Speaking for myself, I see no reason why evolution conflicts with my faith or vice versa. One does not threaten the other. Science is not, and should not be used as a philosophy or moral system, and religious texts do not teach us the table of elements or the workings of cellular biology. I do not expect one to serve the other's function; where truth is found, it is of God's creation.
As for climate change, I am deeply suspicious of the intrusion of politics into science. But that does not somehow translate into wanting dirty water and dirty air, etc. I subscribe to a much simpler, common-sense approach to the environment: being that regardless of whether or not we have altered the climate, it is just wise practice to clean up after ourselves (i.e. seek to minimize the contaminants that we put into the ecosystem, recycle more of our waste, and so forth), and to minimize our waste (again, recycling/reusing, and not using more energy, food, land, resources than we really need).
I do not want a hybrid or other high gas-mileage car for my next vehicle because someone whacked me over the head about climate change, which may or may not be caused by humanity. I want it because I see no reason to use more resources than I absolutely have to, and it is common sense to put fewer things into the atmosphere that the ecosystem was not designed to disperse in the quantities that we put them there. Frankly whether one of the effects is or isn't climate change I don't consider proven, but I KNOW there are plenty of proven bad effects from pollution to not need that as a motivation to be a good steward of the resources I am entrusted with.
I think we can implement such measures, develop cleaner technology, cut our resource consumption, and so forth, without a political football that comes with a lot of baggage like cap and trade.
Its okay to allow a fictitious super entity to scare followers into a moral system out of fear and hell fire, but can't fathom allowing tested science to sway their opinions?
The elderly and disabled will pass regardless of how much we spend.
Just how much debt would be acceptable to you to make it last a few years longer?
I like how when it comes to making sure medical care is readily accessible thats considered too much money and national debt is brought up, but military adventurism around the world which actually eats up more of the national budget is totally okay and if the cost is brought up you're a godd#$ed terrorist lover who hates America.
They're not all that common. Actually, this was the first I've seen, possibly ever, on these bo
Perhaps equally inconvenient is that only nuclear has any chance of offering anything approaching the Star Trek vision of the future, but (American) left-wingers are even more scared of nuclear than oil.
The elderly and disabled will pass regardless of how much we spend.
Just how much debt would be acceptable to you to make it last a few years longer?
Heck, my father just had hip replacement surgery this year, and spinal fusion surgery less than two years ago. I don't openly question the spending in front of him, as that would be rude. But I still think it's bat**** crazy for the federal government to pay the kind of money it did for those surgeries.
In a world of finite resources, and rational person would tell you that such spending is misguided. Invest it into the next generation, rather than keeping the current eldest generation on life support a little longer.
No offense, and you have my sympathies; with how difficult what little I've dealt with has been, I can't even imagine what you go through.
Unfortunately, I can't possibly expect the same level of financial support for myself or anyone from my generation; by that time, it's likely debt servicing will be the number one expenditure, and I won't be thanking my parents' or grandparents' generations for that.
That is the rationale that makes Conservatives hypocrites. Big businesses are entirely dependent on government handouts and any Government representative that they can buy in order to make them money. I find it hypocritical when Conservatives preach True Patriotism and True Capitalism when they are supported by big businesses who pay less in taxes in comparison to what they make, get more grants and other "free" government money than anyone, move their manufacturing to developing countries, and move their headquarters overseas in order to incorporate within that country to sidestep more taxes, yet call someone not loving America because he leads a group of people who wants to bring healthcare to all Americans.
Seriously, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell's portraits should be next to the word hypocrite in the dictionary and/or the wikipedia.
I like how when it comes to making sure medical care is readily accessible thats considered too much money and national debt is brought up,
Because it's an unending expenditure. It has no correlation to any sort of achievable goal. It's not something the federal government should be involved in, and it's not something they're explicitly responsible for.
but military adventurism around the world which actually eats up more of the national budget is totally okay and if the cost is brought up you're a godd#$ed terrorist lover who hates America.
I can see where your issue lies.
It doesn't "eat up more of the national budget." It's pennies compared to the cost of our social programs. Even at the height of the War on Terrorism, it couldn't even come close.
And, there's something to be said for maintaining global stability. That does indeed improve the lives of all people the world over. That said, I'd be happy to refocus any military and humanitarian efforts towards South America, and let the rest of the world rot in our absence.
"Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society." - Aristotle
Electric cars didn't even enter my thinking at this point, quite frankly...the fact that it is not viable without subsidy suggests to me that something is seriously suboptimal about the tech--something that will probably take real private enterprise to figure out and either fix, or supersede.
In contrast, costs seem to be trending down on hybrids and also on high-efficiency traditional combustion engine vehicles. These options are both definitely on my radar for an upcoming car purchase.
I agree about considering nuclear energy. Of course, in the US they will need to be very well engineered for earthquake protection, including in some parts of the country no one seems to consider as earthquake hazards (take the New Madrid fault, which is capable of dealing out near 9.0 earthquakes over a far more widespread area than the San Andreas ever could), AND the ability to withstand a direct hit from an EF5 tornado. While neither of these are threats France has ever had to deal with, I do think the engineering capability is there to do it right.
We'll probably want to progress towards getting nuclear fusion working in a viable manner (which BTW also puts out less waste and doesn't do the whole meltdown and spew radioactive isotopes over an area when it goes wrong), but until then I do think fission should be pursued with some strong, sound engineering behind it.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Don't know much about the Three Mile Island event, but Chernobyl was a case of deliberately bypassing a number of safety protocols, and who in their right mind would build a Nuclear Power Plant right in the centre of earthquake country?
As long as common sense and proper safety precautions are taken, Nuclear Power is incredibly safe.
Well I don't see Conservatives making threads attacking the left for not liking a fictional character.
Perhaps because "leftists" know the difference between reality and fantasy?
Once again getting back on topic, the OP was to show how someone is so blinded by their politics that they auto-hate a character simply because Obama said something nice about him.
It reminds me of a political cartoon I once saw where Obama made an announcement that Americans should breathe oxygen, and as a result, conservatives from coast to coast lay unconscious at their TV sets from holding their breaths until they passed out.
Big businesses are entirely dependent on government handouts
Not as much as you imply. Some are, such as Tesla Motors, but many aren't. Largely they just need a strong military to maintain global order, and policing to maintain local order. They could privatize the roads and bridges, and probably do us all a favor in the process.
Just look at how the federal government strongarmed multiple banks into accepting bailouts they didn't need, "for the sake of appearances."
I find it hypocritical when Conservatives preach True Patriotism and True Capitalism when they are supported by big businesses who pay less in taxes in comparison to what they make, get more grants and other "free" government money than anyone, move their manufacturing to developing countries, and move their headquarters overseas in order to incorporate within that country to sidestep more taxes, yet call someone not loving America because he leads a group of people who wants to bring healthcare to all Americans.
Every liberal I've met with any appreciable amount of wealth does exactly the same things. Many conservatives I've met with equally appreciable amounts of wealth do not; they're also more charitable.
Bush did indeed face a lot a criticism, some justified and some not. However, some of the things that Obama is facing are completely different than Bush.
Just some examples:
Referring to Obama as Mr. Obama. No other U.S. President has been referred to in this manner. It has always been, Mr. President or President <last name here>
Claiming that Obama is not a valid President has he is not a natural born citizen. It was shown by the state of Hawaii, that he was; but the claim still continues. If I recall correctly, it was started by Sarah Palin.
During the night of Obama's first inauguration, some members of the GOP met and planned to make sure that he was a one-term President. Some had gone on record as stating that they would kill anything proposed by the President.
I don't agree with everything Obama does or says; but I do feel that he has not been given the basic level of respect for his office by his opposition. You don't have to respect the man, but you should show some base level of respect for his position. When the critics went too far in going after Bush during his time in office, he at least had others (his supporters and some critics) that stated people should show him the respect of his office.
Anyway, I thought religion and politics were a no-no here.
"I'm not big on telepaths myself. I'm not big on guns either. But if everyone else has them, I want to make sure I can get my hands on the biggest one I can."
Perhaps because "leftists" know the difference between reality and fantasy?
Once again getting back on topic, the OP was to show how someone is so blinded by their politics that they auto-hate a character simply because Obama said something nice about him.
It reminds me of a political cartoon I once saw where Obama made an announcement that Americans should breathe oxygen, and as a result, conservatives from coast to coast lay unconscious at their TV sets from holding their breaths until they passed out.
Auto hate? From the bit I bothered to read of his commentary I'd rather not read the entire wall but it seems from early on he just never did care for Spock much to begin with.
Not as much as you imply. Some are, such as Tesla Motors, but many aren't. Largely they just need a strong military to maintain global order, and policing to maintain local order. They could privatize the roads and bridges, and probably do us all a favor in the process.
Just look at how the federal government strongarmed multiple banks into accepting bailouts they didn't need, "for the sake of appearances."
Every liberal I've met with any appreciable amount of wealth does exactly the same things. Many conservatives I've met with equally appreciable amounts of wealth do not.
You're not as open minded as you'd like to think.
Though I don't have much love for either of those guys myself.
Still, if you're not blaming Harry Reid, then you've been successfully misled by the liberal media.
With every post you make, the more I wonder if you made a typo when you tried to set up your account as "mentalmidget".
Didn't read the article, don't care to pay attention to what people like this have to say because people paying attention to them out of outrage is exactly what they're looking for.
The reason I'm here though is to point out that I thought the URL in OP's post was to a website called "freebacon.com". Suffice to say, I was sorely disappointed.
I'm not saying there aren't issues to work out, but working those issues out is literally the only way to achieve the kind of environmentally-friendly energy policy you want the world to adopt.
Not as much as you imply. Some are, such as Tesla Motors, but many aren't. Largely they just need a strong military to maintain global order, and policing to maintain local order. They could privatize the roads and bridges, and probably do us all a favor in the process.
Just look at how the federal government strongarmed multiple banks into accepting bailouts they didn't need, "for the sake of appearances."
Every liberal I've met with any appreciable amount of wealth does exactly the same things. Many conservatives I've met with equally appreciable amounts of wealth do not; they're also more charitable.
You're not as open minded as you'd like to think.
Though I don't have much love for either of those guys myself.
Still, if you're not blaming Harry Reid, then you've been successfully misled by the liberal media.
Reid is an amateur in comparison to those two. Boehner has shot down any proposal relating to the country's infrastructure in order to promote his secret plans, yet has shown nothing in the last couple of years.
Talking about my closed-mindness just because I absolutely disagree with anything involving GOP policies and practices literally makes no sense. I will not agree that poor people are just lazy, I will not agree that women who use contraceptives are TRIBBLE and TRIBBLE, I will not agree that advocating the use of biblical law is different than Shari'a law, I will not agree that on trying to use the Constitution to forcefully make schools teach Christianity in schools, nor will I agree that just because I didn't live in New York City on 9/11 makes me less of a patriot despite the same mayor saying at the time We are All New Yorkers.
Its okay to allow a fictitious super entity to scare followers into a moral system out of fear and hell fire, but can't fathom allowing tested science to sway their opinions?
Believe it or not, fear doesn't enter into it; it would take me quite a dissertation to explain in full depth, but what I can say succinctly is that as love is by definition an act of free will and coercion negates it, that faith out of fear is not the intent at all. I'd say Fyodor Dostoyevsky and C.S. Lewis do a far better job at explaining than I would, and those are the authors I would recommend you check out should you be curious about this assertion.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-) Proudly F2P.Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Radioactive contamination that will be sending out deadly levels of rads not just for centuries but for thousands of years, is what a conserva-troll like you thinks is "an issue to work out".
I hear that there are some lucrative job opportunities offered by the Malon for people like you.
Gotta give you some credit though. Here I was linking to an article some bonehead has made and your posts somehow managed to even out-derp that Yahoo.
Bush was made fun of relentlessly before the Ninth Month of 2001, mainly in his horrid speeches and the most vacationing of a sitting President despite being in office barely two years. What I am talking about, is the constant attacking of Obama ever since he said I want to run for President.
No one made fun of Bush's family nor heritage nor family history nor the fact that he existed as they do today of Obama. When Cheney shot his friend in the face, it was news for less than a week. If Biden shot anyone, he would have been brought on charges, along with Obama just because they try to shove it to him anyway they can.
Besides, it really ruins when your argument when you cannot even use spell check.
I missed one word....oh no. Now my point is invalidated. Attacking the inconsequential over delivering something of substance. I love how I am either a supporter of your position or the Devil and reviled. This is why politics are the way they are. :rolleyes:
You have selective memory, or selective reading. The incident with Cheney was in the news for more than just a week (Here is a sample article). It was ruled an accident. If it was Biden, the same would have occurred...it would have been ruled an accident.
Your partisanship isn't helpful.
I reiterate my statement. This is not even close to the worst Congress.
The 77th Congress passed Public Law 503, putting into law President Franklin Roosevelts Executive Order 9066 authorizing the internment of Japanese, German, and Italian Americans in 1942. (Put into perspective: George Takei's family was affected by this.)
There are others, but these came to mind.
I think we elect these people to keep them out of our neighborhoods. :P
Radioactive contamination that will be sending out deadly levels of rads not just for centuries but for thousands of years, is what a conserva-troll like you thinks is "an issue to work out".
Most the waste is tracked. One day, when Space Travel has a 100% safety record, or extremely close to it, the waste can be retrieved, and launched into space. Buried on the moon, sent into the sun, or who knows what. Before that, we may learn new ways to recycle it, and reuse it for beneficial purposes, but due to scaremongerers, nowhere near enough research is being done into this.
Most the waste is tracked. One day, when Space Travel has a 100% safety record, or extremely close to it, the waste can be retrieved, and launched into space. Buried on the moon, sent into the sun, or who knows what.
Comments
Its okay to allow a fictitious super entity to scare followers into a moral system out of fear and hell fire, but can't fathom allowing tested science to sway their opinions?
Only report the "leftist" ones, eh?
I like how when it comes to making sure medical care is readily accessible thats considered too much money and national debt is brought up, but military adventurism around the world which actually eats up more of the national budget is totally okay and if the cost is brought up you're a godd#$ed terrorist lover who hates America.
Three Mile Island.
Chernobyl.
Fukushima.
Yeah. Just leftist paranoia there. Uh huh
That is the rationale that makes Conservatives hypocrites. Big businesses are entirely dependent on government handouts and any Government representative that they can buy in order to make them money. I find it hypocritical when Conservatives preach True Patriotism and True Capitalism when they are supported by big businesses who pay less in taxes in comparison to what they make, get more grants and other "free" government money than anyone, move their manufacturing to developing countries, and move their headquarters overseas in order to incorporate within that country to sidestep more taxes, yet call someone not loving America because he leads a group of people who wants to bring healthcare to all Americans.
Seriously, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell's portraits should be next to the word hypocrite in the dictionary and/or the wikipedia.
Well I don't see Conservatives making threads attacking the left for not liking a fictional character.
Isn't that how several god-related threads spawn on the Internet?
I can see where your issue lies.
It doesn't "eat up more of the national budget." It's pennies compared to the cost of our social programs. Even at the height of the War on Terrorism, it couldn't even come close.
And, there's something to be said for maintaining global stability. That does indeed improve the lives of all people the world over. That said, I'd be happy to refocus any military and humanitarian efforts towards South America, and let the rest of the world rot in our absence.
In contrast, costs seem to be trending down on hybrids and also on high-efficiency traditional combustion engine vehicles. These options are both definitely on my radar for an upcoming car purchase.
I agree about considering nuclear energy. Of course, in the US they will need to be very well engineered for earthquake protection, including in some parts of the country no one seems to consider as earthquake hazards (take the New Madrid fault, which is capable of dealing out near 9.0 earthquakes over a far more widespread area than the San Andreas ever could), AND the ability to withstand a direct hit from an EF5 tornado. While neither of these are threats France has ever had to deal with, I do think the engineering capability is there to do it right.
We'll probably want to progress towards getting nuclear fusion working in a viable manner (which BTW also puts out less waste and doesn't do the whole meltdown and spew radioactive isotopes over an area when it goes wrong), but until then I do think fission should be pursued with some strong, sound engineering behind it.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Don't know much about the Three Mile Island event, but Chernobyl was a case of deliberately bypassing a number of safety protocols, and who in their right mind would build a Nuclear Power Plant right in the centre of earthquake country?
As long as common sense and proper safety precautions are taken, Nuclear Power is incredibly safe.
Here? At STO-forums? I must have missed those.
thank you for this, OP. Induced a solid ten-minute laughing fit, LOL.
Perhaps because "leftists" know the difference between reality and fantasy?
Once again getting back on topic, the OP was to show how someone is so blinded by their politics that they auto-hate a character simply because Obama said something nice about him.
It reminds me of a political cartoon I once saw where Obama made an announcement that Americans should breathe oxygen, and as a result, conservatives from coast to coast lay unconscious at their TV sets from holding their breaths until they passed out.
Just look at how the federal government strongarmed multiple banks into accepting bailouts they didn't need, "for the sake of appearances."
Every liberal I've met with any appreciable amount of wealth does exactly the same things. Many conservatives I've met with equally appreciable amounts of wealth do not; they're also more charitable.
You're not as open minded as you'd like to think.
Though I don't have much love for either of those guys myself.
Still, if you're not blaming Harry Reid, then you've been successfully misled by the liberal media.
Just some examples:
Referring to Obama as Mr. Obama. No other U.S. President has been referred to in this manner. It has always been, Mr. President or President <last name here>
Claiming that Obama is not a valid President has he is not a natural born citizen. It was shown by the state of Hawaii, that he was; but the claim still continues. If I recall correctly, it was started by Sarah Palin.
During the night of Obama's first inauguration, some members of the GOP met and planned to make sure that he was a one-term President. Some had gone on record as stating that they would kill anything proposed by the President.
I don't agree with everything Obama does or says; but I do feel that he has not been given the basic level of respect for his office by his opposition. You don't have to respect the man, but you should show some base level of respect for his position. When the critics went too far in going after Bush during his time in office, he at least had others (his supporters and some critics) that stated people should show him the respect of his office.
Anyway, I thought religion and politics were a no-no here.
Auto hate? From the bit I bothered to read of his commentary I'd rather not read the entire wall but it seems from early on he just never did care for Spock much to begin with.
With every post you make, the more I wonder if you made a typo when you tried to set up your account as "mentalmidget".
The reason I'm here though is to point out that I thought the URL in OP's post was to a website called "freebacon.com". Suffice to say, I was sorely disappointed.
well, not with idiots like you around...dude, you and your ****ed up opinions are actually not worth my time.
Name calling.
How typical.
Seriously? You just want to take your ball and go home?
How immature.
A liberal response. All these opinions being deemed wrong by you, don't you mean?
Reid is an amateur in comparison to those two. Boehner has shot down any proposal relating to the country's infrastructure in order to promote his secret plans, yet has shown nothing in the last couple of years.
Talking about my closed-mindness just because I absolutely disagree with anything involving GOP policies and practices literally makes no sense. I will not agree that poor people are just lazy, I will not agree that women who use contraceptives are TRIBBLE and TRIBBLE, I will not agree that advocating the use of biblical law is different than Shari'a law, I will not agree that on trying to use the Constitution to forcefully make schools teach Christianity in schools, nor will I agree that just because I didn't live in New York City on 9/11 makes me less of a patriot despite the same mayor saying at the time We are All New Yorkers.
Believe it or not, fear doesn't enter into it; it would take me quite a dissertation to explain in full depth, but what I can say succinctly is that as love is by definition an act of free will and coercion negates it, that faith out of fear is not the intent at all. I'd say Fyodor Dostoyevsky and C.S. Lewis do a far better job at explaining than I would, and those are the authors I would recommend you check out should you be curious about this assertion.
Christian Gaming Community Fleets--Faith, Fun, and Fellowship! See the website and PM for more. :-)
Proudly F2P. Signature image by gulberat. Avatar image by balsavor.deviantart.com.
Radioactive contamination that will be sending out deadly levels of rads not just for centuries but for thousands of years, is what a conserva-troll like you thinks is "an issue to work out".
I hear that there are some lucrative job opportunities offered by the Malon for people like you.
Gotta give you some credit though. Here I was linking to an article some bonehead has made and your posts somehow managed to even out-derp that Yahoo.
I missed one word....oh no. Now my point is invalidated. Attacking the inconsequential over delivering something of substance. I love how I am either a supporter of your position or the Devil and reviled. This is why politics are the way they are. :rolleyes:
You have selective memory, or selective reading. The incident with Cheney was in the news for more than just a week (Here is a sample article). It was ruled an accident. If it was Biden, the same would have occurred...it would have been ruled an accident.
Your partisanship isn't helpful.
I reiterate my statement. This is not even close to the worst Congress.
The 2nd Congress passed the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793
The 5th Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798
The 31st Congress passed the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850
The 21st Congress passed the Indian Removal Act in 1830
The 65th Congress passed the Eighteenth Amendment aka. Prohibition, the Espionage Act of 1917, and the Selective Service Act, and entered World War I.
The 77th Congress passed Public Law 503, putting into law President Franklin Roosevelts Executive Order 9066 authorizing the internment of Japanese, German, and Italian Americans in 1942. (Put into perspective: George Takei's family was affected by this.)
There are others, but these came to mind.
I think we elect these people to keep them out of our neighborhoods. :P
Most the waste is tracked. One day, when Space Travel has a 100% safety record, or extremely close to it, the waste can be retrieved, and launched into space. Buried on the moon, sent into the sun, or who knows what. Before that, we may learn new ways to recycle it, and reuse it for beneficial purposes, but due to scaremongerers, nowhere near enough research is being done into this.
Or Dump it to Crumpet.