Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,389 Year: 3,646/9,624 Month: 517/974 Week: 130/276 Day: 4/23 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Attack on free speech at Grand Canyon
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 46 of 57 (98185)
04-06-2004 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Zoombwaz
04-06-2004 2:18 PM


Re: Updated - Feb 2nd 2004
Depends on what the contract says. The store is contracted to sell novelties as well, the book could be called a novelty. The photos in are wonderful ...
... just take a black marker to the text ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Zoombwaz, posted 04-06-2004 2:18 PM Zoombwaz has not replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 47 of 57 (98186)
04-06-2004 5:59 PM


Babble break out
People, back to the topic.
Adminnemooseus

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by SRO2, posted 04-06-2004 7:01 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied
 Message 54 by PaulK, posted 07-13-2004 12:45 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

  
SRO2 
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 57 (98194)
04-06-2004 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Adminnemooseus
04-06-2004 5:59 PM


Re: Babble break out
Sorry, we're just a little excited. If you had been where we came from, it's hard to break out of the mindless chit-chat mode we've been subjected too for 3 years...we'll try to stay on topic...please bear with us.
Allen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-06-2004 5:59 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by RAZD, posted 04-06-2004 11:45 PM SRO2 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 49 of 57 (98287)
04-06-2004 11:45 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by SRO2
04-06-2004 7:01 PM


Re: Babble break out
was that an attack on free speach about an attack on free speach?
just want to confirm where we are here ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by SRO2, posted 04-06-2004 7:01 PM SRO2 has not replied

  
IggerRoth1
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 57 (98741)
04-08-2004 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by SRO2
04-06-2004 3:42 PM


Re: Updated - Feb 2nd 2004
What do we have here? The blind leading the blind? This is a free country, what's wrong with a little religion on public property. Much better than leaving garbage behind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by SRO2, posted 04-06-2004 3:42 PM SRO2 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Loudmouth, posted 04-08-2004 5:58 PM IggerRoth1 has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 57 (98749)
04-08-2004 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by IggerRoth1
04-08-2004 5:37 PM


Mixing Religion with Public Property
quote:
is a free country, what's wrong with a little religion on public property. Much better than leaving garbage behind.
The problem is that if you allow one religious voice you have to allow all of them. This problem recently reared its ugly head in my fair city of Boise. A local public park had a 10 Commandments monument set up. Really, no one had a problem with it. The problem arose when a Kansas group wanted to erect a statue with a picture of Mathew Shepard (the gay man killed by homophobes in Montana). Below the picture was the birth date and the day that he died as well as a verse from Leviticus saying something to the effect that lying with another man was an abomination to God. Obviously, this was a very anti-gay message and its intent was to polarize the community.
The courts tried to block the erection of the statue. However, as long as the 10 Commandments was present on public property there was a precedent for erecting statues containing scripture. The cure was to remove the 10 Commandments monument in order to keep such hateful speech from being erected in the park. Of course, local christian groups were in an uproar yelling things very much like what is in your post. However, they lost sight of the real reason, trying to keep hateful and spiteful speech out of parks in Boise.
I think this is a perfect example of why government and religion need to be separate to protect the government, the public, and religion. Once any religious speech is allowed, any religious speech, be it enlightening or hateful, is allowed. This is not a good thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by IggerRoth1, posted 04-08-2004 5:37 PM IggerRoth1 has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5612 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 52 of 57 (124215)
07-13-2004 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Loudmouth
03-09-2004 12:10 PM


DemocRAT's don't want conservative federal justices to protect free speech rights)
In California, the Democrats solution was to pour the water in the Desert to promote growing oranges, giving the water's to the farmers so the rest of California would be in shortage. (So the rest of Californians would have extremely high water bills, so industries would flee California, etc...)
In California, The Democrats solution was to create more environmental laws so it was impossible to build electric power plants to meet electric demands so to create shortages, so industries would flee California, and America, etc....
In New York we had a power outage believed to be because of demand increasing and having to rob from other grids, interestingly No new power plants are being built. I suppose though with super coal scrubbers, they had to put down their foot, or industries would follow suite, and create jobs, etc...
The Republicans wanted an energy policy, however the Democrats don't apparently, filibustering the drilling for oil in Alaska, which would of helped our economy and jobs, etc...
The cost for wood for building has sky rocketed, George Bush to his credit want to open up Forest Reserves to lessen the burden to Americans, however, those darn Democrats will likely filibuster cause this would create jobs, and those trees will not decompose naturally, but will be affecting the supply and demand senerio, lowering the burden on the price of lumber, etc...
The democrats have through Clinton and company signed those free trade treaties, protecting foreign steel, so tariffs can not be installed to protect the steel industries, and protecting the pharamacy companies in America, so they are allowed to scam the Americans and in Canada sell at reduced prices (so much for free trade) the Democrats were a bunch of thieves creating a shortage in America so prices are high, making it illegal to go to Canada to get the same drugs at half the price. Clinton has bound the Republicans to World laws, if we tariff steel to protect americans we will be fined by the World trade organization billions of dollars per day, etc.. The democrats like Clinton, should be tried for treason, for this is affecting American jobs, if were not allowed to tariff cause of free trade, they shipped our soverienty from the people to the industries fleeing the democrats mother earth policies, to pollute Mexico, etc...for profit without any penalties for doing so. The World Trade Organization doesn't care if they pollute Mexico, etc...but if we tariff foriegn steel we get penalized cause of Democratics solution is to create shortages, to raise prices to help big buisnesses flee America, or to give the drug companies an out so they could remain in America, and still keep their prices high in America, so they wouldn't need to flee America too, etc...
Kerry says he wants to increase jobs, but interestingly never says how (just double talking elect me and then I'll create all those rubber stamp jobs by raising taxes), Clinton increase jobs (raised taxes), lots of 5 dollar an hour jobs, cause the backbone jobs are fleeing our country. By the democrats bending to the drug companies they are responsible for the high drug health care problems, and the interesting problem of many Americans needing two jobs now, two low paying jobs, cause getting one fulltime job requires the employer to pay health care costs.
Then you got the democrats candidate (Kerry) who married a millionaire, driving big vehicles, and interesting not thinking it hypocritical to think one of his solution's to the energy problem is to tax gas, placing this burden unto lesser fortunate Americans, the Democrats solution is to prevent more refineries being built to meet demand, cause of their solution to raise the price of gas, requires less refineries so demand is never met. They want to save Mother Earth, which means the people demands are never considered, likely why they are the tax and spend people, because if the people are empowered they would be a part of the solution, and this is something the Democrats fear, which is why the laws your freedoms in America are under attack (freedom of speech, to have a voice)(freedom to express religious faith in the public arena, to have a voice in the elections), etc...
It makes sense the Democrats don't want you to have freedom of speech, cause they want to be the solution, to burden you, with excessive laws, taxes, that empower their social programs, and depower your rights, to empower their solution, which doesn't include your interests.
This message has been edited by whatever, 07-13-2004 09:48 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Loudmouth, posted 03-09-2004 12:10 PM Loudmouth has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Adminnemooseus, posted 07-13-2004 11:39 AM johnfolton has not replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 53 of 57 (124218)
07-13-2004 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by johnfolton
07-13-2004 10:42 AM


Re: DemocRAT's don't want conservative federal justices to protect free speech right
I know this is in the "Free For All" forum, but it is pretty remote to the topic theme.
I think it would make a good new topic, and be better served as a new topic.
Adminnemooseus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by johnfolton, posted 07-13-2004 10:42 AM johnfolton has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 54 of 57 (124226)
07-13-2004 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Adminnemooseus
04-06-2004 5:59 PM


Back to the topic
On this page there are some extracts from the book. They show just how "scientific" it is.
Page not found
After going on and on about how geologists must be wrong because geology contradicts creationist theology we come to this statement:
quote:
Unlike secular geologists, creationist geologists don’t need to speculate about history, because we accept the eyewitness accounts preserved in a reliable written recordthe Bible

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-06-2004 5:59 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3945
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 55 of 57 (151509)
10-21-2004 12:50 AM


Excellent review of book in question - Excellent Grand Canyon discussion in general
Randy posted this link at message 43 of the More young earth evidence on the way - topic at Terry's Talk Origins. It was originally a Mt Saint Helens topic, but has since drifted all over the place.
http://www.freeinquiry.com/...dcanyon/elders-review-gcdv.htm
quote:
Bibliolatry Revisited:
A Review of Grand Canyon: A Different View
by
Wilfred A. Elders
There it is listed as originally having been posted at Account Suspended
I think this may be the best discussion of old Earth vs. young Earth Grand Canyon theory that I have ever encountered. Strongly recommended. Possibly deserves a topic of its own.
Very nice commentary from Randy also. POTM material, had been at .
Moose
This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 10-20-2004 11:51 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by roxrkool, posted 10-21-2004 2:09 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 1009 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 56 of 57 (151516)
10-21-2004 2:09 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Minnemooseus
10-21-2004 12:50 AM


Re: Excellent review of book in question - Excellent Grand Canyon discussion in gener
Great review, but what a frustrating read - continent-sized floating forests??? Can they get anymore ridiculous? And from a freaking geologist no less!
Truly disheartening when intelligent people willingly turn away from logic and reasoning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-21-2004 12:50 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
defenderofthefaith
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 57 (165257)
12-04-2004 10:03 PM


Hello
Hi Everyone
Crikey, is this old topic of mine STILL being replied to?
I don't know if anyone noticed, but I haven't been posting for months - I'd had enough of the place. I've also been busy with the old uni work. Still, it's nice to know I started a discussion which is still going long after I departed.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024