Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Return to Triangulation (libertarion vs social right)
National Review Online ^ | 10/25/06 | David Boaz & David Kirby

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 Rove’s 2006 campaign strategy.

(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: besthijack; bestthread; blackirish; braad; creation; darwin; darwincentral; darwinhomebase; doublehijacked; evolution; frhero; frlegend; hero; hijack; hijacked; hijackedthread; legend; libertian; minifreepathon; monthlydonorthon; rehijacked; religion; science; socialright; threadjacked; threadjacking
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 1,661-1,665 next last
To: jennyp
Well, jennyp, if you hate FR so much,

BTW, "hate" is far from the word. Just disappointed & fed up. It was a good thing while it lasted.

681 posted on 10/26/2006 7:02:33 PM PDT by jennyp (The ennui of the short-timer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 674 | View Replies]

To: Fiddlstix

Oh my gosh,it really plays the song.I am just trying to keep up with all this.


682 posted on 10/26/2006 7:03:00 PM PDT by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 640 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I'm suggesting you should quit working with the leftists and or doing their dirty work for them.

How, exactly, am I doing this?

And you should quit insulting those of us who do believe in the Creator.

I do not believe that I have insulted anyone specifically for that reason. In fact, many who accept the theory of evolution as valid science hold belief in a Creator. Your response appears to be a non-sequitur.

If you guys want to prove the theory of evolution, more power to you.

No theory in science has ever been nor will ever be "proven".

But don't use it as a tool to attempt destroy our faith in God or to destroy our political and religious freedom.

I do not believe that anyone here has made such an attempt. Do you have a reference to someone on Freerepublic attempting to use the theory of evolution to accomplish such a goal?
683 posted on 10/26/2006 7:12:29 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 660 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Everything can be made political in a democracy. That doesn't change reality and science.

This issue is larger than the US. The voters in the US have a limited influence on what the rest of the world does where science is concerned. If tomorrow the entire population of the US votes to reject the Theory of Evolution, scientific investigation in this area will go on and it will progress in the rest of the world. Some in the US may assert this is all a waste of time and effort. Based on the history of scientific and technological progress in the past few hundred years, and the track record of the ever present opposition to it, I wouldn't bet they'd be right.
684 posted on 10/26/2006 7:14:56 PM PDT by ml1954 (ID = Case closed....no further inquiry allowed...now move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 680 | View Replies]

To: ml1954
Yeah, well now we see the truth beginning to come out. It is a "worldwide" political issue isn't it?
685 posted on 10/26/2006 7:23:23 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 684 | View Replies]

To: ml1954
I agree that trying to hold to Biblical literalism of the strictest kind, with full knowledge of the scientific data, and not making any concession to the knowledge of discrepancies, *would* be nuts.

In other words, so far as that goes, we agree: except that I am aware that many people who dispute evolution do it in ignorance of the scientific data. And many of the others do it because they implicitly allow for the possibility of supernatural interference, or miracles.

But it sure looked like, from your choice of words, that any mention of miracles or the supernatural, was nuts. And in particular, that miracles are a sort of last-ditch attempt to defend something which has long been discredited or disproven. And it is *THAT* which I was objecting to.

Cheers!

686 posted on 10/26/2006 7:30:09 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 583 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I guess we have an irreconcilable difference here. I think science is ultimately apolitical. You seem to think it is just another part of an all encompassing and pervasive political process. Oh, well. Too bad we can't meet up in a couple of hundred years, compare notes, and see who's right. Then again, maybe we can.


687 posted on 10/26/2006 7:32:51 PM PDT by ml1954 (ID = Case closed....no further inquiry allowed...now move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 685 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; ml1954
Yeah, well now we see the truth beginning to come out. It is a "worldwide" political issue isn't it?

No, he's saying that *science* and research into it will go on in the rest of the world, and leave the US behind, if some short-sighted people in the US with a political or religious axe to grind against science wield them to damage science education, or public respect for science, in this country.

Science should not be used as a weapon against political positions or religious views, granted. But neither should political positions or religious views be used as grounds for attacking science. You incorrectly accuse us of doing the former, but it's the latter we have been concerned about during our time at FreeRepublic -- we've been trying to stop science itself from being undermined by those with politically or religiously motivated grudges against science, its methods, or its findings, especially when it's attacked with false claims, false accusations, or misleading propaganda.

Those don't have any place in the conservative movement. Leave the lies to the liberals, we're better than that. Or at least we should be.

688 posted on 10/26/2006 7:34:02 PM PDT by Ichneumon (Ignorance is curable, but the afflicted has to want to be cured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 685 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer

Hi RadioAstronomer.


689 posted on 10/26/2006 7:35:36 PM PDT by fatima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 651 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
The reason we're having this discussion is because of the friction between religious and secular conservatives, much along the lines of the National Review article.

The fact is, your people...

I am not a "you people" I am a freeper and have been for a long time.

...are seizing upon this issue to belittle and insult believers in God...

No. I do not belittle and insult Christians just for being Christians. I do not mock faith. I have long argued that faith and science are not in conflict. I have traded barbs with those people who call me an idolater, a nazi, etc. A lot of those kinds of people, frankly, don't belong in polite company. That's what I've been trying to tell you: you have more than just a few nuts.

...and to use so-called "apolitical science" as a means to deprive us of the truths we hold to be self-evident, ie, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

We're back to the Goldwater quote I posted upthread. The men and women who "strive to cure disease, subdue and make fruitful our natural environment" have done nothing of the sort. People who study evolutionary science help make the flu shots every year. People who study micropaleontology help find oil to keep the country running. The "inventive engines of production, science, and technology" add to our lives, liberty, and happiness in measurable ways every day, and have made this nation the envy of the world.

690 posted on 10/26/2006 7:38:09 PM PDT by Liberal Classic (No better friend, no worse enemy. Semper Fi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 676 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon

Yeah, well maybe your people should leave the trashing of religious conservatives and our right to freedom of religion to the evolutionists on the left.


691 posted on 10/26/2006 7:38:35 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 688 | View Replies]

To: ml1954

Uh, I believe the Everlasting Life goes on well beyond two hundred years.


692 posted on 10/26/2006 7:41:06 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 687 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic

Well, I'm very happy for you.


693 posted on 10/26/2006 7:43:12 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 690 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman
Yes, it helped. It's just that I only heard of the natural atomic piles last week, so it was new to *me*.

I therefore jumped to the conclusion that nobody else had thought about it either :-)

Thanks for your patient answers...

Cheers!

694 posted on 10/26/2006 7:48:01 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 677 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
Therefore seemingly good conservatives here who defend mainstream science from the constant blizzard of lies from the passionate science-deniers

Oh you mean like Ann Coulter?

695 posted on 10/26/2006 7:55:53 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 654 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Oh you mean like Ann Coulter?

I would agree that Ann Coulter is a passionate science denier, as is evidenced by the content of her most recent book.
696 posted on 10/26/2006 8:02:25 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 695 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
I would agree that Ann Coulter is a passionate science denier, as is evidenced by the content of her most recent book.

Therein lies your problem. You conflate science and Darwinism(IMHO).

697 posted on 10/26/2006 8:07:36 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 696 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC; Dimensio; jennyp

Ms. Coulter destroyed her credibility with her idiotic statements about science (yes, evolution is a study within the science of biology). I no longer feel confident quoting any claims from her previous books unless I have researched them myself. I seriously doubt I will ever buy another one of her books.


698 posted on 10/26/2006 8:19:43 PM PDT by Virginia-American (Don't bring a comic book to an encyclopedia fight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 697 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American; Liberal Classic; All

Ahem. Weren't we just talking about your people ("Evolution Scientists") trashing religious conservatives on this forum? And didn't one of yours deny that this was happening? I think it was just a few posts back. The ink's not even dry on the pixels yet.


699 posted on 10/26/2006 8:39:37 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 698 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
"Second Law of Thermal Documents" placemark

DING DING DING DING DING DING!

NO more calls, please. We have a winner.

Cheers!

700 posted on 10/26/2006 8:41:29 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 1,661-1,665 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson