Skip to comments.How to put Democratic leaders on the defensive just like Chris Matthews 'got' Cong. Pence yesterday
Posted on 05/06/2009 3:36:34 PM PDT by BlueStateBlues
click here to read article
Is that not what you wished to achieve?
Let me quote something that is one of my favorite sayings.
"Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management."It would seem, with that caveat, that opinions expressed by such as OH4life would be, if not welcomed, at least tolerated for the sake of discussion.
If your goal is to convince others of the soundness of your arguments, the righteousness of your cause, if you will, then well-moderated discussions between people who may disagree, but do so with relative politeness and deference to others' opinions should offer a proving ground for polishing debate tactics and procedures, not a killing ground for wayward travelers who may have strayed from the path of your orthodoxy.
What has all that got to do with the comments we made on the research presented in this thread?
The domestication of the russian silver fox. (40 year fast track evolution)
Did you get as far back as post 87?
I suppose nothing. Why do you ask?
That’s what I thought.
Consider it a handwave.
Why are you telling us this? You're preaching to the choir.
You should have alerted (warned) your compatriot there instead. Based on his posts on this thread, he could have used the advice. But it's too late now for him. Maybe you can catch him next time around.
It seemed a good opportunity. On most occasions, I find only the choir in attendance.
Actually, had you bothered to read, you’d understand I’m not wrong.
And try to focus, the subject is evolution, not science. I know the programming runs deep.
Did you bother reading the evidence?
Or does evidence only matter when it comes to what liberal professors spoon feed to you concerning evolution?
Good grief, do liberals EVER not project on these threads? EVER?
Are you purposefully employing every single failed liberal tactic or just this new for real?
What’s a “non-literalist Christian”?
“Im sure Mr. Matthews will have a scathing retort for you just as soon as he thinks of something clever.”
It might make things simpler if you would define what it is youre willing to accept as evidence.
All I have to offer is everything you have seen and thought about in your life.
Is that sufficient?
Or what weight one is willing to give to “evidence” in general.
Have you read the book ‘Next’ by Michael Crichton by any chance?
I have not. It looks interesting, though. I am somewhat independently familiar with some of the contents.
Was there something in it that you wanted to discuss?
Thank you for the courtesy of correcting my careless typo.
I generally allow people to self identify. Many people who believe in Christ as Savior also do not require the Bible to be read literally in sections like Genesis. Some here would challenge their professed Christianity.
Crichton correctly identifies the joke that is peer review, and studies funded by drug companies that (surprise,surprise) come to the conclusion 90% of the time they determine that their own drug is best.
(I must confess I’m surprised it’s not closer to 100%, although perhaps it really is, since even these polls can’t be trusted!)
Personally, I think that’s sufficient, believing and accepting Christ as savior, but as they grow, they come to understand Jesus meant what He said 100% of the time, about every subject.
I’ve met cafeteria Catholics, Protestants all across the spectrum, some worse than others, but it’s not my place to judge them. But I would say it’s a Christian duty to warn them.
One doesn’t get to pick and choose, it doesn’t work that way.
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.