Moderator: Community Team
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
They are willfully misinterpreting what he said there. I'm no fan of Richard Dawkins, I don't really care about him, but I do care about journalistic integrity. Willful misinterpretation of what someone says is the same thing as bearing false witness, n'es pas?When asked in an interview, "If we do not acknowledge some sort of external [standard], what is to prevent us from saying that the Muslim [extremists] aren’t right?", Dawkins replied, "What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question. But whatever [defines morality], it’s not the Bible. If it was, we’d be stoning people for breaking the Sabbath."[9]
The interviewer wrote, regarding the Hitler comment, "I was stupefied. He had readily conceded that his own philosophical position did not offer a rational basis for moral judgments. His intellectual honesty was refreshing, if somewhat disturbing on this point."[9]
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
Lol, wut?Dawkins' book "The God Delusion" along with a community college biology class, have been linked to the tragic suicide of Jesse Kilgore.[15] Kilgore had several discussions with friends and relatives in which he made it clear Dawkins' book had destroyed his belief in God. This loss of faith is considered the cause of his suicide which is not surprising given that there is evidence which suggest that atheism can be a causal factor for suicide for some individuals.[16][17][18][19]
....false prayer is so blasphemous, so I cursed a few times instead.
I read that, hilarious.Iliad wrote:That site is ridicilous.
It tries to assert that only atheists believe in evolution, which is actually epic bullshit and then comes the biggest bs of allLol, wut?Dawkins' book "The God Delusion" along with a community college biology class, have been linked to the tragic suicide of Jesse Kilgore.[15] Kilgore had several discussions with friends and relatives in which he made it clear Dawkins' book had destroyed his belief in God. This loss of faith is considered the cause of his suicide which is not surprising given that there is evidence which suggest that atheism can be a causal factor for suicide for some individuals.[16][17][18][19]
There is even an entire page about how supposedly suicides went up. One of the "proofs" is how suicide rate went up in Paris after an atheistic book was published. WTF?
Well sir, you do know that correlation equals causation, do you not?Iliad wrote:There is even an entire page about how supposedly suicides went up. One of the "proofs" is how suicide rate went up in Paris after an atheistic book was published. WTF?
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
So, um, those are really pretty general moral issues. And everyone is guilty of them. The page on Liberal Values is so short, it's worth quoting here:Conservative values are useful and powerful in combating common human weaknesses:
* Lust
* Laziness
* Jealousy
* Gluttony
* Pride
* Conflict
* Corruption
I don't get it. Where have these values been defined and identified as such by a liberal authority? Is there even such a thing?Liberal values refers to the value system commonly held by liberals, just as Professor values and Hollywood values do for professors and Hollywood respectively. Liberal values stand in stark opposition to conservative values and thus reject those things which conservatives hold to be dear and true. This includes, but is not limited to:
* Censorship of ideas not deemed politically correct
* Denial of politically incorrect truths such as the link between abortion and breast cancer
* Opposition to the free market, instead favoring heavy regulation
* A desire for equal outcomes as opposed to equal opportunity
* Liberal students protest or disrupt conservative guest speakers on college campuses
* To judge something immoral behavior is tantamount to being a bigot.
* Bigotry itself, an almost uniquely liberal trait
In general, liberal values tend to undermine traditional society, and in certain instances can cause irreparable harm to the lives of individuals who are brought under their sway.
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
In general, I find most of these are true. I will go down the list, in order.pimpdave wrote:I don't get it. Where have these values been defined and identified as such by a liberal authority? Is there even such a thing?Liberal values refers to the value system commonly held by liberals, just as Professor values and Hollywood values do for professors and Hollywood respectively. Liberal values stand in stark opposition to conservative values and thus reject those things which conservatives hold to be dear and true. This includes, but is not limited to:
* Censorship of ideas not deemed politically correct
* Denial of politically incorrect truths such as the link between abortion and breast cancer
* Opposition to the free market, instead favoring heavy regulation
* A desire for equal outcomes as opposed to equal opportunity
* Liberal students protest or disrupt conservative guest speakers on college campuses
* To judge something immoral behavior is tantamount to being a bigot.
* Bigotry itself, an almost uniquely liberal trait
In general, liberal values tend to undermine traditional society, and in certain instances can cause irreparable harm to the lives of individuals who are brought under their sway.
That's not really a link between abortion and breast cancer.captain.crazy wrote: * Women who breast feed are seven times less likely to get breast cancer, maybe that is what they mean. The hormonal triggering mechanism starts the process of developing breast milk, but those hormones are never actuated, thus leaving these chemicals in the fatty tissue of the breast.
I think that you could make an argument about the breast cancer thing... but I would have to study it more to be certain. I can't claim one way or the other, I am only speculating. And I agree with you about denial of truths... its just that I recognize that this goes both ways. Do you disagree?Snorri1234 wrote:That's not really a link between abortion and breast cancer.captain.crazy wrote: * Women who breast feed are seven times less likely to get breast cancer, maybe that is what they mean. The hormonal triggering mechanism starts the process of developing breast milk, but those hormones are never actuated, thus leaving these chemicals in the fatty tissue of the breast.
Besides, denial of truths for political reasons is pretty spot-on when talking about conservatives.
I don't disagree. Politics is usually about denying truths because it suits you. I think the offense is more that it's somehow a liberal value instead of just politics.captain.crazy wrote:I think that you could make an argument about the breast cancer thing... but I would have to study it more to be certain. I can't claim one way or the other, I am only speculating. And I agree with you about denial of truths... its just that I recognize that this goes both ways. Do you disagree?Snorri1234 wrote:That's not really a link between abortion and breast cancer.captain.crazy wrote: * Women who breast feed are seven times less likely to get breast cancer, maybe that is what they mean. The hormonal triggering mechanism starts the process of developing breast milk, but those hormones are never actuated, thus leaving these chemicals in the fatty tissue of the breast.
Besides, denial of truths for political reasons is pretty spot-on when talking about conservatives.
Sure. The point about breast cancer and abortion is vague. People (and there are many) will blindly take that point as fact without ever looking at the evidence as to why that may be the case. At any rate, I appreciate your rational dialog here, it seems that there are some here incapable of expressing a viewpoint without being vulgar.Snorri1234 wrote:I don't disagree. Politics is usually about denying truths because it suits you. I think the offense is more that it's somehow a liberal value instead of just politics.captain.crazy wrote:I think that you could make an argument about the breast cancer thing... but I would have to study it more to be certain. I can't claim one way or the other, I am only speculating. And I agree with you about denial of truths... its just that I recognize that this goes both ways. Do you disagree?Snorri1234 wrote:That's not really a link between abortion and breast cancer.captain.crazy wrote: * Women who breast feed are seven times less likely to get breast cancer, maybe that is what they mean. The hormonal triggering mechanism starts the process of developing breast milk, but those hormones are never actuated, thus leaving these chemicals in the fatty tissue of the breast.
Besides, denial of truths for political reasons is pretty spot-on when talking about conservatives.
Oh!Snorri1234 wrote:The weirdest thing about this conservapedia is that they aren't actually biased in every article. I looked up The Netherlands, and instead of a condemnation of dutch values and policies it just offered pretty basic facts.
He did have a very sexy moustache.Bovver boy wrote:Madefe is a big fan of Hitler too.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
This has been asserted by folks who want to put forward a young earth = Christianity idea, but is really not true at all.pimpdave wrote: "The theory of evolution was published by naturalist Charles Darwin in his book On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, in 1859.[19] Prior to publishing the book, Darwin wrote in his private notebooks that he was a materialist, which is a type of atheist."