Politics The Elephant in the room...The GOP today

Someone like Huntsman would be good.

That said, the problem isn't so much the leadership. It's the voters. There seems to be a lot of support for the most idiotic of ideas.

 

It just might.

This is not a new phenomena, it's just new(ish) the American South. The same issues are rearing up across Europe and Canada. It's also quite the topic here in Singapore as well. Immigration both builds nations and irreversibly changes them.

 

What Republicans need is better names for their campaigns.

Conservative Victory Party. It sounds like a BBQ at a cattle ranch.

 

Strom Thurmond was a Democrat until he switched parties in '64.

'Nuff said.

 

If true that conscious is a condition of environment one would think that controlling for environment a consistent and predictable outcome would result - the implication of this is that conscious can be more or less manufactured - I think that is absurd. Feel free to worship at whatever alter you choose but the notion that your alter has all the answers illustrates your level of tolerance and open mindedness.

If you read what I wrote I don't think schools should confuse facts with theory, opinion, folklore, etc. When age appropriate theory is brought into the schools it should be taught as theory. When folklore is being discussed it should be discussed as folklore. When opinions are presented they should be presented as opinion. I don't fear exposure to information I am suspect of or information that I disagree with - to the contrary I welcome it. I give students more credit than you - I think they can handle it.

 

I don't understand what you are saying. Do you mean "conscience" or "consciousness" or something else?

What was the question? If what is true?

 

You can live with the lies used to promote liberal policy like Obama's debt reduction plan or Obamacare?

Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/020513-643333-fiscal-cliff-budget-congress-president-federal-spending.htm#ixzz2K9PdXxjG
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook​

Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com#ixzz2K9QAeg14
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook​

Give me an imperfect Tea Party candidate who is honest any day of the week rather than a person who will repeatedly and knowingly out right lie to promote their hidden political agenda.​

 

I may have confused the words in a post or two, if so my apology, as it does gets a bit confusing - but I am discussing self-awareness. There are 5 commonly defined levels of self-awareness at some level one achieves an understanding of self and at higher levels of self-awareness we achieve an understanding of self in the context of how the world views us - the sensations of morality.
--- merged: Feb 6, 2013 8:25 PM ---

the on-line dictionary:

Worship -

Worship - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
I read what you wrote to mean that you had an admiration for Gould - and I assume you have an admiration for Darwin - and it is clear you have an extravagant respect for science to the point where you do not want public money spent on teaching religious theology that contradicts scientific theory.

To reach the conclusion that things that are conditional on environment can be controlled if one can control the environment. Is that conjecture?

 

You do lack restraint for science relative to theology. Your belief in scientific theory is so extreme that you would deny public funding for comparable religious theory in schools. I argue that theory is theory - I show restraint. I argue that the student can understand the differences between scientific and religious theory, you have been silent on the issue, but implicit you don't show restraint in this regard either. You are on the other extreme of those who do not want some scientific theories exposed to their children. This exceeds what is reasonable on both sides.


To elaborate on conscious v conscience. If conscious as awareness of self is environmental - in a laboratory controlled environment you would think you could condition an eagle into a self awareness that it is a rabbit - to the degree that these animals have awareness of self. In some low levels of self awareness with species that are similar this may be possible - otherwise it is absurd in my opinion. If conscience as awareness of self in the context of how we view our self through the perspective of the world and others around us is environmental - in a laboratory controlled environment you would think you could condition people into predictable morality responses to behaviors - this is absurd in my opinion as well.

 

You compare science and theology. I was comparing scientific theory with theology (religious) theory. I repeat, there is a difference between science and theology - I see it and I agree. I also see differences in the approaches to theory from the perspective of science and the perspective of theology. However, the concluding theories are in fact theories. I have also stated that some theories are more credible than others - all theories are not equal. However we do get to points where both religious theory and scientific theory are within a range of comparative credibility.

Yes, and I gave you my explanation. You have not directly responded to my explanation.

Theology is based on the observations of the real world. When one studies different theologies from a folklore perspective there are clear recurring patterns - these patterns arrived at independently based on human observations of the real world. These observations and the curiosity are the basis of science. To try and separate them would be like trying to separate the links in a evolutionary chain.

Again I have no problem with calling religious theory what it is, nor do I have a problem calling scientific theory what it is. My view is broader than yours, your view is more narrow, more closed, more intolerant, etc. More extreme.

It depends on the religious theory in question. A religious theory that states self-restraint as beneficial to the quality of life is clearly not metaphysics - and can be proven. One of the seven deadly sins is gluttony - it is provable that gluttony can hind the quality of life and in fact can be deadly. Science approaches this issue as well - both arrive at the same conclusion. Long before science addressed gluttony, religion did.

Only to those with narrow points of view.

Are you to be the judge and jury of this? I hope not. How do you pretend to know what is and what is not a waste of another person's time?

 

That would be the Supreme Court that ruled in 1987 that requiring that creation science be taught in public schools, along with evolution, was unconstitutional because the state law in question was specifically intended to advance a particular religion.
--- merged: Feb 6, 2013 at 5:43 PM ---
Give it a fucking rest, already!

 

He understands perfectly well. Nobody can be this obtuse. I stand by my theory -- troll.

 

Can we talk now about teaching the Koran and the Book of Mormon in public schools, given that Islam and Mormonism are the fastest growing religions in the US (according to US Religion Census).

Imagine the stampede of elephants in the room if this were proposed in any state legislature!