Skip to comments.A Return to Triangulation (libertarion vs social right)
Posted on 10/25/2006 11:10:46 AM PDT by Blackirish
As the Republican base fragments and Christian conservatives consider a fast from politics, the polling data point to a mid-term Republican thumping. Less than two weeks from now, Republicans will begin their post-mortem soul searching. And as the corpses of their House and Senate majorities grow cold, so should Karl Roves 2006 campaign strategy.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
We're a science discussion site, not a religion site. We're a bit more narrowly-focused than FR.
If they can drive the religious conservatives from the Republican party, it's all over and that's what it seems like is happening, or being attempted.
I never could figure out why THEIR creation account got preferential treatment.
I've read comments over there. I was hard pressed to find *scientific* discussion.
I mentioned him because he really *is* a professor and as such, it would be somewhat his *real life job* to educate on science.
He was far too irascible but his comments were scientifically rigorous.
BTW, I was out of town (I think in Alaska) when he got banned. I never did find out how it happened, as the thread apparently got pulled too.
If anyone can give me more details via private FReepmail, I'd be grateful.
I leave at #550, and come back now and find a wonderful illustration of these c VS e THREADS!!
(Now post a calvinasaurus!)
There is no more evidence that life evolved here on the earth than there is for it to have been delivered or engineered by extraterrestrials...
How do evolutionists feel about teaching that life came from outer space? They already teach the Big Bang theory...
"It is our knits that make us women."
Some of the Bozos out there can't get past that word God, so they would just piss the entire country away and join the enemies of America; all because they have this polemic need to bash the Christians and do everything in contravention to them. I say screw them and the filthy practices they want to live by. My children are not going to inherit their squalor if I can help it.
--I've wanted to say that for a long time--just on general principles after being lectured on 'keeping religion in its place' ;-)
If you want to have a science site with a Darwinistic bent, great. But FR is about conservatism, not Darwinism--don't try to turn it into THAT...
Full Disclosure: The point is, if you want to discuss science, great. Can't we get a gentleman's agreement that on the pure biology and/or science threads, that crevo food fighters stay OFF of them unless the poster of the thread explicitly invites it?
There ought to be a way to have biology postings without it turning into a flame war, every time...
Only by the disquised leftists!
It is by our kilts we can prove we are men...
Basically for the same reason that a spherical earth gets preferential treatment over a flat earth, and the earth orbiting the sun gets preferential treatment over the sun orbiting the earth.
Sometimes it takes religion a few centuries to come to terms with science, but it eventually does. Believers are no longer debating whether the earth moves.
Leave out the word, thought, idea, consept of EVOLUTION in them!
Just talk about what IS; not what might, could, should, oughtta BE!!!
Dyslectic G bump
There is no more evidence that life evolved here on the earth than there is for it to have been delivered or engineered by extraterrestrials.
Indeed we do talk about a lot of other things too. Even the handful of creationists on the site abide by the rules and the discussions are more or less pretty civil.
Heck, I'm Catholic. I don't accept the inerrancy of Scripture and I think a lot of people worship a book rather than God, but that does not make me irreligious.
The anti-science bent of a lot of folks, especially here on FR, is really hurting the conservative movement. Conservatism should appeal to the rationalist, regardless of religious affiliation or lack thereof. Of late, however, the fundies have been trying to drive anyone not a born-again Protestant Christian from the movement, which will, in the end, kill the very things they want to promote.
I am an atheist and think you are clearly just a pathetic anti-Christian... "Fundie" is a favorite leftist slur...
George Santayana placemarker
I see where you are coming from now. True, those with an agenda can use any science as a political tool, warping the goal of science, which is simply the furthering of knowledge through rational observation.
I am sure some people have a fixation on the Theory of Evolution and want it in the classroom for various non-scientific reasons. Personally, I don't care if the Theory of Evolution were to be completely disproved tomorrow, replaced by another valid scientific theory. I just want the current state of science in the science class -- and English in English class, math in math class, religion in religion class, etc.
Atheist Creationist Placemarker
Oh, but here is! Come back to the TRUE 'Intelligent Design Movement', Brother, and get some REAL Religion. Go here!!!!!!!!!!!!!...............
The Designers have been here!
I read it on the Internet therefore it must be true!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Bible says so too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..........
Lets all get together and get this into our Godless Public School System as a viable alternative to what the Godless Evilutionists profess!!!!!!!!
Who's with me?
Wednesday, 29 March 2006 14:54
You're not an atheist, nor have you ever been one. You can claim it all you want, but your posts speak for themselves.
I decided to have a look at the DarwinCentral site last night. The first thread I found was a rather large one trashing FR and Jim Rob. Nice. You must be proud to be a member.
I am. We have a place to blow-off our frustrations, sure. But, like liberals, you take a fraction of the available evidence and extrapolate it to cover the totality.
Heck, we must be doing something right; since this brouhaha we've collected nearly a score new members over there.
"Fundie" is a universal slur against fundamentalists. It is used by the non-fundie right, left and center to describe those folks who not only wear their religions on their sleeves but feel everyone else on the planet needs to believe exactly the same way they do.
As for you being an atheist, your postings speak louder than your claims. You take the fundamentalist Christian side in all arguments, including creationism (why would an atheist believe in creationism?). It is pathetically obvious to everyone more intelligent than a retarded monkey that you are no atheist.
I haven't been posting since the 11th of this month, after a science news thread got transferred to the Religion forum, and I kinda gave up on science news around here -- at least for a while.
When I registered back in '99 it was because this site had been recommended to me by a good friend -- brace yourself! -- Jack Thompson. I looked, I read your mission statement, I liked what I saw. When I discovered that you also had active science threads I was doubly delighted.
As my homepage said, I've long been concerned by the left's propaganda that conservatives are idiots, while intellectuals belong to them, and I thought that myth should be exploded. I've had a great time helping to keep this website interesting for dozens of scientists, engineers, and university professors. You've had loads of PhDs here, with degrees in physics, chemistry, math, biology, astronomy, etc. Several have said to me that on their liberal campuses they've had no one to talk with, but here they can chat with like-minded conservatives. We loved this place! My science ping lists had just short of 400 names. And -- wouldja believe it? -- most of them are religious people. That's no contradiction.
Most Christian denominations aren't anti-science, and most scientists aren't anti-religion. We (the people on my ping list) have always tried to walk that line, and to make it clear that our interest in science isn't because of any antagonism to religion. For the most part we've done that rather well -- but you can't please everyone. I don't bash religion, and I've always avoided atheism threads -- I don't start them, don't ping to them.
However, some folks are hyper-sensitive. If someone says -- correctly -- that Noah's Ark isn't supported by scientific evidence, in my mind that's not Christian-bashing, or Marxism, or devil worship, or an endorsement of homosexuality. But if someone starts complaining that such a scientific view amounts to bashing his religion, well ... he's wrong, and he shouldn't be on the science threads, just as a belligerent atheist doesn't belong in the religion threads. But if he mashes the abuse button and complains to the mods, it requires a mod who understands what's going on.
Since Dales left, we haven't had a mod who cared enough to follow our threads so that he'd know who was making trouble. It's been a rough year without Dales. Once I even asked the admin mod if there were another mod with whom I could work to smooth out problems, but I got a brush-off. Fair enough. We slogged along, and a lot of science threads ended up in the Backroom that didn't need to go there. Some judicious moderation would have calmed things down, but it just wasn't there. We endured. But then ... my homepage vanished. That was March 6 of this year (or the 5th, I no longer remember).
The unexplained disappearance of my homepage is literally the reason for the creation of Darwin Central. On March 7 -- the day after the homepage takedown -- we started an emergency site at Yahoo, just like FR has. It was a place where we could find each other in case something crazy happened. I thought I was being zotted. When seemingly senseless things happen (like the homepage takedown) for no apparent reason, people will assume that something's gone wrong, and they will expect more of the same. DC was created as a fall-back site where we could find one another in case a bunch of us got banned -- a fate that was reasonable to expect under the circumstances.
The non-response to my inquiries to the mods and to John R was troublesome; it was attributed to your distance from day-to-day affairs. It was assumed that you had delegated too much authority to assistants with an anti-science agenda, and that some rogue mod was on a private rampage.
Seriously, Jim, I had no clue what was happening. I "knew" it wasn't you, because I've had years of happy experience here at FR. I naturally assumed the problem was a rogue mod or maybe computer hacking, and I asked John R to look into it for me. I really wish you had said something to me. But we've never talked. Perhaps it's too late now, but I wanted to lay out my side of all this.
Anyway, the motive for Darwin Central's creation wasn't anti-FR. It was self-defense. You're the godfather, Jim.
We're not socialists, nor homos, nor ACLU freaks, nor anti-FR. We'd like nothing more than to have things the way they were, back when Dales was a concerned moderator who understood what was happening in our threads. If that's not to be, okay. It's your website, and we're not your enemies.
I've always wished you well, and I continue to do so. I'm going to vote straight "R" as I always do. I'll pray for the troops, and you, and for our great country.
And no, this isn't an opus.
Unfortunately there is no good book I have come across about the philosophy of Whitehead since the Living Philosophers series in the sense of quick and direct and succinct. Whitehead has developed his own lingo and rightly so. "Process and Reality" is supposedly his philosophy masterwork and one of the best of the best, right up there with Heidegger's "Being and Time," but was written while he was still a mathematician and in transition. However, he develops ontological categories there that Aristotle wouldn't have dreamed of on his best day. Won't be any shortcuts here.
Kinda applies to your claim of Catholicism.
As I said, I don't believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. I have a handful of saints I venerate (there are always votive candles going in the little shrine in my house) and I say my prayers. Once in a blue moon I go to mass.
My version of Catholicism, however, cannot be compared to a guy who claims no belief in God, yet thinks that same God created the universe.
I would judge that you're not even a bad one, but, hey, what you call yourself is your business until it is used to add credibility to your arguments. Then, like Mikey Fox's paroxysms, it becomes relevant.
I suppose you have plenty of evidence to back up that statement?
Hell, you and other creationists don't want the science-types around either. You (not you personally, but the overall encompassing "you") have called us Nazis, communists and liberals for accepting science over a literal interpretation of Genesis.
Gee, sounds like you're trying to drive us away, doesn't it?
No, wait. You're not Catholic.
Interesting blog item:
Check out the second paragraph:
Stiff upper lip and all that. Come on Junior, you throw stones as good as anybody. I haven't lost a wink of sleep yet over the stones thrown my way by fellow freepers like yourself.
You want to do something to to advance conservatism and science?
Tell the technofascists supporting the "anti cloning" amendment in Missouri that we dreaded creationists are not all rubes. We know what somatic cell nuclear transfer is and we know that the amendment seeks to place the public purse at the control of the science community rather than elected representatives.
When you do that I'll know you are serious about conservatism and bridging the gap between science and religion.
And I'm not Muslim, but I sure can talk about their disingenuousness.
Actions speak louder than words. They must've gotten the idea that creationists were rubes from somewhere.
But you cannot comment on what is and is not a "good Moslem." You can comment on Catholicism or atheism (or disengenuousness) for that matter all you want.
Sure I can.
This is a good Muslim.(in fact, a hero)
And this is a bad Muslim
Care to argue?
LOL, you've become a parody of yourself.
Oh and one other thing, I am Catholic and to be Catholic one must, of necessity, be a creationist. So when you self identify as a Catholic, I think that is ample evidence that you are a creationist and hence a "rube".
And since you have no problem with the followers of scientism trying to take the peoples money without being accountable to the people I guess you are some type of Marixist and Jim was absolutely right.
Now correct me if I'm wrong and I'll withdraw the Marxist comment. Do you support the Missouri Amendment or not?
I guess I'm having a real identity crisis; I don't know whether I'm coming or going.
Make that *conservative* or *republican* party line and it might make more sense. What is the *fundamentalist* party line? What's the *Fundamentalist Party* to begin with? Never heard of it.
What I object to is people who call themselves conservatives who think nothing of teaming up with vile organizations like the ACLU to help them further their America and God hating agenda. That does not lend any credibility to anyone who claims to be a conservative. Actions speak louder than words.
D: Curious. Why, then, do you believe that Ken Miller claims to be Catholic?
To be a Catholic, though, one must not of necessity, reject evolution.