Supreme Court to Discuss Guidelines for Thinking During Government Meetings

Photo by Jeff Kubina, via Wikimedia

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court began a discussion over whether there needs to be clearer guidelines concerning prayers that take place at government meetings. However, this is only the opener to a bigger debate over whether guidelines concerning the proper use of thought while government leaders, especially lawmakers, are assembled.

“Some types of thought patterns are extremely offensive to different kinds of people. Some are fiscally conservative, fiscally liberal, for example. Things start to get dangerous, though, when people from one side of an issue try to think the way their opponents do.” said Senator Jeffry Schweighauser about the debate.  “There’s just too much risk.”

Schweighauser stated that many of his close associates in Congress believe an argument can be made that it’s unconstitutional to allow thinking of any sort during meetings. 

Opponents to this position made sure to point out that this is somewhat of an over-generalization. In order to accomplish normal legislative tasks (such as reading documents, saying yay or nay, and filibustering), at least a rudimentary, autonomic form of "thought" likely still has to take place. They did, however, admit that nowhere in the Constitution is it explicitly allowed that any sort of comprehensive or analytical thought take place while decisions are being made. 

Others in congress felt the need to mention that any sort of abolition of thought, of any variety, would end up an unnecessary formality. House Democrat for Montana, Peter Glendale, stated it quite simply: "Legislators have been following such guidelines on their own good will for centuries."

Study Claims Healthcare Isn't Actually Helpful

Photo by J. Troha, via Wikimedia

A recent study, funded primarily by members of the Tea Party, makes bold claims about the limitations of healthcare, in an effort to prove that universal coverage isn't necessary. Proponents of the Affordable Care Act, however, see this as a last-ditch effort to rally support against the Act.

The study reveals that health care has no effect on a person developing cancer, catching colds, or even breaking bones. It was also conclusively determined that a person will still eventually die at some point, regardless of any medical care received during their life. Organic, natural foods were included in the study as well, also being determined incapable of preventing death.

It didn't quite stop there, though. Exercise and good emotional health were also ruled out. The only thing that was acquiesced as a possible solution was investment in research either related to cryogenics or to human-to-computer consciousness transfer. It was recommended that wealthy individuals be allowed to retain as much of their fortunes as possible, so that they can fund and accelerate this research.