General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
LifeIsEat&Die
 
LifeIsEat&Die's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by :ninja: View Post
No. No no no.


No.

gallup poll on drudge says that 80% of americans today believe in some sort of christianity.. for what its worth, gallup is a pretty good source
__________________
xbox live: skankbowlfight
9bf8a31d0b17522f141fd28d1c413a6a
Old 12-27-2007, 03:53 PM LifeIsEat&Die is offline  
Reply With Quote
#31  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Tom Kazansky
911 Was an Inside Job. Bush is traitor like Prescott Bush
 
Tom Kazansky's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeIRye View Post
The point of the thread - believing stupid shit in one area generally spreads to other areas of thinking. Example - your reading comprehension and the question you asked.



Guys, he actually insulted my reading comprehension after he believed everything I said about atheism breeding murder due to Joseph Stalin was completely serious.

You don't have a right to criticize anyone's reading comprehension, buddy.

And that question was completely valid, by the way. Believing in creationism doesn't affect your stance on environmental issues, and if you think so you're a complete idiot.

Answer my question, what do you think of Isaac Newton's theories on mechanics? Complete whack-job since he believed in Genesis creation, right?

__________________
ERTW - Engineers Rule The World
Old 12-27-2007, 04:03 PM Tom Kazansky is offline  
Reply With Quote
#32  

:ninja:
My cooter sweats, and reeks like rotting sea vermon.
 
:ninja:'s Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LifeIsEat&Die View Post
gallup poll on drudge says that 80% of americans today believe in some sort of christianity.. for what its worth, gallup is a pretty good source
And this is relevant to the beliefs of the founding fathers... how?

Read. Comprehend. Post.
__________________
Use Linux and BSD
Old 12-27-2007, 04:05 PM :ninja: is offline  
Reply With Quote
#33  

Enygma
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathlete View Post
This nation was not founded on Christian principles (whatever that means). The founding fathers are mostly in agreement on this as well. I suspect people just say it to make themselves feel better that Jesus wasn't mentioned anywhere in the constitution.

We shouldn't close off a particularly promising avenue of research just because another opened up. A very good Time editorial pointed out that the stem cell debate can't be about protecting life; otherwise republicans would be against in vitro fertilization, which destroys many embryos in the process by design.

the whole christian principles thing is a way for christians to imply that our nation was founded as a christian nation (false) by saying something that's entirely true. sure, it was founded upon the christian principles of freedom, equality and brotherhood of man. but it doesn't make people not retarded for saying it.
__________________
It is too difficult to think nobly when one thinks only of earning a living. ~ Jean Jacques Rousseau

this sig for sale, PM for details.
Old 12-27-2007, 04:20 PM Enygma is offline  
Reply With Quote
#34  

mathlete
I'm the cheapest person on this planet, maybe the universe.
 
mathlete's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enygma View Post
the whole christian principles thing is a way for christians to imply that our nation was founded as a christian nation (false) by saying something that's entirely true. sure, it was founded upon the christian principles of freedom, equality and brotherhood of man. but it doesn't make people not retarded for saying it.

Are freedom, equality, and brotherhood truly christian ideals? Is the nation truly founded on christian principles? Does the constitution protect the sabbath? Encourage people to honor their parents? Is god mentioned anywhere in it?

Sorry, I just don't see the connection.
Old 12-27-2007, 05:20 PM mathlete is offline  
Reply With Quote
#35  

:ninja:
My cooter sweats, and reeks like rotting sea vermon.
 
:ninja:'s Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathlete View Post
Does the constitution protect the sabbath?
I don't mean to be a nit-picker, but the sabbath day is not observed by Christians. It was done away with the New Covenant.
__________________
Use Linux and BSD
Old 12-27-2007, 05:38 PM :ninja: is offline  
Reply With Quote
#36  

mathlete
I'm the cheapest person on this planet, maybe the universe.
 
mathlete's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by :ninja: View Post
I don't mean to be a nit-picker, but the sabbath day is not observed by Christians. It was done away with the New Covenant.

Well, in the sense that strict observance is not required, you are right. Nonetheless, it's still an important day for many Christians. In the most basic sense, all that is required of christians is to accept Jesus as their lord and savior. So what constitutes christian principles then?
Old 12-27-2007, 05:50 PM mathlete is offline  
Reply With Quote
#37  

Xayd
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathlete View Post
This doesn't surprise me in the slightest. But Ron Paul recognizes that it isn't the president's responsibility to dictate education policy.

it has to be by federal guidelines. kansas has clearly demonstrated that they are not qualified to educate and govern themselves.
Old 12-27-2007, 06:40 PM Xayd is offline  
Reply With Quote
#38  

mathlete
I'm the cheapest person on this planet, maybe the universe.
 
mathlete's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xayd View Post
it has to be by federal guidelines. kansas has clearly demonstrated that they are not qualified to educate and govern themselves.

They self-corrected pretty well actually. The federal government didn't play a role there. The courts worked it out in Pennsylvania, again requiring no input from the president.

In general, I'd support you. But then again, all the candidates have crazy beliefs from my point of view. I actually trust Ron Paul more than most to not let them influence his political decisions.
Old 12-27-2007, 06:53 PM mathlete is offline  
Reply With Quote
#39  

Escaped Gorilla Genitals
Jim Morrison
Hey, Jim <3 ules, You didn't deserve this because you can't guess numbers but anyways BREAK ON TH
 
Escaped Gorilla Genitals's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMaN383 View Post
states dont teach anything. schools are a level of local government and should decide their own curriculum. parents should have a choice in what school their child attends and thus, if they want their child to be "educated" by a school run by idiot assholes, go for it. if not, they can send them to a school which does offer an acceptable curriculum. do you really think some state or federal law is going to force evolution down the throats of people in areas where parents want creationism to be taught? if parents want their kid to be raised to be just as ignorant as they are, its GOING to happen and it does not matter how much that pisses you off. you dont, no matter what size you grow government to, have more influence over a childs mind than their parents.
If we had taken that attitude towards education I can only imagine what sort of shit shape the average curriculum would be like in rural areas. You're right we can't force kids to believe evolution and a lot of them are probably going to believe whatever creationist bullshit their parents teach them, but the entire point of public education is giving people an opportunity for a proper education instead of whatever they could get at home. For every kid that believes what their parents say about evolution or creationism there is another that is exposed to the truth in classrooms and has an opportunity for a better education than they would have had that same opportunity been lacking because their parents found it offensive to their beliefs. They already have a choice to homeschool their kids if they don't want them to learn about evolution or whatever (which is wrong in my opinion), it's wrong to let the majority of people determine that children in public schools should learn lies just because they want to. There should be federal minimums to ensure that those in public school receive a proper education.

There is a point where parenting ends and propagandizing begin, at the very least the State should be making an effort to make sure children at least have an opportunity to learn the truth and definatley shouldn't be involved in propagating ignorance that's harmful to the childs education and society as a whole.

Last edited by Jim Morrison; 12-27-2007 at 07:07 PM..
Old 12-27-2007, 06:58 PM Escaped Gorilla Genitals is offline  
Reply With Quote
#40  

MrMaN383
Asshole Licking Douchebag
 
MrMaN383's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Morrison View Post
If we had taken that attitude towards education I can only imagine what sort of shit shape the average curriculum would be like in rural areas. You're right we can't force kids to believe evolution and a lot of them are probably going to believe whatever creationist their parents teach them, but the entire point of public education is giving people an opportunity for a proper education instead of whatever they could get at home. For every kid that believes what their parents say about evolution or creationism there is another that is exposed to the truth in classrooms and has an opportunity for a better education than they would have had that same opportunity been lacking because their parents found it offensive to their beliefs. They already have a choice to homeschool their kids if they don't want them to learn about evolution or whatever (which is wrong in my opinion), it's wrong to let the majority of people determine that children in public schools should learn lies just because they want to. There should be federal minimums to ensure that those in public school receive a proper education.

There is a point where parenting ends and propagandizing begin, at the very least the State should be making an effort to make sure children at least have an opportunity to learn the truth and definatley shouldn't be involved in propagating ignorance that's harmful to the childs education and society as a whole.

clearly you did not receive a proper education. i blame the federal government for this. please try reading my post again and perhaps you will understand it this time.
Old 12-27-2007, 07:12 PM MrMaN383 is offline  
Reply With Quote
#41  

Xayd
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathlete View Post
They self-corrected pretty well actually. The federal government didn't play a role there. The courts worked it out in Pennsylvania, again requiring no input from the president.

In general, I'd support you. But then again, all the candidates have crazy beliefs from my point of view. I actually trust Ron Paul more than most to not let them influence his political decisions.

federal courts = federal government in its purest form.

i agree that presidents are a bad judge of law, especially since bushes started winning elections, but states rights is a farce. it died with the civil war. the federal courts have to regulate the states, they can't control themselves.
Old 12-27-2007, 07:27 PM Xayd is offline  
Reply With Quote
#42  

mathlete
I'm the cheapest person on this planet, maybe the universe.
 
mathlete's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xayd View Post
federal courts = federal government in its purest form.

i agree that presidents are a bad judge of law, especially since bushes started winning elections, but states rights is a farce. it died with the civil war. the federal courts have to regulate the states, they can't control themselves.

In some cases, I might agree with you, others not. I'm not very fond at all of the federal government overriding California's decision to make medical marijuana legal, for instance.

In the Dover case, regardless of how it was presented, at its core, it's a religious establishment case which is in the purview of the federal government via the 1st and 14th amendments.

Last edited by mathlete; 12-27-2007 at 07:32 PM..
Old 12-27-2007, 07:29 PM mathlete is offline  
Reply With Quote
#43  

Xayd
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathlete View Post
In some cases, I might agree with you, others not. I'm not very fond at all of the federal government overriding California's decision to make medical marijuana legal, for instance.

In the Dover case, regardless of how it was presented, at its core, it's a religious establishment case which is in the purview of the federal government via the 1st and 14th amendments.

it should've ended in perjury charges too.

thou shalt not bear false witness indeed.
Old 12-27-2007, 08:54 PM Xayd is offline  
Reply With Quote
#44  

Slacker
 
Slacker's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PopeKevinI View Post
The complete misunderstanding of the term "theory" continues to grate on my nerves.

Seriously. It's like the word hypothesis has just gone out of the english language and been replaced by theory. A theory is very different from a hypothesis. And scientific laws - they're just theories as well.
__________________
[M]ilitary [M]ayhem
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy
Old 12-27-2007, 08:56 PM Slacker is offline  
Reply With Quote
#45  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:16 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.