spendi, being a realist, I have no delusion anything resemblimg a religion-free society is achieveable within the foreseeable future; superstition dies hard, and ignorance is its chief ally. I do applaud the religionists, particularly the fundamentalists of whatever stripe, for their recent efforts; while the to-be-wished end is yet generations away, the demise of religion as a sociopolitical factor is naught but hastened by the absurditites and outrages perpetrated by the unthinkingly devout, whether Jihadist or Jehovah's Witness. The pernicious influence of religion and its inherrent bigotry and elitism has brought on itself its own assured, and richly deserved, finish.
Wait a minute timber-
Quote: superstition dies hard, and ignorance is its chief ally.
"Mmmm!huh! Ogoggilby eh?Sounds like a bubble in a bath tub." (Can you do WC's accent?)
Just who is ignorant?The broad masses I suppose.
"Don't be a luddy-duddy.Don't be a mooncalf.Don't be a jabbernowl.You're none of those are you?"
"You listen to me Og-there's nothing in this world that's perfect."
Not even scientists.
spendius wrote:"You listen to me Og-there's nothing in this world that's perfect."
Not even scientists.
With which scientists would certainly agree Spendy, and with which religionists would not. Dont they have holy texts which they describe as the final and perfect word of God?
What do you think of Gilbert and George btw
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/comment/story/0,,1691445,00.html
Thanks for Gilbert & George, Boss--i was unfamiliar with them.
You know, there are so many strawmen reeling around in this thread within the last few pages, that no one had better carelessly throw down a match, lest the whole place go up in flames . . .
Steve wrote-
Quote:With which scientists would certainly agree Spendy, and with which religionists would not. Dont they have holy texts which they describe as the final and perfect word of God?
That is very loosely worded Steve.What makes you think the "religionists" really represent Religion just because they make a lot of noise.
I read the link and the interview with G and G.
No art in sight I'm afraid.Banging on pans more like.
Your article does not identify who "Fair" is . . .
spendius wrote:What makes you think the "religionists" really represent Religion just because they make a lot of noise.
I read the link and the interview with G and G.
No art in sight I'm afraid.Banging on pans more like.
You made that point about religions not representing religion before, and I still dont get it.
Are you refering to some esoteric meaning behind the outward face of religion? Like the cabala or something?
And what makes me think the religionists represent Religion? Well they claim to don't they?
No cabala Steve.Nothing esoteric.Pure mainstream European.
Not gnostic.Not Manichean.Not Nestorian.Not monophysite.Not Catharist.Not Albigensian.No heresies.
"Big time negotiators,false healers and women haters,
Masters of the bluff and masters of the proposition,
But the enemy I see wears a cloak of decency
All non-believers and men stealers talkin' in the name of religion.
And there's a slow train.A slow train.Comin' ".
Slow Train Bob Dylan
Do you really think such questions can be disposed of in a post?
Setanta wrote:Your article does not identify who "Fair" is . . .
Sorry, my quoted article is an abridgement. Fair is South Carolina State Senator Mike Fair.
Setanta wrote:You know, there are so many strawmen reeling around in this thread within the last few pages, that no one had better carelessly throw down a match, lest the whole place go up in flames . . .
up in flames... sounds like a new form of "Poofism"
If I was to attempt an explanation of the expression "straw man" in the pub tonight which would be the best couple of examples from the last few pages to illustrate my exegesis and drive home the lesson with the verve and erudition of the last two posts?
Quote:Decision on how to teach evolution postponed
(Associated Press, January 23, 2006)
South Carolina's education reform panel met Monday to discuss whether the state's high school students should be encouraged to question evolution, but the panel decided to postpone a decision.
Scientists and teachers gave their opinions on how high school students should learn about evolution in the classroom.
Two testified that a biology standard proposed by the state Education Department should be approved as written. Two argued the wording should be revised to urge students to critically analyze the theory of evolution.
Critics say a revision leaves the door open for mixing science and religion in the classroom.
Subcommittee members say they will meet with state Education Department officials on a resolution, but no deadline for making a decision has been set.
I highlighted one sentence because this is exactly what Kansas did (revise current standards to criticize evolution). In both Kansas and South Carolina this tactic was suggested by individuals connected with the Discovery Institute.
wande-
Is this-
Quote:Discovery Institute is a nonpartisan public policy think tank conducting research
on technology, science and culture, economics and foreign affairs.
what is referred to? (Google)
Discovery Institute has a number of departments, of which the Science and Culture arm is but one. They deal in many "prosperity theology" issues as well as government. To say they are non-partisan is like FOX news calling itself "fair and balanced"
spendi, The Discovery Institute hardly is a "... nonpartisan public policy think tank conducting research on technology, science and culture, economics and foreign affairs."
It is the unambiguously partisan leading proponent of the ID-iot proposition; in fact it is the origin of the term "Intelligent Design" as substitute for Creationism.
The only public policy in which it has an interest or has taken action is in the matter of foisting the ID-iot proposition on the public education system.
It has conducted no research into anything other than fundraising and legal maneuvering, let alone published none; the proposition they champion is in fact antithetical to the concept of research.
Well why are they allowed to say that about themselves if it's a bare-assed lie.
I don't think you could do that here.I'm not certain mind you.Things are a bit strange.
spendius wrote:
Do you really think such questions can be disposed of in a post?
I dont see why not. The Royal Mail loose quite a lot of stuff.
spendiQuote:Well why are they allowed to say that about themselves if it's a bare-assed lie.
Greetings visitor, this is the planet we call earth. From what star system do you hail?
Gimme a break.
farmerman wrote:spendiQuote:Well why are they allowed to say that about themselves if it's a bare-assed lie.
Greetings visitor, this is the planet we call earth. From what star system do you hail?
Gimme a break.
the big green glowing thing out of the spaceship aint so bad farmer. Its just the language problem English/Spendi.
