Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

Gay and Godless on the Public-School Stage

nomad5 Wrote: Mar 30, 2013 1:44 PM
(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.
In response to:

Gay and Godless on the Public-School Stage

nomad5 Wrote: Mar 30, 2013 1:40 PM
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--
In response to:

Beware Public Opinion

nomad5 Wrote: Mar 28, 2013 7:46 PM
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?
In response to:

‘Pro-Choice’ Slave Masters Losing War

nomad5 Wrote: Mar 18, 2013 7:30 PM
Sorry for the dual post...not sure what happened.
In response to:

‘Pro-Choice’ Slave Masters Losing War

nomad5 Wrote: Mar 18, 2013 7:29 PM
In order for you to write your second sentence, you must go along with the fundamental premise behind RvW and behind Dred Scott: that humans have the right to decide which products of human conception are human, and which are not. This is a binary choice: Either they do, or they don't. If they do, then they do. You will argue that you have controls and limits; I will (a) ask you on what basis you are putting artificial controls in place (because if humans have the right, any limit is artificial), and (b) point out that with a suitable manipulation campaign I can do away with any control you put in place. It's already been done both here and elsewhere. If they don't, then they don't, and the mass murderers were wrong.
In response to:

‘Pro-Choice’ Slave Masters Losing War

nomad5 Wrote: Mar 18, 2013 7:29 PM
In order for you to write your second sentence, you must go along with the fundamental premise behind RvW and behind Dred Scott: that humans have the right to decide which products of human conception are human, and which are not. This is a binary choice: Either they do, or they don't. If they do, then they do. You will argue that you have controls and limits; I will (a) ask you on what basis you are putting artificial controls in place (because if humans have the right, any limit is artificial), and (b) point out that with a suitable manipulation campaign I can do away with any control you put in place. It's already been done both here and elsewhere. If they don't, then they don't, and the mass murderers were wrong.
Like most of what we deal with today, we are still fighting the battles of the 1960s in education. The two sets of partisans need to accept this, and to understand that before we can "make progress" in much of any direction the bad blood and acrimony that has built up over the past 45 years or so is going to have to be bled off. The best thing we could do today is to agree that we have to (a) keep the lights on and (b) pay our bills, and otherwise stop trying to make "great moves forward". Of course, we won't learn this, and will keep fighting and trying to "win", not having the wisdom to realize that while there can't be two winners there can most certainly be (and IS) two losers.
In response to:

The Continuing Wimpification of America

nomad5 Wrote: Mar 16, 2013 9:19 AM
That's disrespectful to geeks. Most geeks aren't this silly.
Previous 11 - 20 Next