APP - Ask me about social conservatism

I reject your premise, that they have evolved further than I.

So respond to the rest of the post. Are you familiar with the scientists and thinkers I mention? What do YOU mean by 'junk' science.
We cannot discuss unless we understand what you mean. There used to be junks plying the calm waters of the South China Sea, would that be the 'junk' to which your refer? Junk science, then, might be akin to boat design.
Seriously though. Tell me what you mean by junk science....... please.
 
Which sectarian prayer should be said in school? Remeber the founders created the bill of rights because they believed some rights were NOT to be left up to the whims of the Majority.

Death Penalty: Jesus said: You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. Jesus in his sermon reputiated an eye for an eye. So how does a follower of Christ justify support of the death penalty with Christ's command to turn the other cheek?

1. I'd like the choice of prayer to be by the class. If none can be agreed to unanimously then a moment of silent prayer would be appropriate.

2. Jesus was referring to interactions between individuals. The death penalty is a killing by the state, to punish a heinous crime.

John 19:10-11---Jesus And Capital Punishment

In these verses Pilate made two explicit affirmations in the presence of Christ: (a) he had certain power (authority) as a civil magistrate and (b) this authority included the right to pass and carry out a death sentence, vs. 10. In vs. 11, Jesus responded to these statements but didn't indicate that Pilate was in error in regard to either of them. Instead, He concedes the accuracy of Pilate's assertions with the significant observation that this authority was given to him by God.
http://www.bible.ca/ef/topical-the-bible-and-capital-punishment.htm
 
His premise is factual. Your's is rascist.
OIC. You're in the camp that this is racist:

6a00d8341c630a53ef0120a520e637970c-200wi


when in response to this:

Bush-the-Joker002-copy%5B1%5D.jpg
 
So respond to the rest of the post. Are you familiar with the scientists and thinkers I mention? What do YOU mean by 'junk' science.
We cannot discuss unless we understand what you mean. There used to be junks plying the calm waters of the South China Sea, would that be the 'junk' to which your refer? Junk science, then, might be akin to boat design.
Seriously though. Tell me what you mean by junk science....... please.

When the premise is rejected, there is no need to respond further to your question.

Junk science is science that ignores dissenting scientific opinion.
 
When the premise is rejected, there is no need to respond further to your question.

Junk science is science that ignores dissenting scientific opinion.

How many "scientists" reject evolution?

The amount of scientist worldwide who reject global warming is a little less than the number who work for Exxon/Mobil, never mind Monsanto and Dupont.
 
When the premise is rejected, there is no need to respond further to your question.

Junk science is science that ignores dissenting scientific opinion.

You didnot reject the premise you rejected a tongue in cheek piss take.
I would be interested to know more about dissenting scientific opinion. ALL science starts from a position of dissention. That is what science is. Unless you can show me I'm wrong.
 
How many "scientists" reject evolution?

The amount of scientist worldwide who reject global warming is a little less than the number who work for Exxon/Mobil, never mind Monsanto and Dupont.

Again, mine is not an all-out rejection of the theory, but a question of its limitations. There are many "holes" in the fossil record, and evolution does not explain the origin of life. Furthermore, and argument can easily be made of evolution being a tool of the Creator. "Junk" science evolution is the belief that life evolved from nothing.

Cite evidence of your claim with respect to the pint being discussed: man-made global warming.
 
You didnot reject the premise you rejected a tongue in cheek piss take.
I would be interested to know more about dissenting scientific opinion. ALL science starts from a position of dissention. That is what science is. Unless you can show me I'm wrong.

You just described one aspect of science that bolsters my argument against junk science.
 
I was looking forward to an interesting thread, but instead found the usual pablum. Right up front you notice nothing in the list about individual freedom, the only freedom noted is for an abstraction. Abstractions love freedom, it allows them exploitation under cover.

Number one is obvious, but no conservative has lived up to it including Reagan (see deficits url below). Capitalism has died many deaths and is in constant need of blood, aka taxpayer money. Only mixed economies work, isn't that clear by now? Free markets don't exist, never did, never will.

Whose prayer, non issue and should be in the home. Support birth control, support life, and we could possible take conservatives serious on abortion. Was shock and awe a sign of respect? Another meaningless abstraction that requires nothing from the freedom hating conservative.

Abstinence? You mean you have to teach that, but then later you say parents control education? Damn, no wonder you conservatives are so lame, you couldn't see a contradiction if it hit you on the head. So gays don't have the same rights as others? Individual freedom got lost, you think?

You mean there is a difference between the sexes? Boy, ah er girl, glad you told me, all this time I've wondered. Now this grandpa knows. Thanks conservatives.

Pornography is in the eye of the beholder and knowable to those of us mature enough to realize it will live on so long as males develop testosterone. There's that individual freedom lost again!

You can hug your guns all you like, just no howitzers or fighter planes in the backyard. EAE is that another abstraction useful in hiding corruption, aka plutocracy? 'Let em eat cake!'

You already have the death penalty, kills many an innocent person. DNA helps though. Parental control LOL Sure thing, where you been, the loonies already run the schools. Ask a teacher.

Already have these: Private medical care and retirement plans.

I can think of no social program that has failed completely, improvement sure. World government already exists. Note the UN and the European Union as examples.

Immigration? Thought you were against big government? This task would take big brother. Got an easy answer and not the usual conservative empty slogan?

Respect for everyone who serves honorably, seems a no brainer. Evolution is fact as is global warming. Almost every educated person knows that. Look in the mirror nude sometime if you need personal proof. See any similarities.

Low taxes for families, jeez now you sound like a liberal, thought you guys only worshiped corporations. You're confusing me now. Confederation - you mean the South will rise again? LOL This is another empty abstraction used when convenient.

We have a strong enough defense to destroy the world many times over, what we need now is reason.

In the end your list is meaningless pablum for ideologues and junior fascists. Is it any wonder in power conservatives fail badly?

If anyone wants to understand political conservatism, I suggest Albert O. Hirschman's brilliant 'The Rhetoric of Reaction.' "He argues that a triplet of 'rhetorical' criticisms--perversity, futility, and jeopardy--'has been unfailingly leveled' by 'reactionaries' at each major progressive reform of the past 300 years--those T. H. Marshall identified with the advancement of civil, political and social rights of citizenship...Charmingly written, this book can benefit a diverse readership." The Rhetoric of Reaction - Albert O. Hirschman - Harvard University Press.

What Is Conservatism and What Is Wrong with It?

The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England

http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html
 
Last edited:
1. I'd like the choice of prayer to be by the class. If none can be agreed to unanimously then a moment of silent prayer would be appropriate.

2. Jesus was referring to interactions between individuals. The death penalty is a killing by the state, to punish a heinous crime.


http://www.bible.ca/ef/topical-the-bible-and-capital-punishment.htm

Jesus just shortly after the quote about turning the other cheek in Matthew tells the disciples; Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,...Matt 28:19. Had he intended his message for just the people, he would have said to the disciples go and and make disciples of all PEOPLE. He didn't. He intended for all nations, once populated by the converted to adopt his message of love. Further Christ would have no more attempted to tell Pilate, and avowed polythiest that he commanded him to turn the other cheek. The argument that Christ was instructing individuals about turning the other cheek and NOT nations as well is a modern argument set up to help rightwingers who are also Christians feel better about their old testament leanings and their rejection of Christ's message of love and forgiveness. Not only that, but if you execute someone for their crime, you actually interfere with the possibility that they will ask Christ to come into their life and lord and savior and deliver them from sin and damnation.
 
Jesus just shortly after the quote about turning the other cheek in Matthew tells the disciples; Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,...Matt 28:19. Had he intended his message for just the people, he would have said to the disciples go and and make disciples of all PEOPLE. He didn't. He intended for all nations, once populated by the converted to adopt his message of love. Further Christ would have no more attempted to tell Pilate, and avowed polythiest that he commanded him to turn the other cheek. The argument that Christ was instructing individuals about turning the other cheek and NOT nations as well is a modern argument set up to help rightwingers who are also Christians feel better about their old testament leanings and their rejection of Christ's message of love and forgiveness. Not only that, but if you execute someone for their crime, you actually interfere with the possibility that they will ask Christ to come into their life and lord and savior and deliver them from sin and damnation.

Jesus recognized the authority of the state to impart justice. If the criminal repents and accepts Christ it has no impact on the required actions of the state.
 
wouldn't it be more accurate to say science begins with observation?.....

Well, I suppose one must observe first, but the same might be said about anything. Perhaps we should say that science is about doubt and discovery and progress whereas religion is about certainty, dogma and stagnation. It is because of the human desire for easy answers that religions exist. They (ALL) impede human progress and development.
 
Back
Top