Evolution and intelligent design Life is a cup of tea

Economist ^ | 10/6/05 | Economist

[taxesareforever]

Ah, but taxes posted in support of slavery. Christian or no?

Supporting it and saying that it is not wrong are two different things. I know you find this hard to believe. Is gambling wrong? No. Do I support it? No. Illogical? Only in your mind.

[taxesareforever]

That's because there are no ID studies. No one has a background in ID studies.

Being in denial does not change the facts.

[taxesareforever]

Maybe you should ask JimRob for a ruling on your posts at 375 & beyond.

I am led to believe that JimRob has considered my later posts and sees the logic that I have submitted and considered it worthy of discussion.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

...Dembski’s filter has never been demonstrated to be able to distinguish anything in the biological realm — it has never been successfully applied by anyone to any biological phenomena (Elsberry and Shallit, 2003).

If you have a link to anyone who has actually performed Dembski's calculation of "complex specified information" please post it.

No one has seen it done anywhere as far as I know.

[Junior]

No. It's some guy claiming to talk for God. You accept, uncritically, the claims the Bible makes for being the Word of God. Yet you really have nothing other than the words in the Bible to base that acceptance upon.

[taxesareforever]

Yet you really have nothing other than the words in the Bible to base that acceptance upon.

I'll believe the Words of God before I believe the words of mere mortals.

[Junior]

But you don't know those are the words of God. You are taking the word of mere mortals that they are.

[taxesareforever]

You posted this to me. I was not the one who posted the quote you listed.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

What I posted to you are the words of one of the critics of Behe's book on ID.

I'm giving you the opportunity to link to an "ID study" based on Dembski's definition that Behe uses repeatedly.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Point of order. Post #375 wasn't mine.

Of course it was. Responding to 375 gives:

[In a shaded box] In the News/Activism forum, on a thread titled Evolution and intelligent design Life is a cup of tea , taxesareforever wrote:

[In the posting itself.] My position on slavery? I don't consider it is wrong to have slaves.

Who else do you allow to use your posting privileges?

[Doctor Stochastic]

We have a new modus operandi:

Make a provocative post (supporting slavery in this case);

Have the post pulled;

Deny that one did this.

Even Arnold can't erase this post.

[Doctor Stochastic]

I do not find it curious that no creationist has yet criticized slavery.

[Doctor Stochastic]

"By the way, anyone who is employed is in effect a slave. "

This is the usual Marxist conflation of force with money. I do not find it curious that creationists make such catagorical mistakes.

[taxesareforever]

I do not know a thing about Behe or Dembski. I don't know why you insinuate that I should.

[taxesareforever]

Read my post #643. Might clear up some of your confusion.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Supporting it and saying that it is not wrong are two different things."

Saying that slavery is not wrong goes against the entire purpose this website exists. There is no way to reconcile individual rights, which the Free Republic called the United States is the first and greatest historical example, with slavery.


"Is gambling wrong? No. Do I support it? No. Illogical?"

Slavery is not gambling. Slavery is always immoral; it is the initiation of force against another. Gambling is a matter of choice; slavery is the annihilation of choice.

Your new tagline should be, "Slavery Now, Slavery Tomorrow, Slavery Forever-- If that's what the Government Wants"

[Thatcherite]

When I was a Director I frequently beat my staff. I chained them up at night and made free with their women, keeping the resultant children as my own future slaves if it pleased me to do so. I kicked a couple of the men to death (they made an inadvertant error), but fortunately for me they survived 36 hours in horrible pain so at least I need fear no biblical injunction. Now I am an employee my bosses do the same thing to me and my fellow wage-slaves. Truly, paid employment is just like slavery.

But I was always sure that I let Hebrews go before 6 years were up (well, actually I sold them on after 5 years).

And don't get me started when it comes to tax inspectors. Taxes are just like slavery too (according to the cretinists).

[taxesareforever]

Slavery is always immoral;

In your opinion. And what is your opinion based on?

[taxesareforever]

Slavery is always immoral; it is the initiation of force against another.

Is abortion always immoral? Does it initiate force against another? Yes and yes, yet the government sanctions it and women and doctors use it. Go figure.

[From many - one.]

Let's try this again:

You in the infamous post 375:
"I don't consider it is wrong to have slaves."

Clean and simple: You don't consider it is wrong to have slaves.

Now you imply, but do not say directly, that although is is not wrong you would not support it, making an analogy with gambling not being wrong but something you nevertheless would not support.

That leaves me with two questions:

1. Why is is not wrong to have slaves?
2. How does the idea that is is not wrong to have slaves relate to your religious views?