Previous thread (part3): HERE (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/politics-world-events/597130-republican-field-primary-thread-part-3-a-84.html)
Enjoy!
Thor Simpson
02-13-12, 09:02 AM
Now that it's down to Ron Paul and Romney, expect Paul to name Romney his Secretary of State in order to lock this up. Then we can get on to the nasty stuff as the Republicans focus on Obama's war record.
CRM114
02-13-12, 09:05 AM
Breitbart keeping it classy:
http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4od4QQVK1o
Wow. What the hell? Freaks and animals? Stop raping people? That dude is insane (and looking for a good ass kicking, it seems).
Man, I can't imagine anyone caring about this. I think this would be as big as some story about a WA politician buying a microwave in OR and not reporting sales tax. It's silly to think he is somehow screwing Pennsylvania. And I don't like the guy. Well, except for the fun of watching people react to him. It's a good Palin alternative in that respect.
That story basically lost him his Senate seat so I suppose people did care. Mostly Western PA people though. The Eastern PA people gave him the boot because he is insane. And I'd say bilking a local school district out of (lets say a lowball number of $5000 per kid x 7 kids) $35,000 a year is pretty significant.
CRM114
02-13-12, 09:05 AM
Can we please get past the Ron Paul obsession? After a while, the left wing dropped the Ralph Nader ruse too.
mosquitobite
02-13-12, 09:23 AM
Can we please get past the Ron Paul obsession? After a while, the left wing dropped the Ralph Nader ruse too.
Does someone already have the 1144 pledged delegates needed to win the convention on the first ballot? :hscratch:
CRM114
02-13-12, 09:35 AM
http://www.issues2000.org/Ralph_Nader.jpg
wishbone
02-13-12, 09:42 AM
Wow. What the hell? Freaks and animals? Stop raping people? That dude is insane (and looking for a good ass kicking, it seems).Occupy is a peaceful protest.
classicman2
02-13-12, 09:44 AM
http://www.issues2000.org/Ralph_Nader.jpg
You were a big supporter of Ralph Nader, weren't you?
CRM114
02-13-12, 10:22 AM
I admire Nader greatly as a person but never supported his candidacy.
Navinabob
02-13-12, 10:25 AM
For some odd reason, I thought Ralph Nader and Ron Paul were the same person for the longest time, :shrug:
CRM114
02-13-12, 10:26 AM
They probably share a lot of supporters, oddly enough.
Sean O'Hara
02-13-12, 10:40 AM
They probably share a lot of supporters, oddly enough.
No, I voted for Nader twice, but I couldn't do it for Ron. Rand's another story, though.
Time to form a super PAC and give Mr. Harold Simmons a call.
Thor Simpson
02-13-12, 11:35 AM
Rand Paul is a freaky dude. What grown man does that? (Let alone wear beige plaid shorts?) ;)
My point was that Obama is a wonderful person who is a good role model to kids because he wears a helmet, and that he is able to place not one, but two clubs behind his back and hold them with his elbows.
Rand Paul is a freaky dude. What grown man does that? (Let alone wear beige plaid shorts?) ;)
He's been talking to The Maestro. It's an old conductor's trick he learned from Leonard Bernstein.
Jaymole
02-13-12, 12:34 PM
Tell me your point and I'll tell you mine.
I think everyone knows your obvious and tired counterpoint
Thor Simpson
02-13-12, 12:37 PM
I think everyone knows your obvious and tired counterpoint
Whereas the original post was fresh, fun and full of zing!
By the way, Obama released a 3.8 TRILLION dollar budget today. That's more than Romney makes in 10 years.
Why must Super Duper Tuesday be so far away? Are there any interesting primaries before then?
CRM114
02-13-12, 01:15 PM
Arizona and Michigan. Let's go Rick!
CRM114
02-13-12, 01:21 PM
I actually don't know who Breitbart is.
C'mon man. Its a reference to a post on the page BEFORE this one.
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/11113042-post2081.html
Thor Simpson
02-13-12, 01:37 PM
I don't usually click video links unless I think they'll be interesting. I clicked it. I still don't know who Breitbart is, and it wasn't interesting. But thanks.
Sean O'Hara
02-13-12, 01:41 PM
I don't usually click video links unless I think they'll be interesting. I clicked it. I still don't know who Breitbart is, and it wasn't interesting. But thanks.
Remember the ACORN/hookers brouhaha? Brietbart was a backer of the filmmaker. He owns several rightwing blogs, including Big Hollywood, where washed up celebrities go to blog about how they aren't really washed up but no one will give them jobs because they're conservative.
Navinabob
02-13-12, 01:44 PM
C'mon man. Its a reference to a post on the page BEFORE this one.
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/11113042-post2081.html
I had to look it up too Thor. I knew the name vaguely, but I didn't know specifically that he was a Tea-Party darling. Sadly, after that embarrassing display, he'll likely be more endeared.
JasonF
02-13-12, 01:58 PM
Thor, Breitbart is the guy you referenced in these posts:
If anyone gets me the video we can split the 10 grand from Breitbart.
I highly doubt it was Breitbart who tweeted his junk, passing it off as Weiner.
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/politics-world-events/591295-weiner-tweets-his-junk-2.html#post10796606
I'm not doing that to call you out -- you made two posts refering to the guy, neither of which required you to know anything about him beyond the post you were responding to. But he's a guy who's been around for a while and is reasonably prominent in the news. Not Obama prominent or Mitch McConnell prominent, but maybe Ed Schultz prominent or Andrew Napolitano prominent, such that it's not unreasonable to expect that someone who is participating in a political discussion knows who he is (the guy was heavily involved in the ACORN nonsense, the Shirley Sherrod nonsense, and the Anthony Weiner nonsense, among other things). Or if not, is willing to take 60 seconds to google his name and read his wikipedia entry.
CRM114
02-13-12, 01:59 PM
You'd think one of the more prominent right wing posters here would know who Breitbart is considering he's one of the poster boys for the modern movement.
You'd think one of the more prominent right wing posters here would know who Breitbart is considering he's one of the poster boys for the modern movement.
Like JasonF said, it looks like he's mostly involved in nonsense. Which means left wing posters are probably more likely to remember him than right wing ones, because pointing out the fact that douchebags are douchey is the best retort to disregard conservative arguments without actual thought. I don't remember the names of anyone involved in the ACORN fluff or the Weiner "scandal."
I would enjoy a tour of your "modern movement" room someday to see what other posters you have on the wall.
wishbone
02-13-12, 02:23 PM
You'd think one of the more prominent right wing posters here would know who Breitbart is considering he's one of the poster boys for the modern movement.Considering that Republicans are outnumbered 4:1... just saying.
CRM114
02-13-12, 02:39 PM
Like JasonF said, it looks like he's mostly involved in nonsense. Which means left wing posters are probably more likely to remember him than right wing ones, because pointing out the fact that douchebags are douchey is the best retort to disregard conservative arguments without actual thought. I don't remember the names of anyone involved in the ACORN fluff or the Weiner "scandal."
I would enjoy a tour of your "modern movement" room someday to see what other posters you have on the wall.
He runs one of the most prominent brands in the conservative universe. C'mon.
Venusian
02-13-12, 02:43 PM
He runs one of the most prominent brands in the conservative universe. C'mon.
what is that? I honestly don't know
wendersfan
02-13-12, 02:47 PM
what is that? I honestly don't know
http://www.breitbart.com/
CRM114
02-13-12, 02:54 PM
And my favorite:
http://biggovernment.com/
with this headline:
BREITBART CONFRONTS OCCUPY THUGS AT CONSERVATIVE CONFERENCE rotfl
Sean O'Hara
02-13-12, 03:05 PM
He runs one of the most prominent brands in the conservative universe. C'mon.
I wouldn't go that far. Big Hollywood's the only one of his blogs I'm familiar with outside of the occasional newsworthy troll on his part. He's nothing compared to the National Review or Limbaugh.
Artman
02-13-12, 03:07 PM
BREITBART CONFRONTS OCCUPY THUGS AT CONSERVATIVE CONFERENCE
'Thugs' almost gives them too much credibility...
Thor Simpson
02-13-12, 03:08 PM
I don't shop at Conservative Universe, but I've heard their suits are full of fluff. Still better than the empty ones over at Liberal Expo.
wishbone
02-13-12, 03:23 PM
Hip hip hooray for Citizens United. (No! says Alito.)
http://cdn.crooksandliars.com/files/movieimages/2010/01/11677.jpg?key=1264656387Yes! says Obama... 740 days later.
MoviePage
02-13-12, 06:39 PM
STRAW MAN!
I just wanted to say that since the new thread is on page 2 now and nobody has accused anyone else of making one yet. It didn't feel right.
dork
02-13-12, 06:47 PM
STRAW MAN!
I just wanted to say that since the new thread is on page 2 now and nobody has accused anyone else of making one yet. It didn't feel right.
That's one of the most unique posts ever. :up:
Navinabob
02-13-12, 06:56 PM
STRAW MAN!
I just wanted to say that since the new thread is on page 2 now and nobody has accused anyone else of making one yet. It didn't feel right.
Just claim it correctly or I'll... :johnwoo2:
JasonF
02-13-12, 07:40 PM
That's one of the most unique posts ever. :up:
:hairpull:
Thor Simpson
02-13-12, 08:18 PM
:hairpull:
Is that straw coming out of your ears?
eXcentris
02-13-12, 10:09 PM
Considering that Republicans are outnumbered 4:1... just saying.
Otter Republican bumper sticker: "WE ARE THE 20%"
CRM114
02-14-12, 08:02 AM
Play the CANDIDATE MATCH GAME (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/candidate-match-game)!
Decent task for undecided Republicans.
wendersfan
02-14-12, 08:23 AM
I got Huntsman. :sad:
Jaymole
02-14-12, 08:35 AM
I got Obama...followed by Huntsman and then Paul.
wishbone
02-14-12, 08:39 AM
I got Huntsman. :sad:Same...
CRM114
02-14-12, 08:48 AM
I know I'd be much happier with Huntsman than any of the clowns left in the race on the Repub side. Because, after all, there is a slim chance a Repub might win.
Tracer Bullet
02-14-12, 08:56 AM
I got Paul, followed by Huntsman and Obama. I guess that's what happens when you answer "none of the above" to most of the questions. Seriously, 3 out of 11 for Paul and 2 out of 11 for Huntsman and Obama doesn't instill me with a lot of confidence that I'd want to support any of these guys.
mosquitobite
02-14-12, 09:03 AM
Paul with 7, then Huntsman & Obama each with 2.
classicman2
02-14-12, 09:03 AM
I got Huntsman. :sad:
So did I. I guess I'd better change some of my answers. :)
Artman
02-14-12, 10:33 AM
I got the Newtster... his ideas are good, his presentation and campaign not so much. Moon colony 2020!!
Groucho
02-14-12, 10:48 AM
#1 Obama
#2 Huntsman
#3 Paul
When I took a similar quiz in 2008 my matching candidate was Joe "Say It Ain't So" Biden.
Thor Simpson
02-14-12, 11:00 AM
#1 Huntsman (5)
#2 Obama (3)
#3 Gingrich (2)
Maybe our voting process should look more like this game.
CRM114
02-14-12, 11:09 AM
Poor Huntsman. NOW he's getting the recognition. Imagine if it were Huntsman vs Romney at this point and no Newt or Santorum.
By the way, I heard that polls are showing Santorum leading in Michigan, Romney's "home" state. I think we might be seeing Sanmentum picking up. Nice choice, Repubs. :lol:
sracer
02-14-12, 11:23 AM
I got the Newtster... his ideas are good, his presentation and campaign not so much. Moon colony 2020!!
People continue to say how intelligent Newt is... I continue to fail to see his brilliance.
CRM114
02-14-12, 11:28 AM
People continue to say how intelligent Newt is... I continue to fail to see his brilliance.
Mr Gingrich is right when he says that when you donate to an Obama Super Pac you fund a mentally wrong candidate.
Tommy Ceez
02-14-12, 01:37 PM
Poor Huntsman. NOW he's getting the recognition. Imagine if it were Huntsman vs Romney at this point and no Newt or Santorum.
By the way, I heard that polls are showing Santorum leading in Michigan, Romney's "home" state. I think we might be seeing Sanmentum picking up. Nice choice, Repubs. :lol:
There's no way to convince me that the timing of Obama's birth control announcement wasnt specifically designed to do the above.
Navinabob
02-14-12, 02:06 PM
Because if you know you'll have a tight race, pissing off the predominant religion in the US and risking alienating those voters on the off-chance that it'll push upwards a more religious-conservative that might be easier to beat is a sound election strategy in your mind? :hscratch:
Venusian
02-14-12, 02:24 PM
Tight race?
TheMovieman
02-14-12, 02:28 PM
The thing about polls is, especially in this race, they seem to change on a dime. How much was Romney leading in South Carolina coming out of New Hampshire? How much was Gingrich leading in Florida coming out of South Carolina? Heck, even the latest poll in Colorado had Romney up by 10 and he lost by 5.
CRM114
02-14-12, 03:00 PM
Because if you know you'll have a tight race, pissing off the predominant religion in the US and risking alienating those voters on the off-chance that it'll push upwards a more religious-conservative that might be easier to beat is a sound election strategy in your mind? :hscratch:
No, it would make Santorum the nominee who is insane and would self-destruct when he opens his mouth on the national stage.
Thor Simpson
02-14-12, 03:11 PM
He's not on the national stage right now?
Tracer Bullet
02-14-12, 03:57 PM
He's not on the national stage right now?
Why are we talking about a "national stage" in this thread? Sounds like socialism.
Thor Simpson
02-14-12, 04:18 PM
Not really. :shrug:
wishbone
02-14-12, 04:21 PM
Why are we talking about a "national stage" in this thread? Sounds like socialism.That would be more like national stage-stage.
Josh-da-man
02-14-12, 06:15 PM
Just heard on the news that Santorum is gaining ground on Romney nationally.
I wonder if folks like Perry, Bachmann, and Cain are regretting dropping out so early.
Thor Simpson
02-14-12, 06:24 PM
I would imagine all the previous candidates are regretting it, other than Cain.
Artman
02-14-12, 10:44 PM
I wonder if folks like Perry, Bachmann, and Cain are regretting dropping out so early.
Not so much them, they had their time. (too much to begin with imo) It's the candidates who didn't run who are probably wondering "what if".. . I'm convinced this would've been Huckabee's nomination if he was in it.
PenguinJoe
02-15-12, 01:34 AM
I got Huntsman and Obama.
starman9000
02-15-12, 07:18 AM
Not so much them, they had their time. (too much to begin with imo) It's the candidates who didn't run who are probably wondering "what if".. . I'm convinced this would've been Huckabee's nomination if he was in it.
I thing boring old T-Paw is regretting it.
tommyp007
02-15-12, 08:14 AM
Obama, Romney(!), Huntsman
mosquitobite
02-15-12, 08:15 AM
Remember [supposedly] Romney won Maine by less than 200 votes...
wHLXsgn4_B0
Reality Check: GOP vote fraud in Maine (http://www.fox19.com/story/16937227/reality-check-was-there-voter-fraud-in-maine)
It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything. ~Joseph Stalin
.
Groucho
02-15-12, 08:24 AM
Pretty sure the allegations are false. If there's one thing I've learned from this forum, it's that only Democrats commit voter fraud.
starman9000
02-15-12, 08:29 AM
Romney invented Obamacare in Taxachussets. He IS a Democrat. :mad:
Venusian
02-15-12, 08:31 AM
Pretty sure the allegations are false. If there's one thing I've learned from this forum, it's that only Democrats commit voter fraud.
I learned that no one commits voter fraud. The GOP made it up to disenfranchise the poors and the blacks
JasonF
02-15-12, 08:52 AM
I learned that no one commits voter fraud. The GOP made it up to disenfranchise the poors and the blacks
The issues in Maine aren't voter fraud. They are problems (perhaps accidental, perhaps intentional) in the way the votes are being counted. Certainly, no Democrat who remembers Florida 2000 will say that there aren't problems with the way we count votes in this country. But this wasn't a problem that could have been fixed with voter IDs.
Besides, there are no black people in Maine. ;)
One interesting fact I learned from watching the Maddow video: there was a big snowstorm in the one county Ron Paul won in 2008. We all knew Rep. Paul's supporters were more dedicated, but to me, that puts a big asterisk next to that victory. If the relatively lukewarm supporters of other candidates has showed up for the 2008 caucus in that county, would Rep. Paul have won it? Ultimately, it doesn't matter -- a win is a win, but I thought it was interesting.
Sean O'Hara
02-15-12, 09:09 AM
I got Huntsman. :sad:
I got a rock.
kvrdave
02-15-12, 11:19 AM
Romney invented Obamacare in Taxachussets. He IS a Democrat. :mad:
He is whatever he needs to be to get the most votes. The man has no core. But hell, there are worse things.
Dr Mabuse
02-15-12, 11:27 AM
He is whatever he needs to be to get the most votes. The man has no core. But hell, there are worse things.
Yeah... that guy is the archetype of the empty suit bullshit artist. A narcissistic sociopath without a single fiber of substance in him.
In other words, he's just what 'the people' want, and deserve to get.
"Every country has the government it deserves." - Joseph de Maistre
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." - H.L. Mencken
wmansir
02-15-12, 11:37 AM
The issues in Maine aren't voter fraud. They are problems (perhaps accidental, perhaps intentional) in the way the votes are being counted. Certainly, no Democrat who remembers Florida 2000 will say that there aren't problems with the way we count votes in this country. But this wasn't a problem that could have been fixed with voter IDs.
Actually, there was no voter fraud because there was no vote. This was a non-binding straw poll.
Besides, there are no black people in Maine. ;)
That's actually not as true as it use to be. The central Maine area has developed sizable African-American communities. They are mostly Somali and Bantu people immigrants who have relocated from other states.
One interesting fact I learned from watching the Maddow video: there was a big snowstorm in the one county Ron Paul won in 2008. .
You might want to unlearn that. The Ron Paul guy was full of shit. Paul didn't win Washington County in 2008, McCain did. In fact, Paul only got 8% there. He won neighboring Aroostook. Romney took the remaining 14.
Ky-Fi
02-15-12, 11:38 AM
Breaking news---Santorum gets the much-coveted Megadeth endorsement:
In an interview with Music Radar Tuesday, Megadeth frontman Dave Mustaine dished on his support for Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum:E
"Earlier in the election, I was completely oblivious as to who Rick Santorum was, but when the dude went home to be with his daughter when she was sick, that was very commendable. Also, just watching how he hasn't gotten into doing these horrible, horrible attack ads like Mitt Romney's done against Newt Gingrich, and then the volume at which Newt has gone back at Romney… You know, I think Santorum has some presidential qualities, and I'm hoping that if it does come down to it, we'll see a Republican in the White House ... and that it's Rick Santorum."
You might want to unlearn that. The Ron Paul guy was full of shit. Paul didn't win Washington County in 2008, McCain did. In fact, Paul only got 8% there.
Yes, and if you read 8 sideways, you get ∞, which is how much Ron Paul actually won by. But I suppose you think that's just a coincidence. LEGALIZE IT!!!!!!!!
mosquitobite
02-15-12, 05:31 PM
Waldo County Republicans call for censure of state GOP chairman after caucus controversy (http://bangordailynews.com/2012/02/15/politics/elections/waldo-county-republicans-call-for-censure-of-state-gop-chairman-after-caucus-controversy/)
Where are the Waldo Co votes? hehe
Webster said he has been around long enough to weather criticism and calls for his resignation.
“If people were saying ‘he can’t raise money, he can’t raise candidates or he doesn’t speak for the party,’ then I’d consider it,” he said. “That’s not the case here.”
The state Republican party chairmen in Iowa and Nevada both stepped down in the wake of similar controversies in their states earlier this year. Iowa initially awarded its caucus win to Romney only to discover about two weeks later that former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum actually had won. Nevada’s caucuses, won handily by Romney, were plagued by allegations of voter fraud.
If that ain't an elitist asshole attitude I don't know what is!
chowderhead
02-15-12, 07:03 PM
You might want to unlearn that. The Ron Paul guy was full of shit. Paul didn't win Washington County in 2008, McCain did. In fact, Paul only got 8% there. He won neighboring Aroostook. Romney took the remaining 14.
In 2008, 113 voters caucused in Washington County. Even if turnout doubled in that county in 2012, Paul would have needed to go from his 8% to nearly 100% of the vote in Washington county to win the caucus. Paul is the Jerry Brown of the Republican primary. Just pat him on the back and give him a non-prime time convention speaking spot so he can go on and on about gold standard and getting off his lawn.
RagingBull80
02-15-12, 08:34 PM
Obama (82.4% 8 of 11)
Bachmann (33.5% 2 of 11)
Gingrich (33.5% 2 of 11)
For the most part that sounds about right. I don't know how those last two got in there though.
Jaymole
02-15-12, 08:49 PM
Obama (82.4% 8 of 11)
Bachmann (33.5% 2 of 11)
Gingrich (33.5% 2 of 11)
For the most part that sounds about right. I don't know how those last two got in there though.
I'm guessing you want all gays shipped to a colony on the moon :D
of particular interest is the breakdown of voter demographics starting on page 7.
Ron Paul blows the others away with dems/indies...including Romney!
mosquitobite
02-16-12, 07:47 AM
Maddow is a Paulbot?!
x4Z-K5OBD58
Tracer Bullet
02-16-12, 08:48 AM
I really hope that Ron Paul runs as an independent candidate so when he loses badly mosquitobite will shut up about how everyone wants to vote for him. Seriously, this is like how everyone I interacted with in college during the 2000 election thought that Ralph Nader had it sewn up.
Groucho
02-16-12, 08:59 AM
I remember the same thing in 2008. "All of the delegates at the convention are secretly for Paul!" How did that turn out?
Thor Simpson
02-16-12, 09:03 AM
Santorum released his tax return. The media focus (so far) seems to be on his tax rate compared to Romney. I care more about his charitable giving (not shown in the first two articles I read about the returns) which was extremely disappointing, given what I know thus far about Santorum.
He was in the 2-3% range, which is on par with the "average American," but he had far better than average wealth.
Venusian
02-16-12, 09:16 AM
Santorum released his tax return. The media focus (so far) seems to be on his tax rate compared to Romney. I care more about his charitable giving (not shown in the first two articles I read about the returns) which was extremely disappointing, given what I know thus far about Santorum.
He was in the 2-3% range, which is on par with the "average American," but he had far better than average wealth.
That's painful to look at. I don't care how much money you make, it can't feel good to pay more than $300,000 to the Government. :lol:
cpgator
02-16-12, 10:02 AM
That's painful to look at. I don't care how much money you make, it can't feel good to pay more than $300,000 to the Government. :lol:
CRM114 pays more in taxes than Santorum makes, and you don't hear him bitching about it.
dork
02-16-12, 10:16 AM
That's painful to look at. I don't care how much money you make, it can't feel good to pay more than $300,000 to the Government. :lol:
Especially knowing it's just going to be spent on lobster and spices for the poors. :sad:
Jaymole
02-16-12, 10:20 AM
That's painful to look at. I don't care how much money you make, it can't feel good to pay more than $300,000 to the Government. :lol:
Yeah...think of all the jobs he could have created with that money-rolleyes-
Thor Simpson
02-16-12, 10:31 AM
:lol: When it's not your money, it's easy to part with.
Tracer Bullet
02-16-12, 10:34 AM
I'll take it. I can pay my union initiation fee.
Thor Simpson
02-16-12, 10:41 AM
I'll take it. I can pay my union initiation fee.
Thank you sir may I have another?
Jaymole
02-16-12, 10:56 AM
:lol: When it's not your money, it's easy to part with.
My heart bleeds for the rich...give me a break already.
So they need the tax money more than I do? Or you just think people, no matter how rich they are, should only pay up to a certain amount?
CRM114
02-16-12, 10:59 AM
CRM114 pays more in taxes than Santorum makes, and you don't hear him bitching about it.
THAT I do not do. ;)
CRM114
02-16-12, 11:01 AM
My heart bleeds for the rich...give me a break already.
So they need the tax money more than I do? Or you just think people, no matter how rich they are, should only pay up to a certain amount?
Don't believe the hype. If Santorum made $900K and paid in $300K, he still has $600K to live on - which is a VERY comfortable living. There is no reason to feel bad for them.
I don't know about you, but I only ever look at the net anyway. The gross is meaningless.
Thor Simpson
02-16-12, 11:02 AM
My heart bleeds for the rich...give me a break already.
So they need the tax money more than I do? Or you just think people, no matter how rich they are, should only pay up to a certain amount?
:lol:
All I said was, it can't feel good to write that big a check for taxes.
Maybe you think it would feel great. That's fine. I don't mind paying what I owe, but it still hurts when I look at how much I pay. Maybe you get all smiley and giggly when you pay sales tax at the checkout stand. I'm okay with that. It's just not for me. I still think we should pay sales tax.
Personally, I think Santorum should pay more in taxes at that income level. I don't think he should enjoy it.
Jaymole
02-16-12, 11:07 AM
:lol:
All I said was, it can't feel good to write that big a check for taxes.
Maybe you think it would feel great. That's fine. I don't mind paying what I owe, but it still hurts when I look at how much I pay. Maybe you get all smiley and giggly when you pay sales tax at the checkout stand. I'm okay with that. It's just not for me. I still think we should pay sales tax.
Personally, I think Santorum should pay more in taxes at that income level. I don't think he should enjoy it.
I wish that one day I will be able to pay that much in taxes :)
JasonF
02-16-12, 11:09 AM
Santorum released
EWWWWWWWWWWWWW!
his tax return.
Oh -- that's different. Never mind.
Thor Simpson
02-16-12, 11:10 AM
I wish that one day I will be able to pay that much in taxes :)
Your liberal genie is impressed.
CRM114
02-16-12, 11:12 AM
They were playing clips from Santorum where he was going on about how birth control promotes promiscuity and that it promotes sex out of marriage. (As if married people don't use birth control.) He said something to the effect that it leads to sex that is not "normal."
The Repubs are really going to put this guy other there?
Jaymole
02-16-12, 11:14 AM
Your liberal genie is impressed.
Not for me, I would love to be able to make $1 million a year.
I see you edited your post from calling it stupid.
Thor Simpson
02-16-12, 11:16 AM
I would love to be able to make $1 million a year.
That's a better goal. We're making progress here.
Jaymole
02-16-12, 12:48 PM
That's a better goal. We're making progress here.
Yes, I'm one of those rare creatures who doesn't complain about the amount of taxes I pay. I only complain about how and what they are used for.
orangecrush
02-16-12, 01:31 PM
Yes, I'm one of those rare creatures who doesn't complain about the amount of taxes I pay. I only complain about how and what they are used for.To be fair, the people who complain about how much they pay likely care more about how they are being spent than how much they pay.
CRM114
02-16-12, 01:43 PM
Now THAT'S a good one. :lol:
Navinabob
02-16-12, 02:02 PM
They were playing clips from Santorum where he was going on about how birth control promotes promiscuity and that it promotes sex out of marriage. (As if married people don't use birth control.) He said something to the effect that it leads to sex that is not "normal."
The Repubs are really going to put this guy other there?
What is he implying about "not normal" sex, anal sex? To be fair, every time he Googles himself he has to read about the frothy mix of lube and poop so of course that'd be on his mind. Or is he saying that any sex that doesn't come from trying to have kids is not normal? How can the guy not understand that he just offended the 95% of America that uses birth control?
What's with the comment about states should have the right to ban things such as birth control and sodomy without the Supreme Court interfering (and then says that he, personally, wouldn't ban it from his state)?
Tracer Bullet
02-16-12, 02:03 PM
Or is he saying that any sex that doesn't come from trying to have kids is not normal?
That is exactly what he is saying.
CRM114
02-16-12, 02:16 PM
Yeah, it seems like his personal views are really juvenile. It's like he never opened his eyes to the real world after he graduated Sunday school.
mosquitobite
02-16-12, 02:34 PM
I really hope that Ron Paul runs as an independent candidate so when he loses badly mosquitobite will shut up about how everyone wants to vote for him. Seriously, this is like how everyone I interacted with in college during the 2000 election thought that Ralph Nader had it sewn up.
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this was the Republican field and primary thread. Didn't know there was a rule against posting against Ron Paul in this thread. FFS.
I thought people might like to know that the establishment is rigging an election...but nevermind. Just ignore the potential voter fraud and disenfranchisement.
CRM114
02-16-12, 02:46 PM
I'm interested. I've always assumed that the establishment would find a way for Romney to win and at the same time discredit Ron Paul.
dork
02-16-12, 02:53 PM
and at the same time discredit Ron Paul.
If that was the plan, they'd be trying to get him as much exposure as possible.
CRM114
02-16-12, 02:59 PM
There is a large contingent of hipsters and curmudgeonly old racists that go for Ron Paul's rap though.
dork
02-16-12, 03:05 PM
There is a large contingent of hipsters and curmudgeonly old racists that go for Ron Paul's rap though.
Yeah, it's like he's the new Tyler the Creator.
I know what you mean, though. Lately, every time Jon Stewart opens his mouth, Ron Paul's limp member flops out.
Navinabob
02-16-12, 03:21 PM
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this was the Republican field and primary thread. Didn't know there was a rule against posting against Ron Paul in this thread. FFS.
I thought people might like to know that the establishment is rigging an election...but nevermind. Just ignore the potential voter fraud and disenfranchisement.
But in the link you provided it said that clerical errors were made (nothing about this conspiracy you allege) and that even if you add those votes for Paul in, he still lost by a wide margin. The guy isn't even accused of a conspiracy and is basically guilty of being a douche. They are going to vote in 3 weeks to decide if they want to even slap him on the wrirst or not.
When you say "establishment is rigging an election" and "voter fraud" over and over again it starts to sound like crazy-talk. Conspiracies seem to be a really big deal to you; and while they can exist, I don't think they happen to the degree you often suggest.
Top 10 things you should consider before posting something saying that a conspiracy exists:
Proof of the conspiracy supposedly emerges from a pattern of “connecting the dots” between events that need not be causally connected. When no evidence supports these connections except the allegation of the conspiracy or when the evidence fits equally well to other causal connections—or to randomness—the conspiracy theory is likely to be false.
The agents behind the pattern of the conspiracy would need nearly superhuman power to pull it off. People are usually not nearly so powerful as we think they are.
The conspiracy is complex, and its successful completion demands a large number of elements.
Similarly, the conspiracy involves large numbers of people who would all need to keep silent about their secrets. The more people involved, the less realistic it becomes.
The conspiracy encompasses a grand ambition for control over a nation, economy or political system. If it suggests world domination, the theory is even less likely to be true.
The conspiracy theory ratchets up from small events that might be true to much larger, much less probable events.
The conspiracy theory assigns portentous, sinister meanings to what are most likely innocuous, insignificant events.
The theory tends to commingle facts and speculations without distinguishing between the two and without assigning degrees of probability or of factuality.
The theorist is indiscriminately suspicious of all government agencies or private groups, which suggests an inability to nuance differences between true and false conspiracies.
The conspiracy theorist refuses to consider alternative explanations, rejecting all disconfirming evidence and blatantly seeking only confirmatory evidence to support what he or she has a priori determined to be the truth.
(List stolen from the brilliant Michael Shermer)
joeblow69
02-16-12, 03:41 PM
So I was just reading that Romney admitted to participating in those freaky rituals that baptizes dead people into Mormonism. That seems pretty "culty" to me ... is that something the mainstream christian wing of the republican party is OK with?
mosquitobite
02-16-12, 03:42 PM
I posted links to newscasters reporting on it.
and um...one is kind of a well known national reporter.
Good God. If you want to discredit the Maine allegation because I'm a Ron Paul supporter, fine. :rolleyes: But why is Rachel Maddow reporting on it nationally? Did you even watch the fricken video? Or does it just get rolled over because I posted it?
Tracer Bullet
02-16-12, 03:42 PM
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this was the Republican field and primary thread. Didn't know there was a rule against posting against Ron Paul in this thread. FFS.
I thought people might like to know that the establishment is rigging an election...but nevermind. Just ignore the potential voter fraud and disenfranchisement.
Um, what? If there is a theme running through all of your tiresome Ron Paul wish-fulfillment shilling, it's that there's some unknown groundswell of Ron Paul support out there that could be magically uncorked if only the establishment wasn't keeping him down!!!
When in reality Ron Paul is doing quite a bit better than he did in 2008, indicating that if your claims have any basis in reality, the Republican establishment (whatever that means) is getting worse at voter disenfranchisement, not better.
If it makes you feel better to live in Candyland, don't let me stop you, but don't act like a martyr if people call you on it.
wendersfan
02-16-12, 03:43 PM
Rachel Maddow is reporting on it because of the potential to make the Republican Party look bad, and she's in the business of trying to make the Republican Party look bad.
kvrdave
02-16-12, 03:45 PM
So I was just reading that Romney admitted to participating in those freaky rituals that baptizes dead people into Mormonism. That seems pretty "culty" to me ... is that something the mainstream christian wing of the republican party is OK with?
Not something I have ever heard of in any church I've ever been in. Not something I have ever seen justification in the Bible for. Seems like serious stupid shit, and disrespectful to the deceased. Having said that, I don't get worked up over the president's religion, even when it is Islam, like the current president.
Navinabob
02-16-12, 05:03 PM
This might belong in the old Can religion be an insanity? thread. Basically, Santorum thinks that Satan is systematically destroying America. He thinks we are living in a time when God's Army is more needed than ever because all of the major institutions in society were under attack by Satan. He also says that God had used him, his political career, and even the death of his son Gabriel in the fight to outlaw abortion in America.
He calls academics (implying Atheists here clearly) under the spell of Satan. Sinful Hollywood, corrupted government, even our Protestant nation has fallen to Satan. I'm truly embarrassed by people who support this guy. There has to be a point where even the staunchest "anyone but Obama" folk pause for a second and quickly start rethinking things.
This is not a political war at all. This is not a cultural war. This is a spiritual war. And the Father of Lies has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country - the United States of America. If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age. There is no one else to go after other than the United States and that has been the case now for almost two hundred years, once America's preeminence was sown by our great Founding Fathers.
He didn't have much success in the early days. Our foundation was very strong, in fact, is very strong. But over time, that great, acidic quality of time corrodes even the strongest foundations. And Satan has done so by attacking the great institutions of America, using those great vices of pride, vanity, and sensuality as the root to attack all of the strong plants that has so deeply rooted in the American tradition.
He was successful. He attacks all of us and he attacks all of our institutions. The place where he was, in my mind, the most successful and first successful was in academia. He understood pride of smart people. He attacked them at their weakest, that they were, in fact, smarter than everybody else and could come up with something new and different. Pursue new truths, deny the existence of truth, play with it because they're smart. And so academia, a long time ago, fell.
And you say "what could be the impact of academia falling?" Well, I would have the argument that the other structures that I'm going to talk about here had root of their destruction because of academia. Because what academia does is educate the elites in our society, educates the leaders in our society, particularly at the college level. And they were the first to fall.
And so what we saw this domino effect, once the colleges fell and those who were being education in our institutions, the next was the church. Now you’d say, ‘wait, the Catholic Church’? No. We all know that this country was founded on a Judeo-Christian ethic but the Judeo-Christian ethic was a Protestant Judeo-Christian ethic, sure the Catholics had some influence, but this was a Protestant country and the Protestant ethic, mainstream, mainline Protestantism, and of course we look at the shape of mainline Protestantism in this country and it is in shambles, it is gone from the world of Christianity as I see it. So they attacked mainline Protestantism, they attacked the Church, and what better way to go after smart people who also believe they’re pious to use both vanity and pride to also go after the Church.
After that, you start destroying the Church and you start destroying academia, the culture is where their next success was and I need not even go into the state of the popular culture today. Whether its sensuality of vanity of the famous in America, they are peacocks on display and they have taken their poor behavior and made it fashionable. The corruption of culture, the corruption of manners, the corruption of decency is now on display whether it’s the NBA or whether it’s a rock concert or whether it’s on a movie set.
The fourth, and this was harder, now I know you’re going to challenge me on this one, but politics and government was the next to fall. You say, ‘you would think they would be the first to fall, as fallible as we are in politics,’ but people in political life get elected by ordinary folks from lots of places all over the country where the foundations of this country are still strong. So while we may certainly have had examples, the body politic held up fairly well up until the last couple of decades, but it is falling too.
mosquitobite
02-16-12, 05:18 PM
see? Could be worse. I could be a Santorum supporter! :p
Navinabob
02-16-12, 05:19 PM
Not something I have ever heard of in any church I've ever been in. Not something I have ever seen justification in the Bible for. Seems like serious stupid shit, and disrespectful to the deceased. Having said that, I don't get worked up over the president's religion, even when it is Islam, like the current president.
It was a big deal to those family members of people killed in the Holocaust when they found out that they were being baptized after their death into the Mormon church. The fact that Mitt baptized his very Atheist father-in-law into the church after he died was a big deal to Atheists.
Man, I always thought all of those "Miss me now" posters of Bush after Obama was elected were stupid... until now. Fuck, I'd actually rather have Bush instead of this crop of potential Presidents.
Navinabob
02-16-12, 05:21 PM
see? Could be worse. I could be a Santorum supporter! :p
Santorum Backer: Most Cost-Effective Birth Control? Keep Your Legs Closed
Foster Friess is both a head-turner and head-scratcher. He’s the millionaire money-man largely financing GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum’s super PAC, the Red, White and Blue Fund. He’s also the guy who can’t resist offering a punchline with a straight face on national television about a serious women’s health and political issue.
In an interview today with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell, he revealed a way of looking at birth control that is playing economical with reality.
“This contraceptive thing, my gosh it’s so inexpensive. Back in my days, they used Bayer Aspirin for contraception. The gals put it between their knees and it wasn’t that costly.”
Ok, so we can't get Bush back. What's Quayle up to these days?
X
02-16-12, 05:50 PM
The fact that Mitt baptized his very Atheist father-in-law into the church after he died was a big deal to Atheists.Having it a big deal to atheists sounds strange. But I guess if your religion is Atheism it might matter.
movielib
02-16-12, 06:15 PM
This might belong in the old Can religion be an insanity? thread. Basically, Santorum thinks that Satan is systematically destroying America. He thinks we are living in a time when God's Army is more needed than ever because all of the major institutions in society were under attack by Satan. He also says that God had used him, his political career, and even the death of his son Gabriel in the fight to outlaw abortion in America.
He calls academics (implying Atheists here clearly) under the spell of Satan. Sinful Hollywood, corrupted government, even our Protestant nation has fallen to Satan. I'm truly embarrassed by people who support this guy. There has to be a point where even the staunchest "anyone but Obama" folk pause for a second and quickly start rethinking things.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/n4jopm7hYFk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Shit, this guy is a nutbag (I've known this for a long time but not the seemingly unlimited extent of it). If it's Obama vs. Santorum I can't see how I could vote for either. Sadly, this is just what the Obama people would hope for.
Thor Simpson
02-16-12, 06:19 PM
I want to vote for Ron Paul. But now I'm scared of what the establishment might do to me, so I'll probably stay home.
kvrdave
02-16-12, 06:30 PM
It was a big deal to those family members of people killed in the Holocaust when they found out that they were being baptized after their death into the Mormon church. The fact that Mitt baptized his very Atheist father-in-law into the church after he died was a big deal to Atheists.
Man, I always thought all of those "Miss me now" posters of Bush after Obama was elected were stupid... until now. Fuck, I'd actually rather have Bush instead of this crop of potential Presidents.
Didn't I say it was stupid and disrespectful? I simply said their religion didn't matter to me. Certain practices might, obviously.
Navinabob
02-16-12, 06:32 PM
Having it a big deal to atheists sounds strange. But I guess if your religion is Atheism it might matter.
It is a bit odd sounding... but it is more due to the fact that his memory is being dishonored. If anything, that has to mean more to an Atheist then it would to someone who thinks they'll ditch this world for a better one. To an Atheist, the memory you leave with others is all you have left.
I don't believe in an afterlife, but I'm offended when Mormon did these post-death baptisms on people of other faiths, especially when these people suffered and died for their religion.
Jason
02-16-12, 06:37 PM
Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this was the Republican field and primary thread. Didn't know there was a rule against posting against Ron Paul in this thread. FFS.
I thought people might like to know that the establishment is rigging an election...but nevermind. Just ignore the potential voter fraud and disenfranchisement.
When you rig an election, it's usually against someone who has a reasonable expectation of winning. See Bush v. Gore and Roslyn v. Baltar for reference.
movielib
02-16-12, 06:43 PM
It is a bit odd sounding... but it is more due to the fact that his memory is being dishonored. If anything, that has to mean more to an Atheist then it would to someone who thinks they'll ditch this world for a better one. To an Atheist, the memory you leave with others is all you have left.
I don't believe in an afterlife, but I'm offended when Mormon did these post-death baptisms on people of other faiths, especially when these people suffered and died for their religion.
I don't think it means more to me than it would to a religious person and I think it's insulting no matter whom it's done to. I also might not go as far to say I'm "offended." More "insulted" than "offended."
But I strongly agree with your basic sentiment.
Navinabob
02-16-12, 07:01 PM
When you rig an election, it's usually against someone who has a reasonable expectation of winning. See Bush v. Gore and Roslyn v. Baltar for reference.
Yes, but the reason he does not have a reasonable expectation of winning is because of the conspiracy! Any evidence, even the absence of evidence, proves a conspiracy theory. What I want to know is... who the real power behind Ron Paul is? I mean has Paul ever publicly stated he isn't a cyborg from the future?
But seriously, the reason the so-called "Republican establishment" doesn't want Ron Paul to win is because they know they can't buy him off to keep his mouth shut over the whole secret that Bush was really in charge of 9/11. Everyone knows that on the first day of a President's term given the Omega-Protocol folder that lists our involvement and the cover-up. Man, if the Cabal of Evil Jewish Bankers ever got a hold of that folder...
Venusian
02-16-12, 07:18 PM
It was a big deal to those family members of people killed in the Holocaust when they found out that they were being baptized after their death into the Mormon church. The fact that Mitt baptized his very Atheist father-in-law into the church after he died was a big deal to Atheists.
I don't understand why this bothers people. If I found out the LDS baptized me by proxy, I would think they wasted their time. It wouldn't offend me.
Venusian
02-16-12, 07:20 PM
It is a bit odd sounding... but it is more due to the fact that his memory is being dishonored. If anything, that has to mean more to an Atheist then it would to someone who thinks they'll ditch this world for a better one. To an Atheist, the memory you leave with others is all you have left.
I don't believe in an afterlife, but I'm offended when Mormon did these post-death baptisms on people of other faiths, especially when these people suffered and died for their religion.
Why does it offend you? And how is their memory being dishonored when no one knows until someone researches through the LDS archives and finds the records?
Venusian
02-16-12, 07:21 PM
I don't think it means more to me than it would to a religious person and I think it's insulting no matter whom it's done to. I also might not go as far to say I'm "offended." More "insulted" than "offended."
But I strongly agree with your basic sentiment.
Why are you insulted? Are you insulted when someone says they'll pray for you?
movielib
02-16-12, 07:34 PM
Why are you insulted? Are you insulted when someone says they'll pray for you?
Nope. That seems benign and well-intentioned to me. And it doesn't involve basically lying about me or someone else.
You can say "God bless you" when I sneeze too. :)
X
02-16-12, 07:35 PM
Why are you insulted? Are you insulted when someone says they'll pray for you?Not to mention if they say something really mean about you after you're dead!
Venusian
02-16-12, 07:40 PM
Nope. That seems benign and well-intentioned to me. And it doesn't involve basically lying about me or someone else.
You can say "God bless you" when I sneeze too. :)
baptism of the dead doesn't involve lying either (as far as i knwo)
Jason
02-16-12, 07:44 PM
see? Could be worse. I could be a Santorum supporter! :p
Okay, you got us there.
movielib
02-16-12, 07:51 PM
baptism of the dead doesn't involve lying either (as far as i knwo)
I think saying someone was (somehow) a member of a religion they were not a member of (and may have even been vehemently opposed to) is not exactly the truth.
Venusian
02-16-12, 08:00 PM
I think saying someone was (somehow) a member of a religion they were not a member of (and may have even been vehemently opposed to) is not exactly the truth.
I don't think that is what they are doing...but I could be wrong since I don't know the details behind their reasoning.
Then again, I don't think anyone is going to mistake a holocaust survivor as a Mormon because they were posthumously baptized 50 years later.
movielib
02-16-12, 08:21 PM
I don't think that is what they are doing...but I could be wrong since I don't know the details behind their reasoning.
Then again, I don't think anyone is going to mistake a holocaust survivor as a Mormon because they were posthumously baptized 50 years later.
Just because a lie isn't believed or believable, it doesn't make it not a lie.
kvrdave
02-16-12, 09:07 PM
I don't understand why this bothers people. If I found out the LDS baptized me by proxy, I would think they wasted their time. It wouldn't offend me.
This may not sound logical, and I agree that it would not offend me if they baptized me by proxy in the least. Yet it still offends me that they do this to people. It is an invasion, even if it ultimately does nothing. If someone dug me up and put swastikas all over my corpse, it means nothing to me. If they did that to others, I would think it was in incredibly poor taste.
kvrdave
02-16-12, 09:08 PM
This is how I want it.
<img src=http://209.160.41.119/ds_img_direct.php?i=klingondeat-1.jpg&t=8&d=1sh3kazdek&x=360&y=480&l1=349&l2=784>
Scream my ass into heaven. :lol:
wishbone
02-16-12, 09:23 PM
Data: It is a warning.
Picard: To whom?
Data: They are warning the deadbeats -- beware -- a slumlord is about to arrive.
movielib
02-16-12, 09:43 PM
This may not sound logical, and I agree that it would not offend me if they baptized me by proxy in the least. Yet it still offends me that they do this to people. It is an invasion, even if it ultimately does nothing. If someone dug me up and put swastikas all over my corpse, it means nothing to me. If they did that to others, I would think it was in incredibly poor taste.
Swastikas are always in bad taste. At least since 1933.
Tommy Ceez
02-16-12, 10:59 PM
Because if you know you'll have a tight race, pissing off the predominant religion in the US and risking alienating those voters on the off-chance that it'll push upwards a more religious-conservative that might be easier to beat is a sound election strategy in your mind? :hscratch:
The most predominate religion in which a majoritybof women have used contraception, and polls the most liberal of all Christan denominations?
mosquitobite
02-17-12, 07:54 AM
whWVCxunvNU
Independent Fox Reporter - Ben Swann
Apparently some of the County GOP chairs are turning on Mr Webster.
Does this help those who have a hard time stomaching that the news was coming from Maddow?
At the end he mentions why caucuses are better than primaries BECAUSE of this transparency. Easy for people to know when something is wrong when they know the numbers were one thing, but the state reports something else!
CRM114
02-17-12, 07:55 AM
Rachel Maddow is reporting on it because of the potential to make the Republican Party look bad, and she's in the business of trying to make the Republican Party look bad.
Correct. I think she's attempting to infer an attempt by the Republican Party (or a subset thereof) to spare Romney a very embarrassing loss.
Venusian
02-17-12, 07:56 AM
Sounds like you guys are way more sensitive than me :p
Venusian
02-17-12, 07:58 AM
Just because a lie isn't believed or believable, it doesn't make it not a lie.
they aren't saying they are mormon, they are saying they have been baptized by proxy into the mormon church.
The LDS Church teaches that those in the afterlife who have been baptized by proxy are free to accept or reject the ordinance done on their behalf. Baptism on behalf of a deceased individual is not binding if that individual chooses to reject it in the afterlife.
I'm not defending the practice. I think it is stupid. I just don't see why people get offended/insulted by it.
Tracer Bullet
02-17-12, 08:04 AM
This is how I want it.
<img src=http://209.160.41.119/ds_img_direct.php?i=klingondeat-1.jpg&t=8&d=1sh3kazdek&x=360&y=480&l1=349&l2=784>
Scream my ass into heaven. :lol:
:thumbsup:
Duran
02-17-12, 08:09 AM
I consider it insulting and wrong. Not because I believe it makes any difference whatsoever to the deceased; the whole thing is plain silly in the first place. I find it insulting because they believe they're doing something that has significant spiritual meaning absent the subject's consent. In other words, I'm offended that they think they have the right to do this, believing what they believe.
Venusian
02-17-12, 08:11 AM
I consider it insulting and wrong. Not because I believe it makes any difference whatsoever to the deceased; the whole thing is plain silly in the first place. I find it insulting because they believe they're doing something that has significant spiritual meaning absent the subject's consent. In other words, I'm offended that they think they have the right to do this, believing what they believe.
They believe that when they do this, they are giving people a 2nd chance to escape hell. How is that insulting?
wendersfan
02-17-12, 08:12 AM
Having it a big deal to atheists sounds strange. But I guess if your religion is Atheism it might matter.
That would only make sense if atheism were a religion.
Tracer Bullet
02-17-12, 08:17 AM
They believe that when they do this, they are giving people a 2nd chance to escape hell. How is that insulting?
:lol: Seriously?
Duran
02-17-12, 08:23 AM
They believe that when they do this, they are giving people a 2nd chance to escape hell. How is that insulting?
Because if they believe what they believe, they are committing spiritual rape, and have no problem with it. I don't think what they do has any meaning whatsoever, as I am an atheist, but the fact that they promote this as legitimate offends me.
And saying the deceased could choose to accept or decline afterwards is bullshit. You can't assault someone, and then inquire afterwards if they were okay with it.
Venusian
02-17-12, 08:28 AM
:lol: Seriously?
seriously.
I don't believe it, but if the offense is based on what they believe, then they believe they are helping the dead folks. It is misguided, but it isn't out of malice.
Venusian
02-17-12, 08:29 AM
Because if they believe what they believe, they are committing spiritual rape, and have no problem with it. I don't think what they do has any meaning whatsoever, as I am an atheist, but the fact that they promote this as legitimate offends me.
And saying the deceased could choose to accept or decline afterwards is bullshit. You can't assault someone, and then inquire afterwards if they were okay with it.
What? How is it spiritual rape? How are they assaulting someone?
They believe that you don't get a choice to go to heaven if you aren't baptized. They baptized so the person gets the choice. Seems pretty simple to me.
Groucho
02-17-12, 08:30 AM
They believe that when they do this, they are giving people a 2nd chance to escape hell. How is that insulting?But what if another religion is correct, and by turning them into a Mormon they are actually SENDING those folks to hell? :eek:
Venusian
02-17-12, 08:31 AM
But what if another religion is correct, and by turning them into a Mormon they are actually SENDING those folks to hell? :eek:
:lol:
Tracer Bullet
02-17-12, 08:32 AM
What about if the KKK started inducting people posthumously?
mosquitobite
02-17-12, 08:33 AM
I agree with Venusian.
I was baptized by my own free will at age 28. I'm comfortable with my soul.
If someone were to baptize my dead body (with no soul) I'd be laughing at them from Heaven! :lol:
Venusian
02-17-12, 08:34 AM
What about if the KKK started inducting people posthumously?
If the KKK did some ceremony and used my name. It wouldn't really bother me.
CRM114
02-17-12, 08:35 AM
I'm not defending the practice. I think it is stupid. I just don't see why people get offended/insulted by it.
Oh please. Christians are insulted if someone dares to take the 10 Commandments down from a courthouse. Christians are insulted about everything.
CRM114
02-17-12, 08:38 AM
They believe that you don't get a choice to go to heaven if you aren't baptized. They baptized so the person gets the choice. Seems pretty simple to me.
And if the person was already baptized as a Catholic? Then what? Maybe that was important to that person. It's basically pissing on a grave. I don't understand why you can't see that.
Groucho
02-17-12, 08:38 AM
Oh please. Christians are insulted if someone dares to take the 10 Commandments down from a courthouse. Christians are insulted about everything.Luckily atheists are a lot more cool-headed. Now, if you'll excuse I'm off to "glitter bomb" the mint in protest of "In God We Trust" on our money.
Tracer Bullet
02-17-12, 08:40 AM
If the KKK did some ceremony and used my name. It wouldn't really bother me.
That's fair. But can you understand at least that this kind of thing does bother some people?
Venusian
02-17-12, 08:42 AM
Oh please. Christians are insulted if someone dares to take the 10 Commandments down from a courthouse. Christians are insulted about everything.Thanks for telling me what i'm insulted by :rolleyes:
Venusian
02-17-12, 08:44 AM
That's fair. But can you understand at least that this kind of thing does bother some people?
I guess I could see it. In my head the Mormon practice is meaningless because I don't beleive it does anything so it doesn't bother me.
It's like if someone wrote a letter to Santa on my behalf or something. It doesn't bother me except for it being a waste of time
CRM114
02-17-12, 08:47 AM
Thanks for telling me what i'm insulted by :rolleyes:
You're welcome. Now forgive me if I say Happy Holidays in December.
CRM114
02-17-12, 08:49 AM
I guess I could see it. In my head the Mormon practice is meaningless because I don't beleive it does anything so it doesn't bother me.
It's like if someone wrote a letter to Santa on my behalf or something. It doesn't bother me except for it being a waste of time
It would bother me.
It bothered me when they put a rosary in the hands of a deceased family member in his casket when he clearly did not believe in any God or religion. I certainly wouldn't want that for myself even if I was dead. It's disrespectful.
Thor Simpson
02-17-12, 09:07 AM
Oh please. Christians are insulted if someone dares to take the 10 Commandments down from a courthouse. Christians are insulted about everything.
People tend to be very reactionary. People do, not just Christians. There are enough Christians in this country that you can usually find one who is insulted about a certain situation, yes. So if you're looking to keep up that opinion, you will always be well-fed.
CRM114
02-17-12, 09:09 AM
Yes, see the recent apoplectic reaction to requiring contraception coverage.
movielib
02-17-12, 09:20 AM
I guess I could see it. In my head the Mormon practice is meaningless because I don't beleive it does anything so it doesn't bother me.
Although I think it's insulting it really doesn't "bother" me either. Thinking something is an insult but not being "bothered" by it are not mutually exclusive. The only time I'd give it any thought whatsoever is in a discussion like this.
How about if I just say it makes me think less of people who do this silly thing? Not that big a deal (I'd still vote for Romney over Obama, for example) but I think people who do such a thing somewhat diminish themselves.
Venusian
02-17-12, 09:26 AM
How about if I just say it makes me think less of people who do this silly thing? Not that big a deal (I'd still vote for Romney over Obama, for example) but I think people who do such a thing somewhat diminish themselves.I totally understand that view.
CRM114
02-17-12, 09:39 AM
Although I think it's insulting it really doesn't "bother" me either. Thinking something is an insult but not being "bothered" by it are not mutually exclusive. The only time I'd give it any thought whatsoever is in a discussion like this.
How about if I just say it makes me think less of people who do this silly thing? Not that big a deal (I'd still vote for Romney over Obama, for example) but I think people who do such a thing somewhat diminish themselves.
Right. If I were a Repub, I wouldn't hold it against Romney either. It's no different than any other ritual of any other religion. The people that participate truly believe in it. I don't know if I would say the same if I were still a practicing Catholic however simply because I cannot place myself in that mindset even hypothetically.
movielib
02-17-12, 09:45 AM
I totally understand that view.
I've had a bit of trouble expressing precisely how I feel about this. I guess I finally got it. :)
Tracer Bullet
02-17-12, 10:13 AM
Although I think it's insulting it really doesn't "bother" me either. Thinking something is an insult but not being "bothered" by it are not mutually exclusive. The only time I'd give it any thought whatsoever is in a discussion like this.
How about if I just say it makes me think less of people who do this silly thing? Not that big a deal (I'd still vote for Romney over Obama, for example) but I think people who do such a thing somewhat diminish themselves.
:thumbsup:
(except to the Romney over Obama comment. That's just silly.)
movielib
02-17-12, 10:23 AM
:thumbsup:
(except to the Romney over Obama comment. That's just silly.)
Fortunately for me, being silly isn't a crime. But Obama is working on that and it's on the agenda for his second term. ;)
Duran
02-17-12, 10:45 AM
What? How is it spiritual rape? How are they assaulting someone?
They believe that you don't get a choice to go to heaven if you aren't baptized. They baptized so the person gets the choice. Seems pretty simple to me.
They are doing something they believe has deep spiritual meaning to someone against their will. If they wanted to be baptized as a Mormon, they could have done so when they were alive.
I don't believe in any afterlife, so I just think it's silly if it were done to me, but what they are doing is profoundly disrespectful to the wishes of the the people they are forcing this on, especially if they were religious themselves. The fact that they either don't realize this or just don't care bothers me.
X
02-17-12, 10:49 AM
That would only make sense if atheism were a religion.I think it's pretty close for some people, that's why I made the capital letter distinction. It has many of the same attributes as what we consider religion including constant proselytising.
Groucho
02-17-12, 10:57 AM
They are doing something they believe has deep spiritual meaning to someone against their will. If they wanted to be baptized as a Mormon, they could have done so when they were alive.
I don't believe in any afterlife, so I just think it's silly if it were done to me, but what they are doing is profoundly disrespectful to the wishes of the the people they are forcing this on, especially if they were religious themselves. The fact that they either don't realize this or just don't care bothers me.Well said.
If the LDS Church wants to show good faith on this, they simply need to set up a "Do Not Baptize" registry. If people care enough about it, they'll sign up. Otherwise, baptize away!
While they're at it, may as well set up a "Do not Proselytize" registry to keep missionaries away.
Dr Mabuse
02-17-12, 01:38 PM
I think it's pretty close for some people, that's why I made the capital letter distinction. It has many of the same attributes as what we consider religion including constant proselytising.
It is a religion. A new belief system that meets every tenet of a religion, and the adherents of which, though obviously engaging in self delusion in most of the cases, behave about, adhere to, and proselytise about it in a religious way. They actively engage in assaulting any other belief systems, which ironically is one of the behaviors they claim to hate most about those other belief systems. They engage in those assaults with emotion and fervor, spewing venom at every turn, considering their own belief system to be the only 'correct' one, again, something they claim to hate most about the other belief systems. I could go on, but the worst deluded are the self deluded, so there is no use really.
To use a Family Guy analogy, 'Atheism' is just the new church of Fonzie. People, looking to belong, and wanting some 'new' system to subscribe to, pile in to it. Again, something the adherents of atheism claim to hate most about the followers of other belief systems, and so often mock. Blindly following, shoving your opinions on others, proselytising, mocking and being rude towards other belief systems, etc.
It's really rather amusing too see people engaging in such and believing themselves to be operating on intellect, logic, and reason.
spainlinx0
02-17-12, 01:43 PM
It is a religion. A new belief system that meets every tenet of a religion, and the adherents of which, though obviously engaging in self delusion in most of the cases, behave about, adhere to, and proselytise about it in a religious way. They actively engage in assaulting any other belief systems, which ironically is one of the behaviors they claim to hate most about those other belief systems. They engage in those assaults with emotion and fervor, spewing venom at every turn, considering their own belief system to be the only 'correct' one, again, something they claim to hate most about the other belief systems. I could go on, but the worst deluded are the self deluded, so there is no use really.
To use a Family Guy analogy, 'Atheism' is just the new church of Fonzie. People, looking to belong, and wanting some 'new' system to subscribe to, pile in to it. Again, something the adherents of atheism claim to hate most about the followers of other belief systems, and so often mock. Blindly following, shoving your opinions on others, proselytising, mocking and being rude towards other belief systems, etc.
It's really rather amusing too see people engaging in such and believing themselves to be operating on intellect, logic, and reason.
You must be religious about every topic you discuss on here.
classicman2
02-17-12, 01:45 PM
How does the Mormon Church baptize people - dunking or sprinkling?
Venusian
02-17-12, 01:54 PM
How does the Mormon Church baptize people - dunking or sprinkling?
Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sexual position.
movielib
02-17-12, 02:00 PM
It is a religion. A new belief system that meets every tenet of a religion, and the adherents of which, though obviously engaging in self delusion in most of the cases, behave about, adhere to, and proselytise about it in a religious way. They actively engage in assaulting any other belief systems, which ironically is one of the behaviors they claim to hate most about those other belief systems. They engage in those assaults with emotion and fervor, spewing venom at every turn, considering their own belief system to be the only 'correct' one, again, something they claim to hate most about the other belief systems. I could go on, but the worst deluded are the self deluded, so there is no use really.
To use a Family Guy analogy, 'Atheism' is just the new church of Fonzie. People, looking to belong, and wanting some 'new' system to subscribe to, pile in to it. Again, something the adherents of atheism claim to hate most about the followers of other belief systems, and so often mock. Blindly following, shoving your opinions on others, proselytising, mocking and being rude towards other belief systems, etc.
It's really rather amusing too see people engaging in such and believing themselves to be operating on intellect, logic, and reason.
Thanks for avoiding sweeping generalizations. :up:
Tracer Bullet
02-17-12, 02:17 PM
It is a religion. A new belief system that meets every tenet of a religion, and the adherents of which, though obviously engaging in self delusion in most of the cases, behave about, adhere to, and proselytise about it in a religious way. They actively engage in assaulting any other belief systems, which ironically is one of the behaviors they claim to hate most about those other belief systems. They engage in those assaults with emotion and fervor, spewing venom at every turn, considering their own belief system to be the only 'correct' one, again, something they claim to hate most about the other belief systems. I could go on, but the worst deluded are the self deluded, so there is no use really.
To use a Family Guy analogy, 'Atheism' is just the new church of Fonzie. People, looking to belong, and wanting some 'new' system to subscribe to, pile in to it. Again, something the adherents of atheism claim to hate most about the followers of other belief systems, and so often mock. Blindly following, shoving your opinions on others, proselytising, mocking and being rude towards other belief systems, etc.
It's really rather amusing too see people engaging in such and believing themselves to be operating on intellect, logic, and reason.
Atheism as you describe it doesn't meet every tenet of a religion. In fact it's missing the most important one.
It is a religion. A new belief system that meets every tenet of a religion, and the adherents of which, though obviously engaging in self delusion in most of the cases, behave about, adhere to, and proselytise about it in a religious way. They actively engage in assaulting any other belief systems, which ironically is one of the behaviors they claim to hate most about those other belief systems. They engage in those assaults with emotion and fervor, spewing venom at every turn, considering their own belief system to be the only 'correct' one, again, something they claim to hate most about the other belief systems. I could go on, but the worst deluded are the self deluded, so there is no use really.
To use a Family Guy analogy, 'Atheism' is just the new church of Fonzie. People, looking to belong, and wanting some 'new' system to subscribe to, pile in to it. Again, something the adherents of atheism claim to hate most about the followers of other belief systems, and so often mock. Blindly following, shoving your opinions on others, proselytising, mocking and being rude towards other belief systems, etc.
It's really rather amusing too see people engaging in such and believing themselves to be operating on intellect, logic, and reason.
"Atheism is a religion" is about as common, and ignorant, as saying "evolution is just a theory". Atheism has no object of worship. A naturalistic worldview is no more a religion then being pessimistic is a religion. Your points are characterizations of people, not Atheism. The end.
In case your wondering why "evolution is just a theory" is also BS, (putting is simply) in science "theory" means something different then how a layman would think of it. Using science, evolution is considered something closer to what a layman would call a "fact". So it is a equivocation fallacy for those playing at home.
Thor Simpson
02-17-12, 06:52 PM
In case your wondering why "evolution is just a theory" is also BS, (putting is simply) in science "theory" means something different then how a layman would think of it. Using science, evolution is considered something closer to what a layman would call a "fact". So it is a equivocation fallacy for those playing at home.
Okay, fancy pants. Throw out words like "equivocation fallacy" but fail in the usage of "you're" and you betray the scientific masquerade.
JasonF
02-17-12, 07:01 PM
Since there doesn't seem to be a thread where we can talk about the election, I'll just post this in the religion thread:
Ohio AG Mike DeWine switches backing from Romney to Santorum before GOP presidential primary
By Associated Press, Updated: Friday, February 17, 4:35 PM
COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine switched his endorsement from Mitt Romney to Rick Santorum on Friday in a defection he said was driven by his belief the former Pennsylvania senator can win the Republican presidential race.
DeWine, a former senator who led John McCain’s Ohio presidential campaign in 2008, made the announcement in the company of Santorum at the Statehouse. He said he once felt Santorum could not overcome Romney’s financial advantage but has decided he was wrong.
“To be elected president, you have to do more than tear down your opponents,” DeWine said. “You have to give the American people a reason to vote for you, a reason to hope, a reason to believe that under your leadership, America will be better. Rick Santorum has done that. Sadly, Governor Romney has not.”
DeWine had endorsed Romney in the Republican presidential race after his initial choice, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, withdrew.
The defection comes as a sting to Romney, though he still has some major names in Ohio Republican politics behind him heading into the March 6 primary. They include Sen. Rob Portman, Reps. Mike Turner and Jim Renacci, and the former senator and governor, George Voinovich.
Romney’s camp tried to wave off the development.
“Nothing has changed,” insisted John Sununu, a Romney adviser and former New Hampshire governor. “Attorneys general don’t have that much of an organization.”
He attributed the switch to an ad a pro-Romney group ran criticizing Santorum’s vote in the Senate to give voting rights to felons once they complete their sentences or parole. DeWine also had cast a vote in favor of such rights.
“Mike DeWine was upset that issue was raised by the super PAC,” Sununu said.
DeWine said Friday he had never seen the ad and it didn’t impact his decision.
Ohio Democrats, through their spokesman Seth Bringman, issued a terse statement in response to DeWine’s decision: “As is true for countless Ohioans, the more Mike DeWine learned about Mitt Romney, the less he liked.”
DeWine successfully pushed for Ohio to join 25 other states in a lawsuit to block President Barack Obama’s federal health care overhaul, claiming health insurance mandates are unconstitutional.
He served four terms in the House and two terms in the Senate before losing his re-election bid to Sherrod Brown in 2006. He won a close election for state attorney general in 2010.
Sununu was joined by Turner in a conference call aimed at countering Santorum’s latest piece of good news. Turner said Santorum, who has lacked money and organization for much of the race, won’t get on the ballot in all states and that raises questions about his “basic level of competence.”
Santorum said he sees “a little symmetry” in DeWine following a 2006 loss with a subsequent win. Santorum also lost his election in 2006. He said pointing to that defeat is another false issue his critics are leveling against him.
“In fact, we’re in the best position to win these key states like Pennsylvania and Ohio — and even places like Wisconsin and Michigan, we can be very, very competitive,” he said. “If we can win the industrial Midwest, from Pennsylvania through Wisconsin and Iowa and Missouri, Barack Obama’s not going to be the next president of the United States. That’s what the folks in the Republican Party have to focus on.”
A Quinnipiac University poll out last week found Santorum edging ahead of Romney in the political battleground state, but with half the state’s GOP voters indicating they may yet change their minds. No Republican nominee has reached the White House without winning Ohio.
Coming off a sweep in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri last week, Santorum had trailed far behind Romney in Ohio just a month ago.
After false starts backing former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, neither of whom joined the race, Ohio Gov. John Kasich has said he doesn’t intend to make any presidential endorsements. Santorum said he and the governor are friends, but he does not expect his endorsement.
"Atheism is a religion" is about as common, and ignorant, as saying "evolution is just a theory". Atheism has no object of worship. A naturalistic worldview is no more a religion then being pessimistic is a religion. Your points are characterizations of people, not Atheism. The end.
In case your wondering why "evolution is just a theory" is also BS, (putting is simply) in science "theory" means something different then how a layman would think of it. Using science, evolution is considered something closer to what a layman would call a "fact". So it is a equivocation fallacy for those playing at home.
May the Fonz be with you.
:lol:
Thor Simpson
02-17-12, 07:33 PM
Since there doesn't seem to be a thread where we can talk about the election, I'll just post this in the religion thread:
:lol::up:
Are the wheels falling off Mitt Romney's bus?
YES! :lol::up:
eXcentris
02-18-12, 12:39 AM
Hey Mitt, don't piss off the Jews! :)
Elie Wiesel interview on Mormon posthumous baptism of Jews:
600,000-650,000 dead Jews were "converted". Holy crap...
Superboy
02-18-12, 04:30 AM
It is a religion. A new belief system that meets every tenet of a religion, and the adherents of which, though obviously engaging in self delusion in most of the cases, behave about, adhere to, and proselytise about it in a religious way. They actively engage in assaulting any other belief systems, which ironically is one of the behaviors they claim to hate most about those other belief systems. They engage in those assaults with emotion and fervor, spewing venom at every turn, considering their own belief system to be the only 'correct' one, again, something they claim to hate most about the other belief systems. I could go on, but the worst deluded are the self deluded, so there is no use really.
To use a Family Guy analogy, 'Atheism' is just the new church of Fonzie. People, looking to belong, and wanting some 'new' system to subscribe to, pile in to it. Again, something the adherents of atheism claim to hate most about the followers of other belief systems, and so often mock. Blindly following, shoving your opinions on others, proselytising, mocking and being rude towards other belief systems, etc.
It's really rather amusing too see people engaging in such and believing themselves to be operating on intellect, logic, and reason.
Can a sandwich eat itself?
Then it's clearly not edible, is it!
Superboy
02-18-12, 04:53 AM
I think it's pretty close for some people, that's why I made the capital letter distinction. It has many of the same attributes as what we consider religion including constant proselytising.
Really? religion has many of the same aspects as a cult too. I guess that means we can call all religions cults?
Superboy
02-18-12, 04:59 AM
People tend to be very reactionary. People do, not just Christians. There are enough Christians in this country that you can usually find one who is insulted about a certain situation, yes. So if you're looking to keep up that opinion, you will always be well-fed.
They have every right to be, and the reason people are upset isn't just because they're insulted that another religion is encroaching upon their own, but because they're desecrating the dead.
How about I find the graves of their relatives and take a nice, steaming hot shit on them? it's not religious, it's not as if they're alive to feel it, and it's not as if shitting on a corpse does something terrible to them. But it's an act of desecration against the dead.
arminius
02-18-12, 06:37 AM
Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sexual position.
Abstinence is masturbation, right?
Jason
02-18-12, 07:30 AM
In case your wondering why "evolution is just a theory" is also BS, (putting is simply) in science "theory" means something different then how a layman would think of it. Using science, evolution is considered something closer to what a layman would call a "fact". So it is a equivocation fallacy for those playing at home.
From Wiki:
A scientific theory is a set of principles that explain and predict phenomena. Scientists create scientific theories with the scientific method, when they are originally proposed as hypotheses and tested for accuracy through observations and experiments. Once a hypothesis is verified, it becomes a theory.
So yeah, pretty much just a hunch. Evolution was obviously pulled directly out of someone's ass.
Thor Simpson
02-18-12, 09:11 AM
Yeah, and the reason people are upset isn't just because they're insulted that another religion is encroaching upon their own, but because they're desecrating the dead.
I don't know why you're being seemingly argumentative with me. I never supported the practice in the slightest. I was simply arguing against CRM's claim that "Christians get upset about everything." My point was "sure, some do. Some people get upset about a lot of things." Sorry if that wasn't clear. I wasn't referencing the mormon baptism issue.
My problem with the issue, based on my limited understanding, is that the mormon church keeps records with their names and claims a conversion. I don't think that's a fair practice when it comes to their family and would personally find it very insulting if it happened to someone I know.
I demand a response from Mitt.
Expect something along the lines of "Some people are troubled by my mornom faith. Well, as of the candlelight of 9pm last night, all the other candidates are mormon now too. So you can no longer hold that against me."
JasonF
02-18-12, 09:29 AM
Expect something along the lines of "Some people are troubled by my mornom faith. Well, as of the candlelight of 9pm last night, all the other candidates are mormon now too. So you can no longer hold that against me."
:lol:
How about something along the lines of "My Mormon faith shouldn't be an issue. We've had Mormon presidents before. In fact, all of our former presidents with the exception of the Bushes and Clinton are Mormons."
Talkin2Phil
02-18-12, 10:04 AM
What legal rights does my corpse have once I die? besides being able to vote in Chicago. Can it truly "rest in peace"?
crazyronin
02-18-12, 10:25 AM
:lol:
How about something along the lines of "My Mormon faith shouldn't be an issue. We've had Mormon presidents before. In fact, all of our former presidents with the exception of the Bushes and Clinton are Mormons."
No mention of history's greatest monster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marge_in_Chains)? For shame.
Superboy
02-18-12, 10:29 AM
I don't know why you're being seemingly argumentative with me. I never supported the practice in the slightest. I was simply arguing against CRM's claim that "Christians get upset about everything." My point was "sure, some do. Some people get upset about a lot of things." Sorry if that wasn't clear. I wasn't referencing the mormon baptism issue.
My problem with the issue, based on my limited understanding, is that the mormon church keeps records with their names and claims a conversion. I don't think that's a fair practice when it comes to their family and would personally find it very insulting if it happened to someone I know.
I demand a response from Mitt.
Expect something along the lines of "Some people are troubled by my mornom faith. Well, as of the candlelight of 9pm last night, all the other candidates are mormon now too. So you can no longer hold that against me."
I wasn't being argumentative. I was merely continuing along the same line of thought.
JasonF
02-18-12, 10:38 AM
No mention of history's greatest monster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marge_in_Chains)? For shame.
I can't believe I forgot about him. I mentally checked off Ford and Reagan as being deceased, but didn't even think about poor Jimmuh.
Thor Simpson
02-18-12, 11:34 AM
I wasn't being argumentative. I was merely continuing along the same line of thought.
That's fine, just don't do it after I'm dead.
How about something along the lines of "My Mormon faith shouldn't be an issue. We've had Mormon presidents before. In fact, all of our former presidents with the exception of the Bushes and Clinton are Mormons."
I like it. :up:
Josh-da-man
02-18-12, 03:28 PM
:lol:
How about something along the lines of "My Mormon faith shouldn't be an issue. We've had Mormon presidents before. In fact, all of our former presidents with the exception of the Bushes and Clinton are Mormons."
When did Jimmy Carter convert?
starman9000
02-18-12, 03:35 PM
When did Jimmy Carter convert?
No mention of history's greatest monster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marge_in_Chains)? For shame.
I can't believe I forgot about him. I mentally checked off Ford and Reagan as being deceased, but didn't even think about poor Jimmuh.
Try and keep up. ;)
Navinabob
02-18-12, 04:45 PM
Okay, fancy pants. Throw out words like "equivocation fallacy" but fail in the usage of "you're" and you betray the scientific masquerade.
Thats unpossible!
Navinabob
02-18-12, 05:03 PM
From Wiki:
A scientific theory is a set of principles that explain and predict phenomena. Scientists create scientific theories with the scientific method, when they are originally proposed as hypotheses and tested for accuracy through observations and experiments. Once a hypothesis is verified, it becomes a theory.
So yeah, pretty much just a hunch. Evolution was obviously pulled directly out of someone's ass.
Yeah, this is a longer summary broken up in a pretty easy way to digest:
http://notjustatheory.com/
You've been told that "evolution is just a theory", a guess, a hunch, and not a fact, not proven. You've been misled. Keep reading, and in less than two minutes from now you'll know that you've been misinformed. We're not going to try and change your mind about evolution. We just want to point out that "it's just a theory" is not a valid argument.
The Theory of Evolution is a theory, but guess what? When scientists use the word theory, it has a different meaning to normal everyday use. That's right, it all comes down to the multiple meanings of the word theory. If you said to a scientist that you didn't believe in evolution because it was "just a theory", they'd probably be a bit puzzled.
In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It's a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations. It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It's as close to proven as anything in science can be.
Some people think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a law by proving it. A theory never becomes a law.
This bears repeating. A theory never becomes a law. In fact, if there was a hierarchy of science, theories would be higher than laws. There is nothing higher, or better, than a theory. Laws describe things, theories explain them. An example will help you to understand this. There's a law of gravity, which is the description of gravity. It basically says that if you let go of something it'll fall. It doesn't say why. Then there's the theory of gravity, which is an attempt to explain why. Actually, Newton's Theory of Gravity did a pretty good job, but Einstein's Theory of Relativity does a better job of explaining it. These explanations are called theories, and will always be theories. They can't be changed into laws, because laws are different things. Laws describe, and theories explain.
Just because it's called a theory of gravity, doesn't mean that it's just a guess. It's been tested. All our observations are supported by it, as well as its predictions that we've tested. Also, gravity is real! You can observe it for yourself. Just because it's real doesn't mean that the explanation is a law. The explanation, in scientific terms, is called a theory.
Evolution is the same. There's the fact of evolution. Evolution (genetic change over generations) happens, just like gravity does. Don't take my word for it. Ask your science teacher, or google it. But that's not the issue we are addressing here. The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. It has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.
Next time someone tries to tell you that evolution is just a theory, as a way of dismissing it, as if it's just something someone guessed at, remember that they're using the non-scientific meaning of the word. If that person is a teacher, or minister, or some other figure of authority, they should know better. In fact, they probably do, and are trying to mislead you
starman9000
02-18-12, 06:39 PM
Well, I'm certainly glad the stupid poster that doesn't believe in evolution was put into his place! Who was that again?
Thor Simpson
02-18-12, 06:44 PM
I don't know of many people who dispute evolution as "genetic change over generations."
The debate lies primarily with macro-evolution.
When you hear the word "evolution" used in these debates, people are most often referring to macro-evolution, whether they use the term or not.
Dr Mabuse
02-18-12, 07:03 PM
Well, I'm certainly glad the stupid poster that doesn't believe in evolution was put into his place! Who was that again?
:lol:
It was the poster made of dried stalks of grain.
When people are emotionally engaged in defending their own religion, most often by lashing out at the belief systems of other, they aren't engaging their intellect. Therefore things don't have be based in reason, logic, or intellect... as I mentioned earlier.
'Oh yeah!?!? well you'un evolutionists is stupid tools of the devil and ig'nrant of god! I've heard all your stupid arguments before!' or 'Oh yeah!?!? well you'un creationists is all stupid and ig'nrant of science! I've heard all your stupid arguments before!'.
To the superficial person, the thoughtless person, those two examples appear quite different, believe it or not. The result of refracting the world through the lens of emotion and self delusion.
Jason
02-18-12, 09:37 PM
:lol:
It was the poster made of dried stalks of grain.
When people are emotionally engaged in defending their own religion, most often by lashing out at the belief systems of other, they aren't engaging their intellect. Therefore things don't have be based in reason, logic, or intellect... as I mentioned earlier.
'Oh yeah!?!? well you'un evolutionists is stupid tools of the devil and ig'nrant of god! I've heard all your stupid arguments before!' or 'Oh yeah!?!? well you'un creationists is all stupid and ig'nrant of science! I've heard all your stupid arguments before!'.
To the superficial person, the thoughtless person, those two examples appear quite different, believe it or not. The result of refracting the world through the lens of emotion and self delusion.
But creationists are willfully ignorant of science, the scientific method, and what the theory of evolution actually states. Some wear this as a badge of honor (http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/overheads/pages/oh20030621_179.asp). Being critical of these types of positions is not refracting the world through ones own ignorance and bias.
wmansir
02-18-12, 10:21 PM
The postponed Maine caucuses took place today (minus one small town) and, as expected, it didn't change the results. Despite a very large turnout in Washington County, Romney maintained his first place status.
Wait, I'm confused? I thought Ron Paul was going to win by a landslide and the voting was suppressed by the Rothschild Conspiracy?
Tommy Ceez
02-18-12, 10:59 PM
Jesus obama's plan is working. 3 pages of religion talk, no economic posts.
Navinabob
02-19-12, 12:01 AM
Jesus obama's plan is working. 3 pages of religion talk, no economic posts.
Which would be fair, but two of the three Republican candidate's left believe in ID and some want to want to change science/religion policy in the US and teach it. So... sorta relevant when talking about The Republican Candidates
He told his interviewers that he did not believe there was a "conflict between true science and true religion," he said.
"True science and true religion are on exactly the same page," he said. "they may come from different angles, but they reach the same conclusion. I've never found a conflict between the science of evolution and the belief that God created the universe. He uses scientific tools to do his work."
Ron Paul:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyvkjSKMLw
"I think there is a theory, a theory of evolution, and I don't accept it," Paul said.
Paul said he thought it was "very inappropriate" for presidential candidates to be judged on a matter of science. He also defended creationism while saying that all sides of the creation debate have an element of uncertainty.
"The creator that I know created us, each and every one of us and created the universe, and the precise time and manner," Paul said. "I just don't think we're at the point where anybody has absolute proof on either side."
I believe in Genesis 1:1 -- God created the heavens and the earth. I don't know exactly how God did it or exactly how long it took him, but I do know that He did it. If Gov. Huntsman wants to believe that he is the descendant of a monkey, then he has the right to believe that -- but I disagree with him on this and the many other liberal beliefs he shares with Democrats. For John Huntsman to categorize anyone as 'anti-science' or 'extreme' because they believe in God is ridiculous."
He also has his name tied to intelligent design: the "Santorum Amendment" to the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act would have forced public schools to offer the creationist perspective in science classes, and to call into question the scientific evidence supporting evolution. That amendment was rejected.
"I'm not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom. What we should be teaching are the problems and holes and I think there are legitimate problems and holes in the theory of evolution. And what we need to do is to present those fairly from a scientific point of view," Santorum said. "And we should lay out areas in which the evidence supports evolution and the areas in the evidence that does not."
JasonF
02-19-12, 02:18 AM
Which would be fair, but two of the three Republican candidate's left believe in ID and some want to want to change science/religion policy in the US and teach it. So... sorta relevant when talking about The Republican Candidates
Mitt Romney:
Ron Paul:
Rick Santorum:
Poor Newtie. :sad:
Navinabob
02-19-12, 04:53 AM
Poor Newtie. :sad:
Believe it or not, Newt gets it mostly right. He waivers a bit to not piss off the Religious Right, but if you pin him down he says this:
"I believe evolution should be taught as science, and intelligent design should be taught as philosophy."
Newt is the only guy in the bunch that stresses pushing science education in our schools.
classicman2
02-19-12, 09:51 AM
I'm don't tend to be critical of the off-topic posts that frequently appear on this forum (sometimes I'm guilty of the practice), but really, this thread is ridiculous.
Sean O'Hara
02-19-12, 10:10 AM
I'm don't tend to be critical of the off-topic posts that frequently appear on this forum (sometimes I'm guilty of the practice), but really, this thread is ridiculous.
So, what do you think of Whitney's death?
Jason
02-19-12, 11:18 AM
I'm don't tend to be critical of the off-topic posts that frequently appear on this forum (sometimes I'm guilty of the practice), but really, this thread is ridiculous.
But what else is there to talk about? The republican primary has basically become a purity challenge between romney, gingrich and santorum. They aren't even bothering to discuss the issues anymore. It's nothing but accusations of weakness, proclamations of how awesome they are, and endless gaffes.
All they talk about is how much of Obama's legislation they're going to undo. I'm waiting for one of them to suggest building our own large hadron collider so they can make a time machine to prevent Obama from being born (in Kenya, of course *wink wink*) Santorum complains that Google won't take down a site making fun of him, and release this commercial (www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-february-16-2012/indecision-2012---mitt-romney-s---rick-santorum-s-michigan-campaign-ads) (skip to the 3:00 minute mark).
How could anyone have a serious discussion about this? At least when it was a huge traveling circus there were some ideas floating around. 9-9-9 was hardly perfect, but it was something.
JasonF
02-19-12, 12:07 PM
Believe it or not, Newt gets it mostly right. He waivers a bit to not piss off the Religious Right, but if you pin him down he says this:
"I believe evolution should be taught as science, and intelligent design should be taught as philosophy."
Newt is the only guy in the bunch that stresses pushing science education in our schools.
I didn't know that about him. Score one for Newt for not pandering completely.
But I was referring to the fact that you said there were three candidates left, then listed Romney, Santorum, and Paul. Gingrich is still in this thing, though, even if everyone besides him recognizes that he's not going to win.
classicman2
02-19-12, 12:48 PM
One meaningful thing we could discuss is the GOP candidates' position on energy - as compared to the non-realistic, pie-in-the-sky energy policy of our president.
Buy: