EPTTea Party wins primary in Delaware - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
vGl-CoW
Belgium8305 Posts
| ||
|
WilbertK
Netherlands210 Posts
Also, when is America going to get over this whole evolution-denial thing? The world is laughing at you, guys. If someone denies evolution, they're to be taken as seriously as someone who denies gravity. Why isn't that common knowledge in America? | ||
|
sCuMBaG
United Kingdom1144 Posts
these guys are nuts... | ||
|
animus123
United States171 Posts
On September 18 2010 01:21 vGl-CoW wrote: if you are of the opinion that people can simultaneously support creationism and not be complete retards, we probably don't have a whole lot to discuss I think it's just gotten to the point where conservatives are willing to support a whacko that's against the spend spend spend mentality rather than a 'normal' person who isn't doing anything about it. | ||
|
Adila
United States874 Posts
On September 18 2010 01:28 WilbertK wrote: It's a political discussion on the internet. By asking to keep that conversation logical and respectful, you're asking a lot. Political discussions on the internet will always result in death threats. As a political science major you should know that. Also, when is America going to get over this whole evolution-denial thing? The world is laughing at you, guys. If someone denies evolution, they're to be taken as seriously as someone who denies gravity. Why isn't that common knowledge in America? http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/education/stories/091510dntexeducation.28d07a4.html With people like that, it might take a while. | ||
|
animus123
United States171 Posts
On September 18 2010 01:37 Adila wrote: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/education/stories/091510dntexeducation.28d07a4.html With people like that, it might take a while. The textbooks were much better when they were just anti-christian. | ||
|
TheToast
United States4808 Posts
On September 18 2010 01:28 WilbertK wrote: Also, when is America going to get over this whole evolution-denial thing? The world is laughing at you, guys. If someone denies evolution, they're to be taken as seriously as someone who denies gravity. Why isn't that common knowledge in America? Some people believe that creationism is part of christian religious belief. They believe that because genesis says that God created the earth and the living things on it in seven days, that believing in evolution would be denying God and would be going against the bible. I personally don't hold to this belief, but I have a friend who does not believe in evolution. I would never belittle him or anything for it, I just accept that he believes something different than me. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32075 Posts
On September 18 2010 01:21 vGl-CoW wrote: if you are of the opinion that people can simultaneously support creationism and not be complete retards, we probably don't have a whole lot to discuss Truuuuuth. Someone who poo-poo's science for an unfounded belief shouldn't be in power, ever. I don't understand why so many republicans think this is good for their party... my buddy keeps reiterating this. This would be like the super left democrats, like the real socialists, picking up steam heading into an election. They are an offshoot of the main party, with radical views not viewed in a positive light by most of the main party, and pretty much hated by any moderates/independents who could be persuaded to vote red or blue... No moderate or independent is gonna vote for this lady, and she probably won't have the entire backing of the main republican party. | ||
|
wadadde
270 Posts
On September 18 2010 00:40 TheToast wrote: Why are comments like this considered appropriate on TL? This thread is filled with hateful comments like this and I think it is unacceptable. Just because someone believes different things than you it's not okay to spread this kind of hate. If someone who did not believe in racial equality for Islam came on this forum and expressed themselves the way ArbAttack and many others in this thread have, they would be instantly banned. I'm not saying that I agree with everything she says (I do believe in evolution) but I agree with her on most points. While I do not agree with liberals and liberal politics, I do not go around posting hateful comments about Obama on TL. I have never referred to a liberal as a "tard" and I have never said anything disrespectful about anyone based on their religion. I accept that there are people in this world with different opinions than myself, and if I choose to disagree I do so in a respectful and logical manner. I know that the response to this is going to be "well republicans spread hate!!!". If that is what you believe fine, (I would take exception with that) but there is no reason to spread it here as well. You're right about such statements not being all that constructive. You're completely wrong when you're asserting that such statements are merely the product of reasonable disagreement (in this case). Retards are people who are on some level not capable of performing basic intellectual tasks. If one is confronted with a band of people who reject reason, and seem to elevate ignorance to the level of ghospel , then the temptation is to equate them with people who are physically incapable of thinking logically. Some Tea Party participants are probably perfectly fine people, but the impression that the movement is mostly about far-right identity politics, greed and a random assortment of frustrations seems inescapable. I can identify with the frustration, but that's where the respectability of it ends. I've listened to quite a few interviews with tea party members/leaders and have yet to hear a sensible word about how and why (economic) policies should change. Nothing but dogmatic drivel... I hope that this doesn't sound too hateful. By the way, I hope that the Tea Party splits from the republican party (idle hope). That way, there might be a chance of American politics becoming slightly more meaningful for voters. That, and barring corporations from "buying access" during elections. Seriously, your system is so fucked and it never seems to get any better... Identity politics FTL | ||
|
animus123
United States171 Posts
On September 18 2010 01:45 TheToast wrote: Some people believe that creationism is part of christian religious belief. They believe that because genesis says that God created the earth and the living things on it in seven days, that believing in evolution would be denying God and would be going against the bible. I personally don't hold to this belief, but I have a friend who does not believe in evolution. I would never belittle him or anything for it, I just accept that he believes something different than me. I gotta say it's kind of weird to not believe in the overwhelming evidence of evolution. I wouldn't vote someone like that President (cough cough Palin), but I wouldn't have a problem voting a person who was pretty off-kilter to the senate, providing they are against spending and were at least a little fiscally responsible. | ||
|
WilbertK
Netherlands210 Posts
On September 18 2010 01:45 TheToast wrote: Some people believe that creationism is part of christian religious belief. They believe that because genesis says that God created the earth and the living things on it in seven days, that believing in evolution would be denying God and would be going against the bible. I personally don't hold to this belief, but I have a friend who does not believe in evolution. I would never belittle him or anything for it, I just accept that he believes something different than me. That's the whole thing. You portray evolution as if it's something you believe in. Like Jesus, or Santa. It's not. It's a scientific theory supported by evidence, and as such it's as factual as any scientific theory. I'm not going to say you should disrespect or belittle your friend. You have friends based on whether people are nice to be around. And people who deny evolution, gravity, the holocaust, or the 9-11 attacks can undoubtedly be pleasant people, and therefore make good friends. That, however, does not mean you should take their opinions on those matters seriously. If, on the other hand, you're going to vote for someone, I think you should always vote for people who make decisions based on sound knowledge. We might disagree on what's best, and end up reaching different conclusions based on personal preference and ideologies, but I would hope that we can agree that you should never deny the facts when making important decisions. | ||
|
Loranga
Sweden83 Posts
On September 17 2010 09:59 Carnac wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_O'Donnell#Political_positions omg Wow, I fucking hate her and all of her suporters. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32075 Posts
On September 18 2010 01:45 TheToast wrote: Some people believe that creationism is part of christian religious belief. They believe that because genesis says that God created the earth and the living things on it in seven days, that believing in evolution would be denying God and would be going against the bible. I personally don't hold to this belief, but I have a friend who does not believe in evolution. I would never belittle him or anything for it, I just accept that he believes something different than me. Is your friend running for a major political office, which would potentially give him/her the power to shove his unfounded belief down the throats of others while pissing on the constitution?? there''s a monumental difference there. I can care less what my friends believe, because it doesn't effect me in any way. To each his own. When they run for office, start talking about how the problem with this country is that we pulled bibles from school and other horseshit, then it becomes an issue. | ||
|
Sumsi
Germany593 Posts
On September 18 2010 01:48 Hawk wrote: Why not? If I had the option between a free-market, limited-government oriented creationist and a rational socialist my pick would not be that hard.Truuuuuth. Someone who poo-poo's science for an unfounded belief shouldn't be in power, ever. The worst danger for the people and their liberty have always been politicians with a rational plan. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32075 Posts
On September 18 2010 02:07 Sumsi wrote: Why not? If I had the option between a free-market, limited-government oriented creationist and a rational socialist my pick would not be that hard. The worst danger for the people and their liberty have always been politicians with a rational plan. Because if you just arbitrarily decide to cherry pick science when it supports you and ignore it when it doesn't, why should that person have any credibility?? | ||
|
WilbertK
Netherlands210 Posts
On September 18 2010 02:07 Sumsi wrote: Why not? If I had the option between a free-market, limited-government oriented creationist and a rational socialist my pick would not be that hard. The worst danger for the people and their liberty have always been politicians with a rational plan. This is dishonest. It's not like Hawk is saying anything is better than a creationism (although he may think so, I don't know for sure). He just said anyone in power should respect science. | ||
|
Sumsi
Germany593 Posts
On September 18 2010 02:09 Hawk wrote: You dont get the point. I dont care about the opinion of a politician in terms of science as long as he supports liberty.Because if you just arbitrarily decide to cherry pick science when it supports you and ignore it when it doesn't, why should that person have any credibility?? Seems not to be the case with O'Donnell either since she wants creationism to be taught in public schools. | ||
|
Bungle
Canada59 Posts
Re: Creationism - if you want a good laugh I highly recommend a visit to the Creation Museum in northern Kentucky where you will gain insight in to how animals used dead logs as rafts to migrate between the continents. Nothing like a 3-4 month journey with no fresh water... | ||
|
animus123
United States171 Posts
On September 18 2010 02:13 WilbertK wrote: This is dishonest. It's not like Hawk is saying anything is better than a creationism (although he may think so, I don't know for sure). He just said anyone in power should respect science. Dishonest? How silly. He is just saying that he isn't worried about the Christian letting her religious beliefs interfere with her political and economic policies. The fact that she believes in creationism is secondary to how she will vote on actual political issues. | ||
tofucake
Hyrule19087 Posts
| ||
| ||
