Posted on 12/11/2009 8:50:14 PM PST by Phileleutherus Franciscus
Too bad I got zapped. I was going to post this last night, but thought calmer heads would prevail. Guess I was wrong.
What has become of the FreeRepublic I joined so long ago?
Years ago, when this forum was young and gaining membership, the dedication to conservative principles was the theme that attracted many who were looking for an outlet to voice matters of political opinion in light of the Lewinsky Scandal. It was my primary reason for signing up. It gave me solace when I was racked in pain with a broken neck and back from an accident. It has been a place where returning the kindness shown to me has been easy, and rewarding. It has been a place to share the horror of 9/11, and the tears of the nation, the celebration of birth, and the tragedy of death and loss.
It has become a home of sorts, where I can share my experiences, and laugh at some of the wit and humor of so many valuable people. I have laughed with you, and cried for you and with you.
But that has all changed.
Through the years I have seen people come and go and be purged for political views that became, not one of debate, but one of demeaning personal attacks on those who did not agree with them politically. Once again, that has reared its ugly head here at FR and in the form of religious beliefs.
Recently, there has been a new creeping fascism by a small group of Creation Science believers into FR. These few individuals would have you believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, there is no other belief other than Jesus Christ, a great flood killed everyone and everything, leaving only a few survivors on a boat, which make little sense, and that any other opinion that does not agree with them either makes you either a ‘liberal’, an atheist, not worthy of posting here at FR, and not a ‘true’ conservative. They would have you believe the Theory of Evolution is the cause of every human disaster since the time of the printing of Origin of the Species and that all science is a lie. The threads promulgated by these very few proclaim the fact they are ‘right’, while anyone disagreeing or choosing to debate them are ‘wrong’. Some of these individuals have promoted bigotry and personal attacks, which would have gotten any other individual here banned.
Yet, under the protection of the owner of the site, these very few have had the audacity to instill their beliefs into the core of what was once a great conservative site, and is now one that determines your conservatism by your acceptability of Creation Science. It has now become a site that determines your conservatism based on rejection of Mormonism, the Roman Catholic faith, atheism, on any religious belief but their own, and not on conservative values that have nothing to do with religious beliefs, but on what is best for the country and what we revere as America.
This is the worst kind of fanaticism as it pits a particular religious belief against an individuals ability to think. Something that has developed over millions of years, from the use of rudimentary tools to the complexities we enjoy today, an individual’s ability to think sets us apart from most of the other animals. And we are still in the adolescence of that developing technology and intelligence. Look how far we have come from the written word to the printing press to the Internet.
This kind of fanaticism was used by Hitler against the Jews and just about every other race and culture, by the Italians against the African Continent, and by the Japanese against the Chinese. It was used by the Catholic Church in Spain as a weapon to force those not of the Catholic faith underground or tortured to death for heresy. It was part of the Crusades and the slaughter of millions of both Muslims and Christians. A struggle that continues even today, although it pits radical self-serving Islam against the free-thinking individual of any religious belief, basic human freedoms, and forces each of us to stand up to that type of extremism.
There are many religions in this world, and many beliefs in a different ‘god’. History is replete with various religious beliefs that either evolved or were discarded. Even those who do not adhere to the Christian belief should be free to choose what and how they think, and not be condemned by the few who see nothing but their way and dismiss their conservative values. This type of religious fanaticism degrades this forum to the very thing that the DUmmies expect from FR, intolerance of others.
Science is the quest for knowledge. That quest requires that each individual take a look at data and information and make a valued opinion. Science is not perfect, nor has it claimed to have all the answers, otherwise, cancer would be cured tomorrow, food would be grown enough to feed the world, and disease would be eliminated. But that is not the case. It is that quest that has sent us in directions to search for who we are, and where we came from. If the science leads us to god, or whatever deity that created the universe, then so be it, but to dismiss it is to ignore the progress of generations, and reinforces an ignorance that only education can alleviate. By using one book as the sole source to how everything has come to where it is now, is ignorance on the highest level. And to use that belief as a ruler to measure your worthiness as a conservative is beyond the pale.
I will miss the valuable wealth of knowledge of the gun-owners here. I will miss the total dedication to the memory of our brave fallen heroes, and the devotion to our military around the world. I will miss the realistic social and fiscal conservative values I found here that reinforces my own political views.
I will not miss the tolerated religious bigotry, the insulting, uneducated, demeaning tripe that passes for knowledge by those few who would dictate to the rest.
Yes, Jim, it is your site to do with as you please, but to allow the few to demean and dictate to the many what beliefs are acceptable and ‘conservative’, and with your blessing, is intolerable to me and probably many, many other conservatives here. It shows that the intolerance the left accuses conservatives of being does live on FreeRepublic. Maybe this kind of self purging is what you wanted allowing the sort of tripe we have seen lately. It serves conservatism very little and demeans everything you started this site to be.
I will continue to fight for conservative causes, pro-life causes, pro-gun legislation, and real conservative candidates to help us get this country of ours back to where it should be. It just won’t be here, where my beliefs in that conservatism will be questioned because my religious beliefs are not coincidental with the owner.
I pray for our country and those who fight for her, in whatever capacity they can.
Please remove my name from all ping lists.
Goodbye and good luck.
[[he got zotted for disagreeing with the hardcore creationists]]
That’s a bunch of bull- there are quite a number of folks who dissagree with so called ‘hardcore creationists’ and they have been here a long time and have not been banned, nor will they- the only reason someone gets zotted is because of a posting history that is nasty and insulting or they continually antagonize the owners or mods after being warned many times not to
They generally have good reason to be.
There can be a thread about an archaeological find and some wise ass on the first or second post always whines, “How can this be? The Earth is only 6,000yo.”. Blah, blah, blah.
Gee, really? "Always"? Way to help your credibility there.
Actually, I took a look just now at the threads that resulted when I did a forum search for "fossil" in the title, and I didn't find a single sarcastic "the Earth is only 6000 old" remark, but I found *PLENTY* of threads where the *anti*"evos" were the ones who threw the first Stone of Snottiness(tm) -- often in the thread title itself (example: "Best ever find of soft tissue (muscle and blood) in a fossil (evos claim it is 18 mya!!!)").
Instead of intellectual debate there is only potshots and snide remarks.
Yeah, I get pretty tired of the anti-evo tactics too.
If you think there's no "intellectual debate" on those threads, check out my profile for examples to the contrary.
Good riddance. Go find a humanist forum where you can agree with everyone all day long.
So... Conservative people with Pistolshot's viewpoint really *aren't* welcome here? You do realize you just helped support his assessment?
[[So... Conservative people with Pistolshot’s viewpoint really *aren’t* welcome here?]]
LOL- way to spin spin spin- per usual- That wasn’t what he was sayign at all- he was saying since the fella obviously can’t tolorate other people’s opinions, and since he’s hell bent on not returning anyways, then a humanist forum, where peopel will agree with him all day long, woudl be more up his alley sicne he obviously can’t tolorate other people’s opinions here
[[ “the Earth is only 6000 old” remark, but I found *PLENTY* of threads where the *anti*”evos” were the ones who threw the first Stone of Snottiness(tm) ]]
BS- you obviously did NOT look too hard- a simpel search for GGG’s posts will put your silyl claim to rest immediately-
[[If you think there’s no “intellectual debate” on those threads, check out my profile for examples to the contrary.]]
Psssst- I’m well familiar with your threads, and you sir can’t play the innocent victim here- nor clai mthat your posts were just ‘intellectual debate’ devoid of snottiness on your part- You aren’t fooling anyone-
If you can equate disallowed rejoinders within Jim Robinson's private virtual livingroom with the oppression of evil totalitarian governments then perhaps you didn't need to be here after all.
I also have a couple of thoughts that don't always tack to the prevailing wind but, to continue the metaphor, I have no need to rent sails and stop the voyage over inconsequential differences.
WOW.
Hmmmmm . . . .
I do not believe in a 6,000 year young earth.
I am a fierce Pentecostal Fundamentalist Christian.
Some of the evolutionists folks are every bit as rabidly hostile, narrow, rigid, clueless as some of the hyper-Creationist 6,000 year old earth folks are.
And, personally, if I were to choose an error . . . I would prefer the Creationist one vs one from hell.
In an era when the literal devil is using every trick in the book to undermine and shred Scripture, Christianity and our culture based on such . . . it’s understandable that some folks think FIERCE SUPPORT OF SCRIPTURE IS A HIGH PERIORITY—A HIGHER PRIORITY than a LOT of other things.
Nevertheless, A RELATIONSHIP WITH JESUS THE CHRIST IS THE PRIORITY—NOT EVEN THE TRUTHFUL PHILOSOPHICAL SYSTEM BUILT ON HIST TEACHINGS is AS high a priority.
I hate seeing conservatives fracture and get at each other’s throats over lesser priorities . . . only the enemy wins.
However, the enemy is insidious in his infiltrations and distractions from our core values and core priorities. And this contentious era is going to get worse in terms of such conflicts.
May God have mercy on all who trust Him and support His values and priorities.
INDEED.
FAR TOOOOOO TRUE.
Seems like . . . hypocrisy runs in that family of thinkers.
That’s a bunch of bull-
Feel free to prove me wrong -- tell me what he *did* get zotted for then after ten years here. All I know is that a) he says that's the reason he was banned, and b) nothing else in his recent posting history is a violation of normal decorum here, except for the several threads of the last two days (now yanked) where he was spanking the "anti-evos" for their fallacious arguments and false claims.
And gosh, what a coincidence, several other "evos" on those contentious threads were banned/suspended at the same time (wacka after six years here, IronKros after seven years here, Buck W. after nine years here, etc.). Nothing but a mere coincidence, is it CottShop?
And yet... Can you name a single "anti-evo" who was zotted in this most recent purge, even though tempers on *both* sides flared and the "anti-evos" were hardly acting like angels? It appears that strongly arguing the "anti-evo" side is considered no vice, and strongly arguing the "evo" side is considered no virtue.
there are quite a number of folks who disagree with so called ‘hardcore creationists’ and they have been here a long time and have not been banned, nor will they-
Sure, a few are kept around as token punching bags these days. But unless you're using some special form of "anti-evo logic", you'll note that your non sequitur fails to actually support your assertion: The fact that a number of "evos" remain does not, in fact, provide supporting evidence for your claim that Pistolshot being zotted for clashing with the anti-evos is "a bunch of bull".
the only reason someone gets zotted is because of a posting history that is nasty and insulting or they continually antagonize the owners or mods after being warned many times not to
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. PatrickHenry, the keeper of the Evolution Ping List, was zotted after not even having posted at ALL for a few months. Just out of the blue, "zot". Several other prominent "evos" were just flushed from time to time for no obvious reason, often after several days of posting nothing in any way objectionable.
And, often quite explicitly, it has been made clear that arguing for evolutionary biology or pointing out the flaws in arguments given for various kinds of "anti-evo" is, in itself, considered as "continually antagonize the owners or mods". How many examples would you like me to cite where those positions are described as being "anti-Christian", "Marxist", "unAmerican", "unconservative", and so on?
Like, say, this thread today? http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2405876/posts
Which, coincidentally, is the same day several "pro-evo" long-time posters, including Pistolshot, got zotted? Just a coincidence, CottShop? So you say it's "a bunch of bull" still?
Don't try to tell me there's a level playing field here and the only consideration for zotting is whether someone is being a major jerk regardless of their "side". That used to be true several years ago when I posted far more frequently. It's not the case now. Some sides of the debate are more equal than others when it comes to being given slack for rude behavior or kept on a shorter leash.
Look, it's Jim's site and he can run it any way he wants. I'm not even complaining. But don't try to tell me that what I say is "a bunch of bull" when I dare to observe the way things are.
Psssst- I’m well familiar with your threads, and you sir can’t play the innocent victim here-
I must have missed the part where I claimed to be either "innocent" or a "victim". Perhaps you could point it out to me.
All I did was dispute the claim that such threads were devoid of intellectual debate.
I'm curious as to how you could bizarrely read a claim of "innocent victimhood" into that. Please explain.
nor clai mthat your posts were just ‘intellectual debate’ devoid of snottiness on your part-
Where the heck did you fantasize I claimed *that*?
Sure, I can get snotty. I'm damned good at it, actually. But I try very hard not to a) be the first to cast the first snot (i.e. I strive to respond in kind as much as possible), and b) document and justify exactly *why* someone deserves the return fire I'm giving them after they've made the mistake of being the first one to get snotty when coming unarmed to a battle of wits.
You aren’t fooling anyone-
Apparently I'm fooling you, which doesn't seem that hard, since you keep "seeing" things in my posts that I didn't actually put there. Damn, I'm good, what with all those "secret" messages I keep inserting into my posts.
And while we're at it, are you seriously going to point fingers at *me* for alleged violations of decorum, when your own posts are so frequently so vitriolic I feel as if I should wipe the flying spittle from my laptop screen after reading several of your posts? I mean, come on!
Oh, the drama.
BS- you obviously did NOT look too hard- a simpel search for GGG’s posts will put your silyl claim to rest immediately-
Oookay....
I guess you missed the fact that the link I gave, wherein an "anti-evo" was the first to get snotty IN THE THREAD TITLE he started, actually *was* one of GGG's gems...
Nice try! Here's a crowbar to get that foot out of your mouth.
Think longer, post slower, and the quality of your posts will inevitably improve, CottShop.
Sure.
You got a prob'em wit' dat? (8^D)
“Circular Firing Squad”.
Focus people, please.
Other FReepers are not the problem.
It is not like fighting over global warming where there are big financial and policy implications over the theory. Nobody is going to raise taxes or energy prices over Creation Science.
Can somebody ping me when it's my time to go?
-PJ
“Science is the quest for knowledge.”
Not the way it’s been practiced by Darwinists or by global warming fanatics.
With them, the science is settled.
Science, true science, requires extreme humility. It requires a recognition that new findings might at any time undermine the foundation of cherished theories and formulas and worldviews. It leaves the door open to new ideas, even though the ideas may be unsettling. It does not proclaim theory as fact, and it is never quick to declare observations as facts. The practitioner of true science understands that observations can sometimes be misleading.
In short, the science is never settled. On anything. Ever. Humility is required in the practice and teaching of science. Unfortunately, humility is a commodity sorely lacking among those who are declared to be experts in any field. Setting someone up as an expert on a subject elevates that person to an almost godlike position. The rest of society awaits the expert’s proclamations. Can such treatment promote humility in that person? Will it not instead promote the exact opposite? It is a rare person indeed who, recognized as an expert, is willing to admit openly that the whole edifice of his beliefs is like a house of cards. One card pulled from a lower level could cause the whole structure to collapse.
It is a rare person who, recognized as an expert, would be willing to start all of his discourses with a disclaimer, “Please remember that anything I say is based upon theories that I believe today to be true. However, at any time in the future, it is possible that these theories will be proven to be incorrect, and therefore any opinions expressed by me are necessarily contingent upon the stability of those theories.”
And, for those who cling to the expert’s opinions, will they not be disinclined to hear any contrary opinions? Won’t they instead vilify those who contradict the expert?
Instead of a quest for knowledge, science has become a tool for certain groups to get their way in policy decisions. For global warming, it is Copenhagen. For Darwinism, it is the promotion of a worldview that says that no God is needed. That all can be explained without Divine intervention. It marginalizes faith and promotes a darkness of the soul that causes despair. And dissenters are treated shamefully.
It requires a quest for the correct answer which overwhelms possib le embarassment at having the answer wrong in light of new data. Even more, it requires an emotional detachment from theory or hypothesis, an ability to let the data reveal the answer--or lack of one--without prejudice, only an attempt to determine if the explanation of a phenomenon is correct.
This, of course, becomes increasingly difficult to achieve as soon as one's theory catapults one to prominence, unless one has the guts (and good fortune) to be the first to step up with new data and say "I/we got it wrong."
One must never lose sight of the fact that knowing what something is not, what process did not cause a specific result, what factors were inconsequential, can be equally or even more valuable than knowing specifically what did.
As Edison might have said, "we know what doesn't work", and that advances knowledge as well.
As for me, the more I learn, the less I know, for each answer only raises more questions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.