And now, evolution. Brought to you by.... the devil.

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Nope, Carson isn't crazy.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...-tale-theory-of-evolution-encoura#.vaNpQ43mbJ

Note his criticism of "high fallutin'" scientists. He's just a flavor of the month -- their insanity always takes them down.

 

[Medic007]

Nope, Carson isn't crazy.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczy...-tale-theory-of-evolution-encoura#.vaNpQ43mbJ

Note his criticism of "high fallutin'" scientists. He's just a flavor of the month -- their insanity always takes them down.

Buzzfeed. Reaching. Grasping. Hoping. Very afraid.

Insanity is Dems backing the same old integrity-devoid, tired, political-never-has-been retread Hillary.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Buzzfeed. Reaching. Grasping. Hoping. Very afraid.

Insanity is Dems backing the same old integrity-devoid, tired, political-never-has-been retread Hillary.

Okay.

Do you agree with him?

 

[Medic007]

Nope. Not religious in any aspect. I don't believe in god. I don't believe in organized religion. I don't have a label for myself like atheist. I'm just a guy who lives my life according to my values and am not concerned with what others believe. I'm not offended by prayer in public. I bow my head to be respectful. I don't have any issue with anybody who doesn't believe in evolution. And I don't believe things like public prayer and the word God on our money violates anyone's right. I'll even listen to the crazy assholes who ring my doorbell on Saturday morning to pray for me and invite me into the fold.

I'm really just a to each there own guy. Unless Carson starts calling for teaching only as the bible teaches, I've got no problem with him having a different view and expressing it. That article isn't anything like you framed it with your post.

I'd still like to know about your two dozen guns. All single shot?

 

[CowboyPhil]

Boy. You're really grasping. The only person to mention the "devil" is the author, 3 times. Not 1 quote attributed to Carson mentions the devil.

 

[wyomingosualum]

Obviously another racist crap attack on the black guy.

 

[MegaPoke]

Sys tripped up by his prejudices again.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Boy. You're really grasping. The only person to mention the "devil" is the author, 3 times. Not 1 quote attributed to Carson mentions the devil.

Okay, so who do you think Carson is referencing when he says "the adversary?"

 

[MegaPoke]

Okay, so who do you think Carson is referencing when he says "the adversary?"

Do you feel dirty at all? Throwing such an accomplished African American under the bus for his faith? Think of how many minority people he could inspire.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

I've got no problem with him having a different view and expressing it. That article isn't anything like you framed it with your post.

Well, you shouldn't be bothered when Obama has a different view and expresses it then. That's what we're talking about after all -- some guy just expressing his view. You think he may try to impact education policy if he's the president of the U.S., or is the issue only whether he's entitled to have a viewpoint, like he's some guy on a lube rack that won't impact the national education policy.

Do you feel dirty at all? Throwing such an accomplished African American under the bus for his faith? Think of how many minority people he could inspire.

Are you trolling, or do you you really think that?

 

[Medic007]

Well, you shouldn't be bothered when Obama has a different view and expresses it then. That's what we're talking about after all -- some guy just expressing his view. You think he may try to impact education policy if he's the president of the U.S., or is the issue only whether he's entitled to have a viewpoint, like he's some guy on a lube rack that won't impact the national education.

That's a really dumb desperate reach on both points. But I suspect you already know that. I suspect the reason for your straw grasping is that my answer to your question made your brain fizzle.

So again, about that gun collection of yours. All single shot and revolvers? Maybe some semi autos that you've rigged to only have a single bullet in the magazine?

 

[NeekReevers]

Believing in the existence of Satan and that he is continually working against everyone on this planet is a central tenant of Christianity. It is is also a tenant of many other faiths and most certainly includes the majority of the world. If your opinion is that you believe this to be insanity, then the majority of the world is insane.

These attacks are so ridiculous and so stereotypical. If a candidate is a devout Christian, paint them as a nut. If they have been successful financially, paint them as elitist corporate scumbags. I guess what the left is looking for is someone who believes in nothing and has done nothing.....i.e. our current President.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

That's a really dumb desperate reach on both points. But I suspect you already know that. I suspect the reason for your straw grasping is that my answer to your question made your brain fizzle.

So again, about that gun collection of yours. All single shot and revolvers? Maybe some semi autos that you've rigged to only have a single bullet in the magazine?

You win the cut down contest - well done.

I get it. Everybody respects his viewpoint that the devil is behind the theory of evolution. I'm not surprised -- it is what it is. It's what makes conservative politics so much fun.

I think I responded to your gun questions some time ago. FIrst, you tell me the difference between intellectual honesty and hypocrisy. Then, I tell you about my guns.

 

[Medic007]

You win the cut down contest - well done.

I get it. Everybody respects his viewpoint that the devil is behind the theory of evolution. I'm not surprised -- it is what it is. It's what makes conservative politics so much fun.

I think I responded to your gun questions some time ago. FIrst, you tell me the difference between intellectual honesty and hypocrisy. Then, I tell you about my guns.

And you fail yet again. I never once indicated that I respect his viewpoint.

I also know you won't ever answer the question about your guns because you know that it will a)let everybody know you are a hypocrite or b)let everybody know you are a dishonest person or c)you are both. Your own posts on gun issues have boxed you into one of those three. To spare you from the inevitable embarrassment, I won't ask again.

 

[poke2001]

You win the cut down contest - well done.

I get it. Everybody respects his viewpoint that the devil is behind the theory of evolution. I'm not surprised -- it is what it is. It's what makes conservative politics so much fun.

I think I responded to your gun questions some time ago. FIrst, you tell me the difference between intellectual honesty and hypocrisy. Then, I tell you about my guns.

Wow, you post your first part and then talk about intellectual honesty? GTFO.

 

[MegaPoke]

Are you trolling, or do you you really think that?

Neither? Both? What difference does it make on this board?

Look. You've made it clear you are not a person of faith, which is fine. But just this week, Dr Carson caught ALL the shit for saying he wouldn't vote for a Muslim for president. So, on the one hand, he's criticized as being religiously intolerant. Then, later in the week he's criticized for his own religious belief, without regard as to whether said criticism is tolerant.

So, I guess in that regard, my question is pretty straight forward. In fact, let me expand it and explain it.

Are you so shallow, that because Dr Carson and Ms. Fiorina are political opponents of yours, you are able to get past the facts of an African American and a woman being so successful in this country on their own merit and call them crazy, shrill, turd etc?

Or does some element of you feel disgusted that you have to be so duplicitous for the sake of team politics? People like them should be a shining example of overcoming the racism you and pilt fear is hiding around every corner, or the war on women Cup thinks is a thing?

 

[07pilt]

Neither? Both? What difference does it make on this board?

Look. You've made it clear you are not a person of faith, which is fine. But just this week, Dr Carson caught ALL the shit for saying he wouldn't vote for a Muslim for president. So, on the one hand, he's criticized as being religiously intolerant. Then, later in the week he's criticized for his own religious belief, without regard as to whether said criticism is tolerant.

Agreed.

So, I guess in that regard, my question is pretty straight forward. In fact, let me expand it and explain it.

Are you so shallow, that because Dr Carson and Ms. Fiorina are political opponents of yours, you are able to get past the facts of an African American and a woman being so successful in this country on their own merit and call them crazy, shrill, turd etc?

I can't tell if you are being serious or lampooning. Are you saying that due to race and gender Ben and Carly should not be subjected to the ridicule Sys normally has for Republicans. Or are you trying to mock what you see as past race and gender based defense of Obama and Hillary?[/QUOTE]

Or does some element of you feel disgusted that you have to be so duplicitous for the sake of team politics? People like them should be a shining example of overcoming the racism you and pilt fear is hiding around every corner, or the war on women Cup thinks is a thing?

If you believe racism is a problem you aren't likely to support the guy who thinks the solution to that problem is for everyone to study really hard and become surgeons.

 

[squeak]

Really, because it hasn't been proven, one who believes in the Big Bang theory is taking the same leap of faith as one who believes in creationism.

 

[MegaPoke]

I can't tell if you are being serious or lampooning. Are you saying that due to race and gender Ben and Carly should not be subjected to the ridicule Sys normally has for Republicans. Or are you trying to mock what you see as past race and gender based defense of Obama and Hillary?

I'm saying that based on previous conversations with some of you guys, racism and the war on women are reasons you often cite for being overly sensitive about such culturally derisive things as wookies and fat ankles.

I'm assuming the sensitivity to race and gender is genuine, and as such, I just wonder how easy it is to simply re-categorize Fiorina and Carson as something other than a minority and a woman who overcame such massive cultural obstacles.

I am both serious, and lampooning, I think. Because I know the answer is - even if unsaid - team politics. Basically anything can be justified when criticizing Fiorina and Carson because the playbook is written to demonize the GOP on minorities and women. When two of top 3 polling GOP candidates are a woman and a black man, I just find it interesting how quickly those worthless platitudes are discarded in order to play team politics.

My error is in asking a sociopath like sys. I should've directed the question at you - whom I believe to be principled and genuine.

 

[07pilt]

I'm saying that based on previous conversations with some of you guys, racism and the war on women are reasons you often cite for being overly sensitive about such culturally derisive things as wookies and fat ankles.

I'm assuming the sensitivity to race and gender is genuine, and as such, I just wonder how easy it is to simply re-categorize Fiorina and Carson as something other than a minority and a woman who overcame such massive cultural obstacles.

It is simply that being a minority or woman who excelled in medicine or had high attainment in business is not a qualification to be president (although certainly their success reflects more of their character than for example Trump's). I wouldn't call Carson a turd or Fiorina Shrill, but I also wouldn't consider voting for them because I disagree with them on policy.

I am both serious, and lampooning, I think. Because I know the answer is - even if unsaid - team politics. Basically anything can be justified when criticizing Fiorina and Carson because the playbook is written to demonize the GOP on minorities and women. When two of top 3 polling GOP candidates are a woman and a black man, I just find it interesting how quickly those worthless platitudes are discarded in order to play team politics.

If the GOP is turning the corner or minorities ans women then good for them. I would wait for one of them to poll over 30% before I declared victory though. And as Obama has proven, merely having a black or female president doesn't magically fix things. If you would like I can go through and list the places where the GOParty platform falls short on racial and gender issues, but that is another rabbit hole. The point is policy speaks louder than candidate skin color or genitalia.

Can you elaborate on what worthless platitudes you are referring to?

You say "team politics" as if R and D were just laundry like the Giants and Jets. Its cool to pretend that they are all the same, but that hasn't been true for a long time. It would be fair to say that Rs and Ds are both really awful, but there are differences. Which isn't to say that being a cheerleader for team D is acceptable, but I am anti-R because I strongly disagree with all the candidates on issue that are important to me.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Believing in the existence of Satan and that he is continually working against everyone on this planet is a central tenant of Christianity. It is is also a tenant of many other faiths and most certainly includes the majority of the world. If your opinion is that you believe this to be insanity, then the majority of the world is insane.

These attacks are so ridiculous and so stereotypical. If a candidate is a devout Christian, paint them as a nut. If they have been successful financially, paint them as elitist corporate scumbags. I guess what the left is looking for is someone who believes in nothing and has done nothing.....i.e. our current President.

Fair enough. Yes, I don't think according to opinion polls. I think it smacks of being a lemming and waiting to be validated by popular opinion. I give a shit what a majority of the world believes -- if it believes everything was miracled up in 7 days and a talking snake convinced woman to eat a magic fruit that gave us modesty or whatever, the majority of the world is wrong. If it thinks that our science policy should revolve around that theory, again... wrong.

Set up a straw man and pound it. Now I'm against someone that has "been successful financially." You think in cartoons, just like you've been taught by Rush Limbaugh. Now I'm painting anyone that's financially successful as an "elitist corporate scumbag?" Who'd you hear it from? Who thought that stereotype up for you? Hannity or Limbaugh? Who's against success? Give me names and what you base it on. At least some of the conservatives here are off script. Not you -- just like Rush has been preaching since, oh... 1991?

 

[Medic007]

We're waiting on you Hil-Rat, lead us to the promised land.

 

[Medic007]

We love the Hil-rat. Liars love liars!

 

[Medic007]

Fair enough. Yes, I don't think according to opinion polls. I think it smacks of being a lemming and waiting to be validated by popular opinion. I give a shit what a majority of the world believes -- if it believes everything was miracled up in 7 days and a talking snake convinced woman to eat a magic fruit that gave us modesty or whatever, the majority of the world is wrong. If it thinks that our science policy should revolve around that theory, again... wrong.

Set up a straw man and pound it. Now I'm against someone that has "been successful financially." You think in cartoons, just like you've been taught by Rush Limbaugh. Now I'm painting anyone that's financially successful as an "elitist corporate scumbag?" Who'd you hear it from? Who thought that stereotype up for you? Hannity or Limbaugh? Who's against success? Give me names and what you base it on. At least some of the conservatives here are off script. Not you -- just like Rush has been preaching since, oh... 1991?

I think you typed more than "I'm either a liar or a hypocrite, or both," but I wasn't sure. So I included some Democraptic ticket voters, otherwise known as mindless sheeple, for good measure and accuracy.

 

[Colorado_Poke]

I think you typed more than "I'm either a liar or a hypocrite, or both," but I wasn't sure. So I included some Democraptic ticket voters, otherwise known as mindless sheep, for good measure and accuracy.

I believe the correct term is "sheeple."

 

[Medic007]

I believe the correct term is "sheeple."

I appreciate the proof reading. I edited my original post for accuracy. It's difficult for me to get the various terms correct since they change goalposts daily.

 

[MegaPoke]

Fair enough. Yes, I don't think according to opinion polls. I think it smacks of being a lemming and waiting to be validated by popular opinion. I give a shit what a majority of the world believes -- if it believes everything was miracled up in 7 days and a talking snake convinced woman to eat a magic fruit that gave us modesty or whatever, the majority of the world is wrong. If it thinks that our science policy should revolve around that theory, again... wrong.

Set up a straw man and pound it. Now I'm against someone that has "been successful financially." You think in cartoons, just like you've been taught by Rush Limbaugh. Now I'm painting anyone that's financially successful as an "elitist corporate scumbag?" Who'd you hear it from? Who thought that stereotype up for you? Hannity or Limbaugh? Who's against success? Give me names and what you base it on. At least some of the conservatives here are off script. Not you -- just like Rush has been preaching since, oh... 1991?

Speaking of trolls...

 

[NeekReevers]

Fair enough. Yes, I don't think according to opinion polls. I think it smacks of being a lemming and waiting to be validated by popular opinion. I give a shit what a majority of the world believes -- if it believes everything was miracled up in 7 days and a talking snake convinced woman to eat a magic fruit that gave us modesty or whatever, the majority of the world is wrong. If it thinks that our science policy should revolve around that theory, again... wrong.

Set up a straw man and pound it. Now I'm against someone that has "been successful financially." You think in cartoons, just like you've been taught by Rush Limbaugh. Now I'm painting anyone that's financially successful as an "elitist corporate scumbag?" Who'd you hear it from? Who thought that stereotype up for you? Hannity or Limbaugh? Who's against success? Give me names and what you base it on. At least some of the conservatives here are off script. Not you -- just like Rush has been preaching since, oh... 1991?

This thread, "Carson is a nut." Fiorina thread, "she's an elitist that owns yachts on both coasts."

Never said one thing about you personally or that you made the Fiorina comment unless you take the entire credit for, "the left." Plus, you know I'm right and you know that's how both will be painted as the election continues.

 

[davidallen]

Really, because it hasn't been proven, one who believes in the Big Bang theory is taking the same leap of faith as one who believes in creationism.

Proven? Seriously you want to say there is the same evidence for creationism and the big bang?