Obama Aims to Shield Science from Politics
- Thread starter Facial_King
- Start date
ChefChiTown
The secret ingredient? MY BALLS
^^^^^
HA!!! Nice custom title!!!
HA!!! Nice custom title!!!
What this really means is shielding science from religious based politics.There was a time even most republicans were with that idea but when the pubs starting using the religious whacks as a constituency the influence of the right wing evangelical pro-life etc whacko's really became a problem.The only real solution if they insist on standing in the way of progress and enlightenment is for us to be as dogmatic and demanding as they are about things and push for the total abolition of these age old backward belief systems from our culture.Its not like don't they have a long history of standing in the way of progress and truth and still try to.Creationism etc etc etc.Just outlaw the nonsense lol.:thumbsup:
Philbert
Banned
Yeah...I forgot...you were/are a Rhodes Scholar, right? Unlike GW who only went to Yale, or Bill, or GB1...wait, weren't any of the past Presidents as smart as BHO or you? Thank God for the smartest President ever...he sure fed you a line of hooey, and now he's President! Wow! He is smart...:thumbsup:
So much wisdom so fast...let me try to understand what you're saying; you're not too clear, but I'll try...
So...there was a time: umm, when was this "time"? Middle Ages? Last year?
Did you mean no Democrats were ever down with religion dictating how we pursue research and science teaching?
Millions of Democratic Southern Baptists were all for Evolution Theory and not the Bible-based Creationism Theory, right?
Suddenly Republicans went far Right...all of them...and controlled the entire Government. There weren't any Democrats smart enough or numerous enough to stop them.
But...overnight Democrats took over...where were these vast numbers of enlightened voters hiding? In your neighborhood?
Now, there's hope because these wonderful enlightened Democrats have reappeared (I still want to know where they were all this time), and evil Republicans must be stopped. Is there a Law that Creationism is the only Theory allowed in schools? When did this happen? Got a timeline?
Since the Republican Right either appeared recently, or "they have a long history of standing in the way of progress and truth and still try to", I don't see where this conflict is resolved in your post.
You want to outlaw this nonsense? What nonsense? The rule of Law...where voters and their reps decide the way things go, or where one group decides what everyone does.
It's amazing how years of time pass, and suddenly the same folks who were here all the time aren't the least bit responsible for anything that happened...either all the Republicans who are pretty much mainstream or the religious Democrats who let it all go down, 'til what...a few months ago?
Since you seem to have a clear vision of how this all happened, could you please just clear up the slight discrepancy in the actual timeline?:dunno:
I eagerly await enlightenment...
religion is a primitive curse on mankind and progress
Philbert
Banned
Facetious
Moderated
George Soros sends his pre set telepromptor wherever Obama goes it seems.
These aren't Obama's ideas, they're György Schwartz's, aka -
george soreohhz's / Mr moveon.org's ideas.
Next up - pure unadulterated infanticide i.e. 11th hour, end of third trimester, whole baby abortion
arty:
These aren't Obama's ideas, they're György Schwartz's, aka -
george soreohhz's / Mr moveon.org's ideas.
Next up - pure unadulterated infanticide i.e. 11th hour, end of third trimester, whole baby abortion
arty:
Facetious
Moderated
What are you talking about ? How many of the russian communists were slaughtered by members of the russian orthodox church ? :spin: :updown: :turnturn:
Philbert
Banned
George Soros sends his pre set telepromptor wherever Obama goes it seems.
These aren't Obama's ideas, they're György Schwartz's, aka -
george soreohhz's / Mr moveon.org's ideas.
Next up - pure unadulterated infanticide i.e. 11th hour, end of third trimester, whole baby abortion
Inspite of all the spiteful posting here on FreeOnes, when those ideas are outed, I have confidence the large majority of all Americans will speak with one voice...absolutely positively NOT!
Somewhere between 5-6 months the baby has definately entered the building.
My girl was born perfect and healthy at just 8 months...
you don't know anything about me so shut up
Philbert
Banned
I can tell deep thinking isn't taking up too much of your time...:rofl:
...or what? You'll post again?
:rofl2:
ChefChiTown
The secret ingredient? MY BALLS
HAHAHA, oh dear God, please don't encourage it.
Violator79
Take a Hit, Spunker!
I'm in favor of it. Science has been obstructed by politics, both gov't and religion for so long that it's amazing that we've accomplished everything we have so far. Science can cure diseases, save lives, etc. Yes there are many, many good things that science can do, but make sure that with this "freedom", science doesn't fall into the wrong hands and another Hitler or Stalin is unleashed on the world.
Considering Bush was part of a family that was extremely rich and extremely politically elite when he went, I would say his Yale degree probably isn't worth the paper it's printed on. His actions over the past 8 years have pretty much proven he a couple cards short of a deck and more or less confirms that. His father wasn't anything to write home about in the brains department either.
While there are religious people on both sides of the aisle, and ones that that let that cloud their judgment, no objective neutral observer could come to any conclusion other than the fact that things are definitely skewed very heavily the Republicans way when it comes to religious nut fundamentalist as of the present.
It doesn't matter if they allow other theories besides creationism in schools. creationism isn't science, AT ALL. It's a philosophy. I suppose if a child is in a private school that his parents put him into and they want to teach theology or philosophy then so be it. It has no place in a public school. As far as science goes the theory of creationism has about as much merit as somebody saying that the world isn't real and we are all hooked up into a Matrix like device that powers some extraterrestrial's spaceship throughout the galaxy. Both have about the same level of proof you can attach to it.
As far as human embryos go, it's the mother's choice what she wants to do with it as far as I'm concerned (or both parents choice if it's outside the mother's body. I‘ll also admit not all their choices are what I would do or are what I‘m happy with, but I don‘t make it a point to dictate other people‘s lives.) It might be life, but until it's born it's not a person in my opinion. While some people don't like that, they probably think that way also even if they don't admit or don't realize it. I'm sure if some fire broke out in a fertility clinic and they have the chance to save either some person knocked out lying on the floor or thousands of cryogenically frozen embryos in a metal container but not both almost everybody is going to save the guy knocked out on the floor. The fact most people won't even think about it pretty much goes to show even they don't think of pre-born life as equivalent to what a person is.
While there are religious people on both sides of the aisle, and ones that that let that cloud their judgment, no objective neutral observer could come to any conclusion other than the fact that things are definitely skewed very heavily the Republicans way when it comes to religious nut fundamentalist as of the present.
It doesn't matter if they allow other theories besides creationism in schools. creationism isn't science, AT ALL. It's a philosophy. I suppose if a child is in a private school that his parents put him into and they want to teach theology or philosophy then so be it. It has no place in a public school. As far as science goes the theory of creationism has about as much merit as somebody saying that the world isn't real and we are all hooked up into a Matrix like device that powers some extraterrestrial's spaceship throughout the galaxy. Both have about the same level of proof you can attach to it.
As far as human embryos go, it's the mother's choice what she wants to do with it as far as I'm concerned (or both parents choice if it's outside the mother's body. I‘ll also admit not all their choices are what I would do or are what I‘m happy with, but I don‘t make it a point to dictate other people‘s lives.) It might be life, but until it's born it's not a person in my opinion. While some people don't like that, they probably think that way also even if they don't admit or don't realize it. I'm sure if some fire broke out in a fertility clinic and they have the chance to save either some person knocked out lying on the floor or thousands of cryogenically frozen embryos in a metal container but not both almost everybody is going to save the guy knocked out on the floor. The fact most people won't even think about it pretty much goes to show even they don't think of pre-born life as equivalent to what a person is.
Philbert
Banned
Not that I like quoting Hillary, but "it takes a village"...
Science and people need to co-exist...if one doesn't serve the other, like most things a balance is upset.
People of pure intellect and people of morals are needed together, to find that balance, and as long as this is accomplished the end results are lasting and good.
Hitler and Stalin are examples of an unbalanced environment...you and I may have differing views, but in the end we find a balance we can live with.
:fight:......:glugglug:......:lovecoupl........ :thumbsup:
Philbert
Banned
That was a lovely speech...but are you really saying Creationism is being taught anywhere in an American Public school?
Please share with us where that might be...last time I noticed there was nowhere Creationism was being taught as science curriculum.
And...while we are there...just how many Republicans and how many Democrats are in favor of Creationism?
Since you seem to have access to actual numbers...
Please don't tell me there aren't large numbers of Black, Latino, and White Baptist, Evangelical, and other Uber Religious Democrats...that wouldn't be very honest. They all believe in the Bible as the Literal Word of God.
And if you want to wear blinders, that's ok...but I'm sure most people don't think a 6, 7, or 8 month old fetus isn't a viable baby.
I watched an 8 month old baby removed from her mother and she was perfect...she could have just as easily been 7 months old, and just as viable.
Embryos aren't a real issue with the largest segment of the population...however, since most voters don't show up at poll time, religious forces have managed to get a lot of concessions in the past...but pendulums swing both ways.
I guess that since you are a republican supporter although I thought you had posted in other threads that science should not be interfered with and that stem cell research should be left to scientists without religious interefence you are trying to make a point here which will just not stand up to scrutiny.
While there may be some dems who are believers it has been clear since at least the 80s when pubs put things like wanting constitutional amendment banning abortion in party platform which party was much less secular in regards to public policy and religious interference.The pubs have tried to use the religious angle to their favor and catered to the extreme religious groups while the dems have been staunchly pro choice etc.
And yes religion has always been anti science if it found that it was in conflict with its dogma and still is.From the earth being the center of the universe to creationsim etc.While creationism may not be in schools now its not from a lack of trying by the religious right who has now tried to use the new phrase of intelligent design and get it back in schools.Bush advocated intelligent design be presented in schools as an alternative theory to evolution,even though there is zero scientific evidence for it.That is religion being brought into public policy.
So bottom line is when pubs drop the pro life-anti choice ,advocating for intelligent design type stuff they can call themselves secular.Till then the dems are clearly much less captive to religious dogma being part of public policy.
Similar threads
