Should those of religious faith be allowed to run this country?

Just a hint to help you find them - all those people who, when you find out they're Muslims, you're a little surprised because you had no idea? They're the moderates.Every Muslim I've ever known has been a moderate. That's a lot of Muslims. I've never met a Muslim fundamentalist. (Probably not too many in Minnesota or Missouri.)

I'm still waiting to see the evidence that CAIR is a terrorist front, or whatever. Did I miss it? I have no interest or preference either way; but that's a claim that I'd like substantiated beyond "everybody knows it." Here is, after all, one person who does not.

I guess those are going on after the "pro ice cream and puppies" marches that are always on the news?Next week I'm in a "isn't lemonade delicious?" demonstration; I expect record turnout. Hopefully that god-damned "People's Iced Tea Front" won't come by to ruin it.

Those damn hippie fruits say that, in a plural society, there's room for enjoyment of both iced tea and lemonade. That's exactly what you'd expect those commies to say, isn't it? Unnatural. A threat to our freedoms.I say, if you're not with lemonade, you're against it.

Why? Because an expert's credentials have the power to leap off the wall and out of their picture frames and muffle him before he says something wrong?No? That's kind of what I thought. There's no harm in offering an expert's conclusions from whatever evidence he's seen, but there's no reason to accept his conclusion absent the evidence that caused him to arrive there. Experts are, after all, only human.

Do you think students have the right to dictate curricula to their professors? If so, why do we even have universities if the students already know everything?

quote:

---

Therefore, academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an environment of intellectual diversity that protects and fosters independence of thought and speech.

---

Translation: we have to treat everybody's stupid ideas as though they had the same factual basis.

quote:

---

In the words of the report, Students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study and to reserve judgment about matters of opinion.

---

Translation: students can't be graded poorly for being wrong.

quote:

---

Students will be graded solely on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects and disciplines they study, not on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.

---

Translation: students may hold any ridiculous idea they choose, and can't be graded down for promulgating it, so long as they're able to claim it as a "religious position."As creationists have shown us here, literally any position in any subject can be argued to be a religion.

quote:

---

Curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences should reflect the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge in these areas by providing students with dissenting sources and viewpoints where appropriate.

---

Translation: because we don't know everything about everything at this time, bullshit is to be taken at the same face value as factual instruction.It's no wonder that you Christian jihadists have a hard-on about this stupid "Bill of Rights"; it's a mechanism for vetoing a professor's curriculum. Can't have our precious youngsters exposed to actual facts, now can we?

Oh, get real. I'm intimately familiar with coursework in three different universities around the country and this has never happened. The only instance of this I could imagine would be where one of you religious conservatives gets their panties in a knot when some professor notes that your "religious or political opinion" is actually a verifiable statement counterindicated by the facts.You may take it as political opinion that Republican presidents are better for the economy. Prepare to get an F in my class when I demonstrate factually that this is not the case.Like I said it's no secret why your ilk finds this "bill of rights" so attractive - it allows you to invent your own facts and insist on their dissemination in the classroom under the guise of "political opinion."

No, that's evidence of its bias. If the bill were as balanced as you say, then there would be criticism from both the left and right.Look, our universities and colleges are regarded as the best in the world, bar none. The education you experience at this nation's institutions of higher learning are the standard by which others are measured. Why muck around with the best?Furthermore, why is it bad for professors to have a leftist bias? Did you ever consider that perhaps that's an indication of how wrong rightist ideas are? Why is it that the persons in occupations where you would expect them to be the best-informed - librarians, journalists, professors, teachers, etc - always lean so far to the left? Don't you think that's an indication that the ideas of the right are based on ignorance?Well, no, of course you don't. It's plenty obvious to the rest of us, though.

Sometimes its not paranoia. Sometimes they really are out to get you. When the current president has to re-affirm, has to come out and actually say that, yes, atheists are still citizens, that suggests to me that, indeed, people like you are out to get people like me.Naturally you're starting at the schools; what really gets me is that for two decades Republicans and conservatives ridiculed education and educators. Well, big surprise, you and your ideas got left behind on the campus. And now you and your ilk are complaining about it?Man does your side whine, or what? Shameless.