Try this. You believe that humans have the authority to decide which products of human conception are human, and which are not. If it's a "choice", then before you can "choose", you have to assume the authority to do so. Your assumption of that authority can be extended to ANY products of human conception, at ANY age. You say you'd never use your "choice" that way??? How many people across this planet in the last 100 years made that same claim, and then wound up making all kinds of "choices" that rendered products of human conception very, very dead??? With the right persuasion, you'd expand your "choice" to all kinds of folks, because you have ALREADY made the critical decision...that you can decide what is and is not human

I really wish Townhall would make it possible to write more in a block, because most of the things we discuss here don't fit in a single block (unless they are insults, which we could do without). Regards to all.

(cont'd) 4. It is relatively easy, for example, to design science lessons not to champion evolution or to denigrate it, or to champion religious faith or denigrate it, but simply to present what is known, what is thought, and what is believed, and make it clear to the youngster that (a) he or she will decide what they think, and (b) there are consequences for that decision (as there are for ALL decisions).

(cont'd) 3. This extends to how we educate children. It is not the business of public education to teach children to be in favor of or against religious faith or ANY OTHER PHILOSOPHY. It is the business of public education to teach children how to be responsible adult US citizens, and to educate themselves throughout the rest of their lives. Until the public educators actually DO this again, then their side excursions into various politically-correct topics is even more inappropriate than they would be otherwise.

All: Time to separate issues again. 1. This play is completely inappropriate for spending public money on. Inarguably, absolutely inappropriate. 2. One root of this issue is the wording of the First Amendment. Many secular folks (regardless of political direction) think that the First Amendment establishes secular thought as being superior to thought based on religious belief (because they say, "My beliefs are not religious in nature, so I am free to spend public money on them; however, yours are religious in nature, so you can't."). To the extent this is tolerated, folks with religious faith are second-class citizens in this country. The only way out of this is to stop publicly funding ALL belief-based speech.

wisdom to choose (d), but that's the correct choice IMHO. I suspect, however, that we will arrive at (b) instead.

c. The two sides finally escalate beyond words and political chicanery toward some level of violence. d. The two sides finally realize that (a) while it's not possible to have two winners it's entirely possible to have two losers; (b) we are going to have to simply disagree in a whole host of areas, and accept half a loaf in a lot of areas, just to keep the peace; (c) neither side is going to get very much of what they want; and (d) it's time to start structuring forward motion to stop trying to mold the society and instead just keep the lights on and the trash picked up. It's not glamorous, but it gets the job done, and given 50-75 years it will allow the bad blood to finally die off. It's unclear if the two sides have the...

Don: You wrote "What good are principles if they're thrown out the window in this dirty fight?" The answer to that depends on how the fight is viewed. If it's viewed as a disagreement among friends or even fellow citizens, then I'd agree with you. The evidence at least suggests, however, that America is slowly but surely coming back around to the same position they were in in the late 1850s--viewing each other as something less than human and ready to injure and even kill each other for the sake of what they believe in. This ends one of several ways: a. The two sets of partisans continue to bash at each other. b. One side or the other finally subjugates their opponents and oppresses them. --more--

Do you understand that despite the worst you can say or do about God that He still loves you as much as He loves His own Son? Do you understand that regardless of the number of times you insist that He doesn't even exist that He still longs to fellowship with you and bless you? You've built an idol named GOD, and you think you know all about Him by looking at what you've made, and you hate Him because of the way your idol looks. You obviously don't know that He loves you. If you did, you couldn't believe He's a myth. I don't know why you hate Him, but He loves you. Why not pitch the idol and start talking to and listening to the real God? What do you have to lose?

Sorry for the dual post...not sure what happened.