I also wonder, still, WHY the liberal p****** get their tampons in a bunch when Christians pray for them, but couldn’t give a royal damn when muslims KILL them.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Edgy but accurate comment here (in reference to Apple banning the iPhone App of Exodus International):
Thursday, March 24, 2011
From a Scientific American interview:
[P.Z.] Myers is, of course, notorious for such over-the-top statements—like the Jim Bakker of New Atheists, a caricature of sweat, histrionics and stage glitter, he sees religious conspiracies as often as evangelicals see the Devil.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
I’m remembering that now, because it seems that the Obama Administration’s stated mission for Libya is one of regime change and the establishment of system of governance.
Which sounds so very much like the stated mission of the Bush regime — the mission that the Democrats and the press pushed, and pushed and pushed against, non-stop, for six long years.
It seems, after all, that helping to establish democratic governments in the Middle East might be in America’s best interests, and in the bests interests of human liberty for the rest of the world.
Helping people to claim liberty for themselves, it seems, is a good thing. Who knew?
I guess what I’m wondering is, how much further along would the Iraq government’s stabilization be — how much further along would the quest for democratic governance be, in the Middle East (and how much less reluctant would tyrants be to try to stop it by killing their own people), if only the Democrats hadn’t wasted 6 years politicizing our efforts and another two years bowing and scraping and restarting and gasbagging and doing everything they could to say, “we’re not Bush,” only to become all they said they hated?
In the end, all the politics, all the fury and drama and rhetoric delayed an inevitable desire and movement toward liberty, and perhaps costs lives.
In an era of record-breaking government spending and clear wastefulness, perhaps the past 8 years of politically-expedient dissent has been costliest waste of all.
I won’t even get into the profound media and pundit silence on issues formerly fraught with headline-grabbing fierce moral urgency. It’s just a given, at this point.
A study in contrasts – I think we’ll be seeing a lot of these. I’m struck how Bush took months and months to “rush to war” while Obama seems have decided to take on Libya between writing his brackets and packing his travel bags, and yet Bush was the impulsive “cowboy” and Obama … sigh, oh, what’s the point…
MORE ON ACADEMIA’S DIVERSITY PROBLEM: “So, if I understand this, self selection is AOK when it results in a predominance of liberals on campus, but it is not OK when it results in a shortfall of women in science?”
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
John C. Wright:
Meanwhile, the Mohammedan world view takes a somewhat more “Levitican” approach to gay-Muslim relations. Shariah law dictates cruel and Draconian penalties for homosexual acts, including flogging or death.
Obviously Shariah law is not yet firmly rooted in England (except, possibly, for certain financial laws, and some private binding arbitration): but the Muslims, or some of them, believe and say that the triumph of Shariah in England is only a matter of time.
One would suppose that any sign of cravenness in the face of an implacable enemy would serve only to encourage that enemy.
If that supposition is correct, the caution of Out East acts exactly contrary to their own notions of their cause and their self-interest.
Their logic has led them to an absurdity (1) They say Islamophobia is the same as Homophobia (2) they must oppose Islamophobia, and therefore support Islam (2) Islam is homophobic, therefore: they must support homophobia in the name of fighting homophobia.
No one can actually believe this.
My own theory (and I am a thoroughgoing supernaturalist) is that the Prince of the World controls the ways of this world. Hence, the world regards the Christian religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular as its main enemy: and when homosexuality is no longer a useful weapon to use to batter the Church and her sacrament of marriage into near-non-existence, the world uses a more violent and more clearly anti-christian weapon, Mohammedanism. And the first weapon, no longer useful, is dropped.
We have already seen in the last decade the speed with which feminism has been dropped when it clashes with Mohammedanism. Feminists fret about fictional income gaps with men, but ignore women being beaten, murdered or mutilated in their genitalia by their families, or forced into arranged marriages.
If this is how the world treats the cause of woman’s rights, when women represent more than half the race (and, in my opinion, the better half) how loyal with the world be to the few sexually abnormal persons who form a much smaller and less admired minority?
From Uncommon Descent:
A widely used phrase like “conflict (or no conflict) between science and religion” is meaningless absent details about what science and whose religion.
For example, if someone, using advanced neuroscience, can exquisitely target and destroy brain areas so that people cannot form concepts that might include dissent from the government – and the Catholic Church opposes it? Is that a “conflict between science and religion”?
What if representatives of another religion come along and say, “Yes, this is wonderful, now there will be no more infidels and no more disobedience to the great prophet. It fits our theology because we don’t believe in free will anyway.” So that is “no conflict between science and religion”?
Must be. That’s pretty much how the debate on using stem cells from abandoned embryos has been understood.
In general, in my experience, “conflict between science and religion” almost always amounts to “conflict between Darwinists (whatever their advertised piety) and anyone who knows that there is derisorily little evidence for Darwinism and talks about it.”
Monday, March 21, 2011
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Thursday, March 17, 2011
This amount of fecklessness, laziness, and dereliction of duty from a GOP president would result in a Katrina-scale hatestorm from all of the people who are strangely silent now.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Sunday, March 13, 2011
The MSM loves death threats against the right people.
Here's the proof.
Here's the proof.
A tale of two parades
A large demonstration and parade in Madison, WI featuring the fleebagging Democratic senators went forward without incident yesterday. The lawmakers were given a heroes welcome as tens of thousands cheered them on.
Meanwhile, in Fon du Lac, WI, two local Republican lawmakers canceled their participation in a St. Patrick's day parade because of death threats.
Wednesday, March 09, 2011
Existence itself comes from federal expenditures:
Maybe it’s a good thing that Sharron Angle lost her race for the U.S. Senate last fall. Well, perhaps, it’s not a good thing for the state she wanted to represented, but it is a good thing for the GOP. The man who defeated her, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, is the gift that keeps on giving:
“The mean-spirited bill, H.R. 1 … eliminates the National Endowment of the Humanities, National Endowment of the Arts,” said Reid. “These programs create jobs. The National Endowment of the Humanities is the reason we have in northern Nevada every January a cowboy poetry festival. Had that program not been around, the tens of thousands of people who come there every year would not exist.”If Sarah Palin talked like that, it would lead the evening news. The Senate’s top Democrat just said that tens of thousands of people wouldn’t exist without government funding. Guess the takeaway is that he and his caucus now believe that government funding is now necessary for the creation of individual human beings.