 AtlLiberal says: I was aware of several facets of Palin's controversial life but this one struck me as particularly odd. It does fit in very well with her professed denial of evolution. Remember, this woman could be president, given McCain's age. Should we abandon the 21st Century again. It's been a strategy for the past 8 years that has not helped us very much. I, for one, am not ready to plunge us into the past. She has shown by her actions that she is uninterested in advancing rational thought. Homophobes are so gay, LOL! If you don't like gay people, blame straight people - they are the ones who keep having gay babies! LMAO! I've never heard it put that way. Haha! Palin has already said she supports teaching evolution in schools. She wants to keep creationism out of schools. So don't try raking up any coals from that little ember. I don't know where you get your "facts" from. A quick google search shows that Palin's position is not as you think. From Boston.com: In November of 2006, the Anchorage Daily News described Palin's positions on social issues in a story wrapping up the governor's race: "A significant part of Palin's base of support lies among Yes she says it should be discussed, not taught. Big difference there. Discussed for the purpose of? Its all about the knowledge, the kids have to be exposed to all sides of the debate so they can make up their own minds. Not just shut out because of one side or the other. It is science class, there is no debate about evolution, because you don't teach religion in school. That is a non starter right there. Specially considering that the whole "debate" is phony to begin with. Its all about the knowledge,Actually, that's simply not true. It's all about edging religion, and by religion they mean Christian religion, into schools. It has nothing to do with advancing knowledge. There is no debate about evolution. This is a strawman thought up by the Creation Institute to get ignorant people to think that evolution is merely an idea with no evidence to back it up. quick correction: You CAN teach religion in school. But the caveat is that you have to teach ALL religions, not just one. James, you're completely right. I suppose my comment made it seem the opposite. The meaning I intended was that unscientific creationism ought not to be taught alongside evolution in science classes. If they wish to teach this in something like a comparative religion class I see nothing wrong with that. Sorry for the confusion. If we're going to debate creationism, why not also debate about the sun going around the earth, or that the flat earth is balanced on the back of a turtle, or that the earth is hollow, or how the stars influence our fate, or that there are only 4 elements, or that our body and health is relegated by our "humours", or what the best method there is for killing a vampire. Oh, come on Bill. You know that the turtle is really a terrapin, and it's phrenology and not that old fashioned "humours" theory that is correct. And please, don't get the vamps angry. BTW, the new HBO True Blood is going to kick ass. We all know Louisiana is rife with the buggers. It is a documentary, isn't it??? |
View the Top Clips from September 10, 2008
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|||||||||||||
