molson_golden2002 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081202/ap_on_...MrQb3zUH4ms0NUE Them atheists are at it again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I didn't notice this before I posted. Good call. No, BAD call. Becuase Im not defending creationism, nor am I advocate FOR this museum. Im pointing out how yet again, we have a "tolerant" liberal bashing other's opinions and at the same time, having the audacity to accuse OTHERS of "hate." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I don't hate creationists until I meet them. Sight unseen, I think they are REALLY REALLY stupid and dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I don't hate creationists until I meet them. Sight unseen, I think they are REALLY REALLY stupid and dangerous. Funny, I feel the same way about Quakers. IMO, thinking the US can lay down its weapons, disband its military and live in peace and free from attack is right up there with the world was created in seven days on the "dangerous idiocy" scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Funny, I feel the same way about Quakers. IMO, thinking the US can lay down its weapons, disband its military and live in peace and free from attack is right up there with the world was created in seven days on the "dangerous idiocy" scale. I don't hate Quakers. I do find their Peace Pledge impractically stupid. See: we agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Funny, I feel the same way about Quakers. IMO, thinking the US can lay down its weapons, disband its military and live in peace and free from attack is right up there with the world was created in seven days on the "dangerous idiocy" scale. That giant military albatross sure was a big help on 9-11 Did about as much good as praying does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 That giant military albatross sure was a big help on 9-11 Did about as much good as praying does Like George Carlin, I pray to the sun and Joe Pesci. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 That giant military albatross sure was a big help on 9-11 Did about as much good as praying does Its a damned shame you survived 9/11. Damned shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Its a damned shame you survived 9/11. Damned shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 That giant military albatross sure was a big help on 9-11 I'm pretty sure by now that you're just pulling his chain, and are aware that statement is retarded. But are you aware just HOW retarded that statement actually is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I don't hate creationists until I meet them. Sight unseen, I think they are REALLY REALLY stupid and dangerous. Dangerous? Stupid, yes. But I'm resistant to the idea that believing a metaphorical morality play is a literal truth is "dangerous". Hell, I'm strongly resistant to the idea that "belief" is dangerous to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Dangerous? Stupid, yes. But I'm resistant to the idea that believing a metaphorical morality play is a literal truth is "dangerous". Hell, I'm strongly resistant to the idea that "belief" is dangerous to begin with. It's not dangerous if they don't breed. But oh, how they breed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I'm pretty sure by now that you're just pulling his chain, and are aware that statement is retarded. But are you aware just HOW retarded that statement actually is? I was messing with him, but what are you getting at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 It's not dangerous if they don't breed. But oh, how they breed. Okay, yeah...breeding is dangerous, I'll give you that. But then, didn't the intelligent designer say "be fruitful and multiply", or "live long and prosper", or something like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I was messing with him, but what are you getting at? The short version is that you (the general you, not you specifically) can't describe a realistic legal military action to prevent a major domestic terrorism event like 9/11, before 9/11. Now, perhaps...but the mechanism is in place now for the military to intervene in domestic terrorism precisely as a reaction to 9/11. Blaming 9/11 on the ineffectiveness of a bloated military is like blaming World War II on the ineffectiveness of the UN Security Council. Never mind that the military wasn't bloated in 2001, it was still pared to the bone by the Clinton Administration's policies (which is not a criticism, just an observation). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 The short version is that you (the general you, not you specifically) can't describe a realistic legal military action to prevent a major domestic terrorism event like 9/11, before 9/11. Now, perhaps...but the mechanism is in place now for the military to intervene in domestic terrorism precisely as a reaction to 9/11. Blaming 9/11 on the ineffectiveness of a bloated military is like blaming World War II on the ineffectiveness of the UN Security Council. Never mind that the military wasn't bloated in 2001, it was still pared to the bone by the Clinton Administration's policies (which is not a criticism, just an observation). I was thinking more along the lines that you don't use a flamethrower to rid your house of termites. Our military was not designed to stop people from hijacking planes, yet many people want to treat the "War on Terrorism" as a new Cold War. RK made the remark about us "laying down our arms" like liberals are surender monkeies or whatever. But, the biggest attack on the nation could have been stopped by people without any weapons at all. If the hijackers were checked for sharp objects there would have been no attack. I don't know--or really want to--what would happen if we had no military. I can't believe anyone would invade us. There might be more problems around the world, but I think we would stay sovereign without many problems. Hell, we might even be safer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I was thinking more along the lines that you don't use a flamethrower to rid your house of termites. Our military was not designed to stop people from hijacking planes, yet many people want to treat the "War on Terrorism" as a new Cold War. RK made the remark about us "laying down our arms" like liberals are surender monkeies or whatever. But, the biggest attack on the nation could have been stopped by people without any weapons at all. If the hijackers were checked for sharp objects there would have been no attack. I don't know--or really want to--what would happen if we had no military. I can't believe anyone would invade us. There might be more problems around the world, but I think we would stay sovereign without many problems. Hell, we might even be safer. Ah, the blissfully ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 No, BAD call. Becuase Im not defending creationism, nor am I advocate FOR this museum. Im pointing out how yet again, we have a "tolerant" liberal bashing other's opinions and at the same time, having the audacity to accuse OTHERS of "hate." What he said. From the article. "It is one of the most egregiously and breathtakingly unconstitutional actions by a state legislature that I've ever seen," said Edwin F. Kagin, national legal director of Parsippany, N.J.-based American Atheists Inc. The group claims the law violates both the state and U.S. constitutions. ____________________________________________ Kentucky has been at the center of a series of legal battles involving religious issues in recent years, most involving displays of the Ten Commandments in public buildings. One case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled in 2005 that such displays inside courthouses in two counties were unconstitutional. Dangerous? Stupid, yes. But I'm resistant to the idea that believing a metaphorical morality play is a literal truth is "dangerous". Hell, I'm strongly resistant to the idea that "belief" is dangerous to begin with. Here's a true life story about me. I was talking to someone at work about the dinosaurs and general geological events. A woman who overheard us turned around and said "You know that's all BS, right? The world is only 10,000 years old. Read the bible." She was a friend of mine and I let it go. later that week she told me she was going to report me to HR about shaking her shoulders one day. For five years we had been doing that to each other and I told her that I would lose my medical benefits if I was fired. She knows I have cancer but she said I deserved to be fired. So she blew a molehill into a mountain and I was fired. Those people can be really petty and in my opinion dangerous. Because of her accusation I can't get unemployment. I touched her and she complained case closed. Also a friend of mine there saw my dinosaur eating a Jesus fish plastic sticker on the back window of my car and asked me about it. I said it was a message to creationists. Turns out he was a creationist and never spoke to me again. They are mostly A-holes. Okay, yeah...breeding is dangerous, I'll give you that. But then, didn't the intelligent designer say "be fruitful and multiply", or "live long and prosper", or something like that? Would a homosexual with a calculator fit that description? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StupidNation Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Secularism is just as much a religion as anything else. It has defined doctrines that no other religion but "IT" is the sole source of public dissemination, that all sources of information by anyone with a creed other than their own must be rejected, buzz-words/labels are more important than debating issues, and freedom of expression and speech will only be allowed if they agree while using caustic ridicule to anything that is disagreeable. I'm certainly not a creationist, but I find arguments for intelligent design to be not plausible by definite based on metaphysical arguments, and while I find some of the silliness of creationism to be a bit over the top, I find the same anti-intellectual argumentation to spill over to intelligent design to the point of stifling debate and using the court, and not ideas, as the principle of the debate. The people who use the words hate and bigotry are the most hypocritical bunch I've met by and large. You can't debate a secularist who pushes their religion while simultaneously telling you not to push your religion on their religion they are pushing and promoting. Just because their religion doesn't have "Methodist", "Catholic", "Jewish", on their cold building they believe they are exempt from being a religion. The traditional meaning of religion is far more vast than the destruction of language to imply only institutional deist communities. When Aristotle said man is "essentially religious" he wasn't talking Christianity, as it didn't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 3, 2008 Share Posted December 3, 2008 The Cincinnati Zoo offered a package - a discount for tix to their long-standing Christmas Festival of Lights in combination with the KY Creation Museum's Bethlehem exhibit.They didn't expect such an outpouring of hate and sadly backed down. Free choice - buy or not. A bit of history - when the Creation Museum opened, it opened with vicious, hateful protests by lefty bigots who hated the fact that other folks can make choices in their lives outside of their view. Liberals never look in the mirror, and see what intolerant people they are, the oppressiveness they mandate - their world view is the only one, and woe to anyone who disagrees with them. These same liberals who revel in attacks against Christianity, would me howling if someone attacked Islam - the religion of peace, it is said. http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20081202/NEWS01/812020317 Neither should be attacked. Both religions have very strong points, but good can go bad when given too much power Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts