Evolution Held Hostage

POSTED BY: misbehaven
UPDATED: Monday, August 21, 2006 21:25
VIEWED: 5944
PAGE 3 of 6

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

KANEMAN

Tuesday, August 15, 2006 5:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
technology is handy to cure diseases....that technology created to begin with.

Computer viruses aren't really diseases! Well not biological is all I'm sayin.

SEVENPERCENT

Tuesday, August 15, 2006 11:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
my friend you are being hypocritical!

Show me where I'm personally being hypocritical.

Quote:
any person, who claims to be religious, yet attempts to bring on armegeddon, is a heretic, hypocrite, and blasphemer.
the Bible says that antiChristian forces bring on Armageddon

Does Dear Leader and his band of Dominionists in office know that? Or Pat Robertson? Or Jerry Falwell? Those are the folks that are running the Christian show in America, and judging by your posts in other threads- if you're old enough to vote-I bet you voted for someone that claimed to be Christian (and wasn't, per your own definition you just provided - what's that nut's name in Colorado, the 'Christian' one that wanted to nuke Mecca?)

Quote:
your right, technology is handy to cure diseases....that technology created to begin with. just like we need bigger and better weapons to help win wars for peace..?

What diseases did tech create to begin with? Unless you're talking metaphorically about the human condition and some new social ones, you're talking out of your ass.

Quote:
im sure youve all heard "eye for an eye"? Jesus says not to repay evil with evil, but to let God discipline the world.

I do not think this quote means what you think it means. Eye for an eye is about just punishments - it's 'tooth for a tooth,' not cutting off a leg for a punch to the arm.

Quote:
Jesus also says Love is the fullfillment of the law, encompassing all other doctrines since one who loves infinitely, does no harm.
given those standards, what ethical code are these destructive maniacs following?

You tell me, they're your destructive maniacs. You said religion makes everything better, I'm pointing out that it's the religious nuts making everything worse. It's always the hardcore Christians I hear claiming they want to nuke something, or wanting to let the poor starve, or clamoring for intrusion into private lives.

Quote:
could it be that they decide for themselves what is right or wrong? with God, we have universal rules we try to follow

Which contradict each other in every other chapter. Which may be part of the problem.

Quote:
im not saying Man cant have a conscience without God,

Sure you are; this whole message is a response to that assertion on your part. You do it in your next sentence, too.

Quote:
but if man never had such influences, would we ever have progressed beyond survival of the fittest?

------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, August 15, 2006 2:59 PM

Okay, I have to confess I'm still at a loss to what Auraptor's angle is, but maybe he's the libertarian conservative he says he is, and just hasn't caught up with the rest of us on terrorists live in washington.

Anyway, this evolution this is a fake debate. I don't get it, a fake debate is always more than just a distraction. My guess is that it's a suicide platform. Get the Xtians riled up about anti-evolution and then present a republican candidate with "your party, sir" - what can he do?

Figure this 2008: McCain gets the republican nomination, and the evolution issue comes up, he's got two options:

1. Say "I support evolution" and have all the christian loons desert him for lou dobbs' 3rd party run.

2. Say "I support both" and have all the moderates run for the hills and support lou dobbs.

It's a lose-lose and helps give us H.R.Clinton.

Next, Immigration- another fake debate.

Purpose? who knows. My guess, split conservatives on unnatural boundaries, rather than christian neocon loon vs. sane fiscal conservative, it splits them on isolationist vs. melting pot, not a line they would split on natually given the real debates currently raging. This allows them to put either group to lou dobbs, helps keep liberals who might vote for her royal highness from voting for dobbs, prevents real criticism of bush policies.

IMHO, We're screwed guys.

McCain/Condi
Dobbs/?
Benator/Hillary

Hey, how about Joementum for Dobbs' running mate?

RUE

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 12:25 AM

USers have a strange love of ignorance. It shows up all sorts of places -
- I don't know much about art, but I know what I like
- with all that fancy education
- don't know much about history, don't know much geography ....

It has to do with some notion that the 'common man' - uncivilized, uneducated - is not a, well, lout, but a diamond in the rough. It equates education with being uppity and arrogant, effete, both gullible and corrupt at the same time ... Education got a reprieve after Sputnik when 'hard scientists' got a measure of public respect, but that didn't last long.

And that has to do with one of those chasms of thought so easily spanned in the mind. At one and the same time, the US is a classless society - but built on the integrity of the hardworking lower class. (Though however hard they work, Hispanic maids and farm-workers need not apply. This honest base is white.)

So yeah, the US is in love with all things ignorant - fundamentalist religion (Don't think ! - BELIEVE), poor education, isolationism, narrow thinking, and so on.

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 3:00 AM

Rue,

I beleive we call it the MSM. Endorsing ignorance in the populace for well at least 70 years. The US Govt. and it's associated establishmentarians got together and decided the biggest threat to the status quo was an educated populous, so, as my man says, keep the minds empty and the bellies full.

Too full, a lot of full bellies in america. ignorant fat f^&ks

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 3:47 AM

Sevenpercent=

lets say that no God exists for a second OK, therefore no religions etc

that would mean that the Hitlers, the Stalins, the Maos of the world, chose to do such aweful things, justifying them in their own consciences. no God exists, therefore no evil exists, and everybody on earth acts morally, or immorally, based on their own personal opinions of ethics.

i hear this a lot from non-believers...im constantly told .."there is no Satan, people choose to do bad things out of their own will"

right here is precisely the hypocracy! whether God exists or not, everybody acts of their own free will! so what makes these alleged "Christians" in power any different? are you suggesting theyre acting on behalf of God?

someone IS NOT A Christian if they are not following the doctrines of Christianity

...meanwhile your telling me that the absence of God, ultimate human free will, would prevent, or solve all these problems?

im trying to understand the logic.

=one person is God fearing, and they believe there are eternal consequences for their choices, therefore they treat everyone as they would want to be treated.
=there is another person who decides for himself what is right and wrong, and does not fear any consequences, outside of the law

your telling me the devout Christians, God fearing, are responsible for the immoral actions of society?

now, if your argument is that some Christians are only believers in word, and not in action, then i agree with you.

Jesus say about such a person "I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were one or the other. So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. Because you say, "I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing'--and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked-"

but no faithful believer would do such inexplicable things to another

i would pose that the absence of God, and doctrines of Love are the causes of the worlds problems.

"an eye for an eye" refers to legal matters, justice and social equality; it is not condoning revenge or malice. Jesus says "if someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to him the other", because God is the only person fit to judge. carma exists, and it always pays it dues, which is why Jesus also says "let he who is without sin throw the first stone"..because no one is perfect, no one is qualified or justified under such circumstances, but God.

how can you identify someone who breaks these laws, as faithful representatives of our faith??

and finally, Pat Robertson, Jack VanImpe, i have no personal beef with them, as christians...but they are interpreting prophecy, based off the news that is being handed down from the establishment. you cant interpret prophecy accurately if you arent basing them off of factual events; i think this is the difference between us. they think Rome is mystery Babylon, and i think America is. therefore, they will support Bush and his war, because they do not see him as an occult conspirator. i on the other hand, believe he is one, therefore the outcome of my predictions is different.

my view about technology and the world is different, because i believe it is being used to enslave us; someone who doesnt believe the government is molevolent, believes that technology is useful to secure national defense etc.

one group of Christians, according to prophecy, will be decieved into believing a lie, until they realize that they helped bring to power the antiChrist. which group will that be? that ones whove all along believed Bush to be an occultist, or the ones who supported him? maybe it is those Christians you are angy at..but i would argue they are being decieved by false doctrines

Christianity back for a second. if Hitler were to actually subscribe, literally to accept into his heart the teachings of Jesus', i dont believe he would have done what he did; because it contradicts all of our teachings.

so lets look

YINYANG

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 6:03 AM

Quote:
i would pose that the absence of God, and doctrines of Love are the causes of the worlds problems.

And, I would pose that you are wrong. So, let's agree to disagree, because this isn't getting us anywhere.

Or, feel free to ignore me, 'cause that's fun, too.

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:57 AM

Quote:
dreamtrove wrote:
Tuesday, August 15, 2006 04:59
Okay, I have to confess I'm still at a loss to what Auraptor's angle is, but maybe he's the libertarian conservative he says he is, and just hasn't caught up with the rest of us on terrorists live in washington.

I've always tried to make my views open and clear to understand for all who read my post. If there's any confusion, one needs only to ask.

And which terrorists in Washington would those be ? That's where I'm at a loss to what YOU mean.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 12:03 PM

Antimason,

I think my point was that the old testament Yhwh becomes a political precedent for his followers. I don't think Bush really believes, I'm not sure Hilter did, (Stalin and Mao were atheists) but they base their actions on biblical precedent, and it's a book chock full of bad ideas. It's like, America worked for a long time because the founding fathers had good ideas, you fall back on those, you're okay. Where I think the democrats go wrong is Andrew Jackson, they're founder, was an evil guy. This enables Kerry, Clinton, Johnson, Truman, to fall back on a 'good enough for Jackson' kind of mentality, it's a perpetual cycle of repeating historical mistakes.

I have no problem with the concept of God, but with the political precedent of the bible, which would think that OBL and GWB were just what the deity ordered.

BTW, I'm not convinced Pat Robertson is a believer, I suspect he's a hired gun of the neocon machine, and always has been.

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, August 16, 2006 12:23 PM

9-11 conspiracy, nice and simple.

step one: Study 9-11 ad nauseum
step two: throw out everything implausiable.
step three: determine who's left as suspects based on the simple rules of criminal investigation: Motive, means, and opportunity.

This, and piles of evidence, leads you in two directions:

1. To the Middle East, particularly Saudi Arabia.
2. To Washington, to Republicans and Democrats.

I came to the conclusion that the most likely suspects are:

A) Some Al Qaeda terrorists, not OBL directly.
B) Neocon underlings and Social dems.

Group A has motive, but probably not means, and certainly not opportunity.
Group B has all three, but no way of getting away with it.

Group A hates america, and is willing to kill itself for a f^&k you.
Group B knows group A's planes won't do jack, but wants to pass the patriot act, and get into WWIII, which is already going on, but will grow again with out help.

So, terrorists in Washington are those people who are involved in a 9-11 conspiracy, assuming any exist. They committed an act of terror against NY, and now they do it against Baghdad, Basra, Najaf, etc. And lately, Beirut. Plain and simple.

What I think most people miss is that it really changes very little. Everyone's like "9-11 conspiracy changes everything" if true, but it doesn't. It's an incident to get us into a war, like the Lusitania, (no, I don't buy the pearl harbor conspiracy ie let it happen in 1941 to get us into wwii.)

Now we're in the war. But I think an in depth digging finds not a lot of successful muslim terrorism that doesn't have a western co-conspirator. The russian school bombing used russians, etc.

So sure, muslims who hate us and want to kill us exist, and there are more of them daily, as we genocide their people. We need to find a way out of this mess together.

My point specifically was:

Trusting GWB to those of us who did our homework on 911 is very much like trusting OBL. I don't think OBL planned 911, I don't think GWB did. But, I think people in OBL's organization were involved, and I think people in GWB's organization were involved, and I would suspect probably withoth their respective leaders knowledge.

ie. I don't trust GWB & co to fix what the co may have got us into, just as you, (and I) don't trust OBL & co.

is this a radical position? sure, but as I said, more than a third of americans have this radical position, and more than half of those are republicans/conservatives.

And no, this is not a plug for "we need a change of leadership, we need a change of course, ie we need a democrat" I think that there were dem conspirators as well, and Hillary and Difi are probably up there, as chief crafters of the patriot act, they had to know that it would take 'an incident' to get their legislation passed. They didn't have to know 'what incident' but when you sign on to allow an incident to happen, you're letting foxes into the chicken house and are completely responsible for what happens.

So, where we are now is where we are now. Where we go from here is up to us. I just don't think a policy of 'get them arabs' is going to get us anywhere good.

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE