

Re: “Working Life: Cleaning up crime scenes, water damage, and rats in the walls

kudo's to you sir

2 of 2 people like this.
Posted by Dauntless on July 30, 2014 at 2:38 PM

Re: “Appeals court ruling could bring gay marriage to S.C.

I like turtles. No old testament quoting by anyone as there is nobody in the entire state of SC that ACTUALLY follows the original good book. I mean no barbeque, no fabric blends, no shrimp, no oysters, no Walmart on Sundays and above all no football or football watching rules, it's just not possible here in SC. Forget the no homo rule, thats a minor infraction compared to the watching or playing of the Pigskin Orb. Besides, a true follower of the original good book would never read the blasphemous rag known as the CP.

3 of 4 people like this.
Posted by CIACulinaryKid on July 30, 2014 at 2:14 PM

Re: “Appeals court ruling could bring gay marriage to S.C.

Hoping for a favorable decision before my partner and I reach 32 years of non-wedded bliss next spring.

9 of 9 people like this.
Posted by tupper29406 on July 30, 2014 at 1:59 PM

Re: “Appeals court ruling could bring gay marriage to S.C.

freefirezone proving once again that you can troll hard without actually knowing anything about the subject you are trolling. Maybe if you actually researched the topic beyond your own translation of the Old Testament, you would actually know what you are talking about.
http://origins.osu.edu/article/real-marria…
Marriage (or unions) predates written history, including the Old Testament.

It is funny when so called Christians take a solid stance on one part of their religion's past, while completely ignoring others.
http://www.livescience.com/37777-history-o…

6 of 6 people like this.
Posted by brewengineer on July 30, 2014 at 12:41 PM

Re: “Appeals court ruling could bring gay marriage to S.C.

freefirezone,

Can we only use one particular ancient Arab definition of marriage (which, as Mr. Eckert has shown, is not what you think it is) or are other ancient Arab definitions acceptable? Can we use other cultures' ancient definitions of marriage or only Middle Eastern? Does the definition have to be ancient?

If so, why are you using a relatively modern one? A marriage definition that involves two consenting adults entering into a contract for intangible and immaterial reasons (simple love or companionship) does not have a long and storied history as a cultural norm and there is no earthly reason why this pursuit should be denied to people with alternative sexualities.

You may believe in heavenly reasons, but the U.S. Constitution does not. I recommend not getting gay married yourself, and then you'll never, ever, be affected by it in any significant way.

8 of 9 people like this.
Posted by HappyPessimist on July 30, 2014 at 11:50 AM

Re: “Boeing CEO says employees are ‘cowering;’ machinists’ union is not amused

"The reporter was teasing Jim McNerney about his upcoming birthday and there was a definite "tongue in cheek" attitude when she asked her question. He responded in kind. There was no malice or hostility in his response. It was an off-the-cuff remark, self-deprecating and not serious at all. IMHO, he has apologized more than enough."

Thank you tpm843! I guess CEO's aren't supposed to have a sense of humor. Lord knows no one else does!

1 of 3 people like this.
Posted by dp4 on July 30, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Re: “City to propose 3-year ban on bars

As Curtis Brown accurately points out, the City is doing some serious sleight of hand here. What was once proposed as an "overlay zone" to place slightly stricter restrictions on new bars/restaurants is now an outright ban....and yet people are saying the F&B people won?!? While the moratorium is "temporary" (at only 1095 days long), how is that any better that what was originally proposed? As residents of this city, are we really ready to say no new restaurants can open in the next 3 years? While I think some changes need to be made in order to improve the quality of life for downtown residents, outright bans are not the answer. I just hope people speak up at both of the upcoming meetings because this new plan is by no means a victory.

6 of 6 people like this.
Posted by Golden Ratio on July 30, 2014 at 11:23 AM

Re: “Vincent Sheheen campaign manager: Candidate non-committal about gay marriage ruling

It might not be stupid but it is business as usual for the Democratic party in this state... which usually loses.

How many Democrats don't bother voting in South Carolina because it historically skews so red? How many Democrats don't bother voting in South Carolina because we lose with this pandering-to-conservatives bullshit the state party pulls like we see with Sheheen?

I understand the conventional wisdom of low-information "swing" voters and base politics, but give me a break. The conventional wisdom hasn't been winning Democrats many elections, why would it change this time? If Sheheen wins it'll be because Haley is a disaster, not because he "persuaded" anybody with this weak sauce.

As long as the Democratic party in this state thinks in election cycles instead of generational we will never make any progress in creating any substantial policy debate in governance.

How about instead of utilizing a mealy-mouthed strategy based on value-compromising whack-a-mole in an effort to persuade the always small and shrinking pool of "undecided" voters, we get candidates focused on growing a healthy Democratic base? Maybe we'd lose this time and the next, but we need to be building an honest and inspiring foundation. I don't see any value in this short-term sell-out business. That's exactly WHY young voters aren't a factor in these elections. And young voters who are uninspired by lackluster politics don't generally become reliable adult voters.

This is the South. Nobody's going to have a problem fighting a lost cause as long as it's one they can believe in.

1 of 1 people like this.
Posted by HappyPessimist on July 30, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Re: “Appeals court ruling could bring gay marriage to S.C.

freefirezone, the Old Testament Hebrew does not actually have a word for "marry". The phrase was simply "he took a woman" and the way you "took" a woman was by being the first to have sex with her. There was no word for "wife", just the phrase "his" woman", and no word for husband except the same word ba'al used for "owner" of any piece of property or attribute. If another man has sex with "your" woman, that is adultery, a serious crime, but if you have sex with another woman, that just means you "took" another woman. There is a verb "betroth" which refers to a payment to the father for the right to take the daughter later: the law makes it clear that this already creates the property right, so that another man would be an adulterer to have sex with her. If one of your women "no longer is pleasing", you may get rid of her (this is where Jesus criticizes the Old Testament) as long as you make a public record so another man can take her without fear of adultery charge. The only exception is if you took the woman by force: then she's still yours, of course, but you cannot get rid of her, and you still owe the father money.

7 of 7 people like this.
Posted by Robert Eckert on July 30, 2014 at 10:35 AM

Re: “RiverDogs to rock old-school Rainbows jerseys in honor of Pride Fest

I was going to go to the game but I think I'll give my tickets away

5 of 14 people like this.
Posted by luvindisgig on July 30, 2014 at 10:33 AM

Re: “Vincent Sheheen campaign manager: Candidate non-committal about gay marriage ruling

Mike Wood,

I've gone back over the past month of comments and none of your comments have been deleted.

1 of 1 people like this.
Posted by chrishaire on July 30, 2014 at 9:57 AM

Re: “Vincent Sheheen campaign manager: Candidate non-committal about gay marriage ruling

Another benchmark: North Carolina, which is slightly bluer than South Carolina and has bigger pockets of liberal intellectuals but is somewhat useful for comparison purposes, still passed an anti-marriage referendum in 2010 with >60% of the vote.

It's tempting to look at national polling, momentum in the courts and other states' ballot boxes, etc. and assume that attitudes among likely voters in our state have changed as well, but numbers don't really reflect that.

We are a reactionary populace.

2 of 2 people like this.
Posted by Laurin Manning on July 30, 2014 at 9:20 AM

Re: “Since 2010, the Pride Festival has gotten bigger, more visible, and more welcome

The other effect of moving downtown? The Pride organizers spit in the face of the people of North Charleston who accepted them when the City rejected them. I am glad that this event has been a success and has been able to grow and hope that it does grow. But, the way they treated Mayor Summey who put his political neck out there and lost votes for supporting the event was not classy.

6 of 12 people like this.
Posted by nofaith on July 30, 2014 at 9:15 AM

Re: “There's no room for censorship in our community

The best way to censor something is with your wallet. If you don't like it, don't watch it or pay to watch it. Rent was a slickly produced play about a bunch of people who didn't pay their bills, if that is what you like, who cares. If you don't like it, don't pay to see it.

5 of 7 people like this.
Posted by nofaith on July 30, 2014 at 9:02 AM

Re: “City to propose 3-year ban on bars

Lets make 'em feel like they won-then they'll shut up

2 of 2 people like this.
Posted by Curtis Brown on July 30, 2014 at 8:41 AM

Re: “City to propose 3-year ban on bars

Why am I not shocked that Mayor Riley's retooling of the ordinance resulted in more government constraints on small businesses that serve alcohol. To further help local businesses that don't serve alcohol, Mayor Riley should make online purchases illegal within the city. Maybe some rent controls would also help.

4 of 4 people like this.
Posted by sunriseseeker on July 30, 2014 at 6:16 AM

Re: “An illustrated guide to what happened the night of Denzel Curnell's death

I have no intention of being drawn up into this debate, i just wanted to make a point. It has been my experience that most laws here in charleston and in America as a whole seem to be pliable based on the circumstances. This guy Curnell had a gun, yes i give you that. And he acted strangely when approached by police. That i don't really see as being strange. You may not understand it but most young black men do not trust law enforcement. Guilty or not. I have never been arrested, thank god, but i have been subject to many stops over the years. even being told flat out that i was stopped because my car "looked" stolen. I have been subject to police intimidation and illegal searchs more here than anywhere else i've lived. Now this to you may sound justified, because my neighborhood is not so nice. But a man walking down the street with his seven year old hardly strikes me as suspicious behaviour. If police profiled all suspicious behaviour than i would be happy. their doing their jobs. keeping us safe. but they don't. and wearing a hoodie at night isn't suspicious just because you wouldnt do it. i've been stopped right after it rained before because i fit the general description of every black guy in charleston. This is a terrible thing that keeps happening in this country and white americans turn a blind eye because cnn tells you it's practices like these that keep you safe. But in the other hands guns laws here only seem to apply to the few. where were the cops for those idiots who walked into restaurants open carrying, just to prove they should be able to. Theirs the difference. They say gun laws are supposed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals but what about all these shooting all over the country by people with no prior records. Who protected you from them. Its easy to condemn people you don't understand. i see it everyday but nothing in this country is ever as simple as you would love it to be. Black and white almost never exists, except in your own heads. Police brutality is very real and it undermines the efforts of the men and women in blue who are trying to make a real difference. as long as you turn a blind eye it will never change. and before you get on the black on black crime. Let us fix our issues and in the mean time open your eyes to your own. Get the truth. I am a three time college grad with no police record working as a lab technician in the holy city, not a criminal. I should expect the same treatment you recieve from law enforcement. And i shouldn't have to drop on the ground when they drive by just so you can feel safe. I dont deserve it and neither does my son.

1 of 1 people like this.
Posted by Dauntless on July 30, 2014 at 2:44 AM

Re: “City to propose 3-year ban on bars

I admit, I've not made closing time downtown in years. So, I've got no dog in this fight (though I used to walk out of bars on Sat morning when the sun was up, before there was a closing time!).

So, as an observer, this is fascinating to watch. The general, theoretical goal seems good - of course a mix of different types of business is desired.

The realities in terms of business economics and the city's methodologies seem all dicked up, though!

1 of 1 people like this.
Posted by Cid95 on July 30, 2014 at 12:04 AM

Re: “Vincent Sheheen campaign manager: Candidate non-committal about gay marriage ruling

Our friends should understand our party's platform without candidates in problematic areas being forced to energize the most virulent voter bases of their opponents.
Certainly they should understand exactly what the platform of the only other possible winner will be.

Posted by Booklady1 on July 29, 2014 at 11:57 PM

Re: “City to propose 3-year ban on bars

Steeeeee-rike Twoooooooo Mayor Joe.
Is waiting 3 years really a plan? You know you can give out liquor licenses every year you just don't have to give out 20.

2 of 2 people like this.
Posted by jimbeauxisland on July 29, 2014 at 10:49 PM
Classified Listings

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2014, Charleston City Paper   RSS