Give me ONE reason...

[othello]

Riddle me this othello:

What do you have to say about stem cell research?

has no one read this thread from start to finish? :| as ive already said, stem cell research is a topic im still researching, so im not gonna say much. from what ive read, which isnt all that much, i disagree with gathering further stem cells. we have plenty of unused cells, as well as animal stem cells with the same characteristics. beyond that, im out of my league.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Hey, wait a minute...

Othello started this thread absolutely confident that he was right, and charged in headfirst with no solid plan or facts.
Then, when met with resistance, he started trying to desperately hold on to the ever-worsening situation.
As fact after fact contrasted with his prior motivation, he's gone into spin control, rather than admitting his errors, while still clutching onto the ideal that his few good points will be enough to justify the whole endeavour and convince people that the resistance is insignifigant, despite their strength and success.

Sounds familiar, eh?

no... not at all.

Okay, I'll give you a hint: It's a war... a recent one... started by America... against Iraq. You might call it a War in Iraq.

Which leads to the best reason of why Bush and this thread should go: Hubris is not a friend to success.

 

[othello]

Okay, I'll give you a hint: It's a war... a recent one... started by America... against Iraq. You might call it a War in Iraq.

Which leads to the best reason of why Bush and this thread should go: Hubris is not a friend to success.

*yawn*... did i forget my [/sarcasm] tags?

 

[moppe]

i have YET to see a good reason (other than the ones i have already advocated of course).

What the hell? Shut up.
You haven't advocated anything so far, just come with stupid personal thoughts and ignored the fact that Bush made a mistake, as stated out in that post that you advocated.

 

[othello]

What the hell? Shut up.
You haven't advocated anything so far, just come with stupid personal thoughts and ignored the fact that Bush made a mistake, as stated out in that post that you advocated.

what fact... where? i have advocated many viewpoints in thread. christ, do you people read at ALL? its pathetic... no wonder you hate bush if you cant even read, much less comprehend that which you have already read. you just sit in front of CNN and think you know everything.

 

[moppe]

what fact... where? i have advocated many viewpoints in thread. christ, do you people read at ALL? its pathetic... no wonder you hate bush if you cant even read, much less comprehend that which you have already read. you just sit in front of CNN and think you know everything.

On every page on this thread someone has atleast posted one new bit of information or suggestion why not to vote Bush, but you wont listen and just turn the fact around until you're satisfied. I hate Bush because I have visited those places that he decleared war on, and it is chaos there. Not to make this another reason no to vote for him, cause so many people have brought this up already, but the war could be avoided.

And the statement that I can't read is very sad, I'd be offended from anyone else except someone that is posting pictures of his girlfriend, in a movie review or uses the contraction "lol" with any mention of a SUV.
We have given you hundreds of reasons, you just ignore them.

Edit:
And I don't have CNN, I've never watched it in my entire life.

 

[Jakeic]

I don't know, i took a pretty hardline stance on Iraq and you said it was my opinion, don't know if that means it is an acceptable reason or not.

While it is true that most journalists tend to lean more to the left than to the right, it is however not true that their editors, producers, and sponsers lean to the left as well. To say the news media is liberal is a falacy. However in Fox News' case, even their liberals are moderates (Alan Colmes anyone). I think the big problem is that while many right-wingers claim the media to be liberal and proceed to bash liberals, they never take a long hard look at the conservative side of things. Liberal shows like Real Time with Bill Maher and The Daily Show will often ridicule the president, but they don't let anyone on the left get away with anything either. It is a stark contrast between the two ideaologies.

I also find it odd that Clinton comes up so often when the right makes any sort of claims. If they wish to look good, they either compare themselves to Clinton or bash him accordingly. Clinton inherited a lot of problems with previous Bush administration, who basically continued along the lines of "reagonomics", which is why he lost in the first place. While it is true that the president doesn't have a drastic economic impact, he does have some influence.

While the rich do get taxed the most, I don't think it is enough. If you take into account sales tax, the lower/middle classes get an additional 5% (base, most places it is higher due to local taxes) sales tax tacked on. Sales tax is the most regressive form of taxation, as it applies to almost 100% of the incomes of lower and middle class families. On top of that, if you take a look at how the gap between the haves and the have nots widen in america, you should begin to understand that not everyone is created equal. At what point do you have enough money? At what point is it time to give more than you receive? I think rich people make out quite well in our current system as president Bush said, rich people can higher lawyers and accountants and stick the rest of us with the bill.

 

[othello]

On every page on this thread someone has atleast posted one new bit of information or suggestion why not to vote Bush, but you wont listen and just turn the fact around until you're satisfied. I hate Bush because I have visited those places that he decleared war on, and it is chaos there. Not to make this another reason no to vote for him, cause so many people have brought this up already, but the war could be avoided.

i do listen, to every single reason mentioned with some amount of eloquence to it. most of the 'information' posted on this thread is someone's personal ingorance manifested. i didnt start this thread to be convinced NOT to vote for bush, i started it to find out why others don't want to vote for him. when people started mentioning such ludicrous 'reasons' i started 'turning the facts around'... towards the truth.

And the statement that I can't read is very sad, I'd be offended from anyone else except someone that is posting pictures of his girlfriend, in a movie review or uses the contraction "lol" with any mention of a SUV.
We have given you hundreds of reasons, you just ignore them.

i havent igored a single reasons, at least... ive tried very hard to consider and respond to every single post on this thread. when i started this thread i had 7 on these forums... that alone should tell you something. 'lol' is an acronym, and i really dont understand that paragraph until the last sentence. are you tired too? lol... its like 5 am here.

Edit:
And I don't have CNN, I've never watched it in my entire life.

awesome.. substitute CNN for nearly any other media outlet.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Stop whining about a freaking media bias! Journalists are slightly skewed towards liberal, but editors, managers, etc. are mostly the opposite.

For christ's sake, at least give a single example of a partisan thing CNN has done before you dismiss them as lower than your oh-so high standards.

I mean, you whine that every large media outlet on earth has a liberal bias. Why? Is it because they keep reporting about the casualties in Iraq? Is it because they keep saying that Bush's evidence was outdated to the point of being outright wrong?

Yeah, becuase they say the president did the wrong thing, they must be liberal. You don't hear them criticising the hell out of the liberal president we have today, right?

And I swear to God you have no clue what the word ignorance means, the way you shovel it out in response to every single post.

The fact that you have about 30 people all responding simultaneously gives you a great opportunity, doesn't it? You're so "overloaded" by all the posts that you have no choice but to pick and choose which to respond to and which to disregard.

The guy says he's been to Bush's war-zones, and you blame his testimony on CNN's 'liberal influence'! He's freaking been there! What more will it take to turn you around and make you see the light?

 

[brink's]

CNN is so pro-Bush it isn't even funny.

 

[Sprafa]

It's very clear why the media is liberallly biased.

Facts are agaisnt the neocons

 

[moppe]

i do listen, to every single reason mentioned with some amount of eloquence to it. most of the 'information' posted on this thread is someone's personal ingorance manifested. i didnt start this thread to be convinced NOT to vote for bush, i started it to find out why others don't want to vote for him. when people started mentioning such ludicrous 'reasons' i started 'turning the facts around'... towards the truth.

Wow, talk about ironic if you fail to see that your own personal ignorance is the biggest here. And there it is again, you don't take this seriusly. You think that it's the truth, we know it isn't.

i havent igored a single reasons, at least... ive tried very hard to consider and respond to every single post on this thread. when i started this thread i had 7 on these forums... that alone should tell you something. 'lol' is an acronym, and i really dont understand that paragraph until the last sentence. are you tired too? lol... its like 5 am here.

That dosn't prove anything. I could also respond to anything in this thread, and say "lol, pwned. Vote kerry!" Your posts here didn't contribute to anything, just pissing us all of with your ignorance.
Sorry that english isn't my first language, and I wrote that right after I woke up.

awesome.. substitute CNN for nearly any other media outlet.

Yes, we have that to. But I still don't trust them with my life, as some other do.

 

[Neutrino]

I'm going to go play some CS:S for a bit. But seeing as it's Friday night and I have insomnia like usual I'm going to try to make a somewhat detailed post when I get back.

 

[Sprafa]

read about the Hostile media phenomenon.

 

[Logic]

Othello, you didn't respond directly to my reply on page 21.. how can you support a leader who is happy to put laws into place that violate human rights and the constitution? It demonstrates that he is either too stupid to understand either of those things, or he is willing to violate them in order to enforce his religious views on his country. Either of those possibilities are more than enough reason to vote against Bush.

Edit: And just to clarify, I'm not fighting for gay rights because I am gay myself (I'm not), so don't say that my disagreement with bush on the issue is only a reason for someone with my views to vote against him. My point is about fighting for the freedoms that are garanteed to everyone, regardless of whether or not you like how certain individuals use that freedom. Anyone who wants the constitution and human rights to be upheld should be voting against Bush.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Othello, you didn't respond directly to my reply on page 21.. how can you support a leader who is happy to put laws into place that violate human rights and the constitution? It demonstrates that he is either too stupid to understand either of those things, or he is willing to violate them in order to enforce his religious views on his country. Either of those possibilities are more than enough reason to vote against Bush.

Edit: And just to clarify, I'm not fighting for gay rights because I am gay myself, so don't say that my disagreement with bush on the issue is only a reason for someone with my views to vote against him. My point is about fighting for the freedoms that are garanteed to everyone, regardless of whether or not you like how certain individuals use that freedom. Anyone who wants the constitution and human rights to be upheld should be voting against Bush.

Radiohead avatar... Australia... Logic... and trapping othello in yet another Catch-22.

This must be the single best post ever. :cheers:

 

[Yakuza]

I agree here, and it brings up an obvious point: if god is omnipotent, then why must he move in mysterious ways and act all shady in his communications to random people?
God's not Solid Snake. He's got infinite power, so why can't he use that power to communicate directly to us in a clear and unobtrusive way. It sure would stop every non-christian on earth from inadvertantly joining the army of satan.

But, instead, he leaves answering machine messages in people's heads without any proof whatsoever that he was ever even involved. I ask why.

God has revealed himself to all, just not every one accepts it.

 

[Yakuza]

Othello, you didn't respond directly to my reply on page 21.. how can you support a leader who is happy to put laws into place that violate human rights and the constitution? It demonstrates that he is either too stupid to understand either of those things, or he is willing to violate them in order to enforce his religious views on his country. Either of those possibilities are more than enough reason to vote against Bush.

Edit: And just to clarify, I'm not fighting for gay rights because I am gay myself (I'm not), so don't say that my disagreement with bush on the issue is only a reason for someone with my views to vote against him. My point is about fighting for the freedoms that are garanteed to everyone, regardless of whether or not you like how certain individuals use that freedom. Anyone who wants the constitution and human rights to be upheld should be voting against Bush.

yeah then maybe we can get a President who will uphold the constitution and give us back the right to pray openly in school, and allow people of various religious groups to post their beliefs on designated areas of the school as long as the words are with in reason. And science class will offer other posibilities of creation other than the one that changes ever 3 years.

 

[Neutrino]

yeah then maybe we can get a President who will uphold the constitution and give us back the right to pray openly in school, and allow people of various religious groups to post their beliefs on designated areas of the school as long as the words are with in reason. And science class will offer other posibilities of creation other than the one that changes ever 3 years.

You have quite the contradiction there. In one breath you talk about upholding the constituation and in the next you talk about tearing it down.

Do you enjoy your freedom of religion in this country? Because you don't seem to understand where it comes from.

You want to pray in school? Fine, then you better be prepared to accept pagan rituals in schools too.

You want your beliefs posted on school grounds? Alright, then I get to post the beliefs of satanism right next to them.

You want creation "science" taught in schools? Sure thing, that can be taught in between the classes on Scientology and Buddhism.

That's ok right?

It absolutely boggles my mind that someone for whom religion is so important does not grasp the concepts behind the laws which allow them to practice that religion freely and without interference.

Edit: Thanks logic for going into more detail with an explanation. I have a hard time responding to such statements as they tend to leave me so astounded that I'm practically at a loss for words.

 

[Logic]

yeah then maybe we can get a President who will uphold the constitution and give us back the right to pray openly in school, and allow people of various religious groups to post their beliefs on designated areas of the school as long as the words are with in reason. And science class will offer other posibilities of creation other than the one that changes ever 3 years.

The reason religion has been taken away from public schools is so that the school itself does not promote one religion over another - public schools need to treat every religion with equal acceptance in order for people of every religion to be able to go to them and not feel discriminated against. The only way to treat every religion equally in school, is to separate religion from it all together. It's a perfectly just reason, and besides, in most areas (I can't speak with certainty about this, though, since I don't live in America) I would assume there would be private christian schools that one can send their children to.

As for science classes teaching creation... that is a religious belief. There is no "scientific" evidence supporting it, while there is a great deal of "scientific" evidence supporting evolution. I think that makes evolution more suited to "science" classes. Not to mention once again that teaching a christian belief like creation in a public school is discriminatory against non-christians.

In order to "uphold the constitution" on this matter, public schools must be indifferent to religion, surely you must see that. What you are suggesting is that they teach the views of one religion.

(btw thanks Mechagodzilla :cheese: )

Edit: what Neutrino said

 

[clarky003]

wow, some people really get pissed at the prospect that Bush is an elitest Doof, who cocked up big time (thread trolling Othello )... and doesnt really deserve to be president anymore just from the plain fact that he's torn his country apart, with the gaping holes in information about 9/11 and nearly every event that lead upto the war.

the truth is out there, and half of it is missing atleast, or has been lied about, to cover these so called 'leader's' wallet's and integrity.

 

[Yakuza]

The reason religion has been taken away from public schools is so that the school itself does not promote one religion over another - public schools need to treat every religion with equal acceptance in order for people of every religion to be able to go to them and not feel discriminated against. The only way to treat every religion equally in school, is to separate religion from it all together. It's a perfectly just reason, and besides, in most areas (I can't speak with certainty about this, though, since I don't live in America) I would assume there would be private christian schools that one can send their children to.

As for science classes teaching creation... that is a religious belief. There is no "scientific" evidence supporting it, while there is a great deal of "scientific" evidence supporting evolution. I think that makes evolution more suited to "science" classes. Not to mention once again that teaching a christian belief like creation in a public school is discriminatory against non-christians.

In order to "uphold the constitution" on this matter, public schools must be indifferent to religion, surely you must see that. What you are suggesting is that they teach the views of one religion.

(btw thanks Mechagodzilla :cheese: )

Edit: what Neutrino said

Its not like we would FORCE any one to believe our faith, or would we expect that others would force theirs. School kicks out religion beliefes yet they teach homosexuality in the classroom. So its okay to teachwhat they believ is okay but not allow us the ability to share what we believe.

And there is quite a bit of scientific evidence supporting creationism. Even some of the more famous people, like Newton and Einstein, are famous enough to be brought up in school yet when it comes to science their ideas of how the world came to be are some how forgotten. Besides evolution is not 100% conclusive wich leaves room for the possibility of a creator. So basicaly if your going to talk about how the world began you should also talk about the possibility of different sides, but then again "Science" isn't supposed to objective, right?

We have gone on for a very long time with the "idead" that only 1 man and 1 women should marry. I dont see why we should shove the beliefs of 75% of the population out the window, just so gays can be reconised. I say give them the benifits and leave it at that. Religious or not the majority believes that Gays should not marry.

 

[Yakuza]

You have quite the contradiction there. In one breath you talk about upholding the constituation and in the next you talk about tearing it down.

Do you enjoy your freedom of religion in this country? Because you don't seem to understand where it comes from.

You want to pray in school? Fine, then you better be prepared to accept pagan rituals in schools too.

Fine, as long as they dont hurt or force any ne to believe what they do.

You want your beliefs posted on school grounds? Alright, then I get to post the beliefs of satanism right next to them.

Fine. as long as it doesn't violate some ones God given right to life lyberty and the pursite of happiness.

You want creation "science" taught in schools? Sure thing, that can be taught in between the classes on Scientology and Buddhism.

Sure.

It absolutely boggles my mind that someone for whom religion is so important does not grasp the concepts behind the laws which allow them to practice that religion freely and without interference.

If it was so free and without interferece why are dont they allow it in school?

Edit: Thanks logic for going into more detail with an explanation. I have a hard time responding to such statements as they tend to leave me so astounded that I'm practically at a loss for words.

Thats exactly what I am saying. and if you read my post I think we could all come to an agreement of a REASONABLE measure of what we be okay.
Instead of just deniying it flatout.

 

[Neutrino]

Fine, as long as they dont hurt or force any ne to believe what they do.

Fine. as long as it doesn't violate some ones God given right to life lyberty and the pursite of happiness.

Sure.

If it was so free and without interferece why are dont they allow it in school?

Thats exactly what I am saying. and if you read my post I think we could all come to an agreement of a REASONABLE measure of what we be okay.
Instead of just deniying it flatout.

Christ, I'm glad people like you don't run the government. We could come to a reasonable agreement? No, I don't think we could. There should never be any religious belief taught in schools, whatsoever. If you show a single aspect of christianity in schools it automatically forces you to show a similar aspect of every single other religion in the country.

Like I said, you don't seem to understand the laws and provisions of this country which allow you freedom of religion. You think no allowing religion in public shools is religious interference? No, not allowing religion in schools is called religious tolerance. There is a difference between your own freedom of religion and everyone's freedom of religion.

 

[seinfeldrules]

In my opinion talk about religion in politics is quite boring. I thought it was pretty funny how Neuts last statement started though.

 

[Neutrino]

In my opinion talk about religion in politics is quite boring. I thought it was pretty funny how Neuts last statement started though.

It's boring until somebody starts to try to use government to spread their religion over other religions.

My last statement? :angel:

 

[seinfeldrules]

Christ, I'm glad people like you don't run the government.

hehe :naughty: :smoking:

Yeah its lame, but caught me as being somewhat funny. Shows you how much Christianity has seeped through into everyday life.

 

[figge]

He is a Christian Fanatic Warlord

 

[Neutrino]

hehe :naughty: :smoking:

Yeah its lame, but caught me as being somewhat funny. Shows you how much Christianity has seeped through into everyday life.

Heh, yes I know what you were talking about. That's why I added :angel: .

I don't know though, I thought it was somewhat appropriate.

 

[Jakeic]

Besides evolution is not 100% conclusive wich leaves room for the possibility of a creator. So basicaly if your going to talk about how the world began you should also talk about the possibility of different sides, but then again "Science" isn't supposed to objective, right?

i agree 100%. I believe that the entire universe is part of God's fecal matter. That should be taught in schools along with creationism.

 

[figge]

Religion should NOT be thaught in schools!
Only if you include ALL the major religions... not only one!

 

[Jakeic]

there is a school for religion, for christians and jews and probably more. so calm down. science could never show the religion aspect b/c science tells you to have PROOF. there is no proof of god or adam and eve. so you can not have it in science even if you wanted.

for a believer there is never enough proof to show that god doesn't exsist, for a non-believer there is never enough proof to show that god does exsist.

anyways, how tall do you think adam and eve were?

 

[othello]

imo, there is more evidence supporting the theory of creation then there is the 'big-bang theory' (which has been disproven by some) and the theory that the world has been around for millions and billions of years (essentially based off carbon-dating, which has been proven completely inaccurate).

i believe any theory, religious or not, should be given equal air-time in class... if it isnt, and you ban a theory because its founded in a religion, is that not religious discrimination?

 

[Edcrab]

Well, here in England, even though we're "founded on Christian principles" (which is a damn stupid phrase in my book; it's more like common sense and religious practions full stop) we studied other religions just as thoroughly as Christianity in Religious Education. Someone may end up correcting me however, as for all I know modern RE involves turning everyone into a devout Catholic during a thorough brainwashing session. That possibility aside, it's quite possible to teach pupils about every religion- even when a country's leader makes his own beliefs very clear.

Man, this is now the discussion thread- where lesser communities have multiple forums, we just have one monolithic epic...

 

[rkef]

i believe any theory, religious or not, should be given equal air-time in class...

Any theory? There are an infinite number of potential theories on how we got here. To see this, take the "theory" that we were created by a single God. Then take another theory that says we were created by two Gods, three Gods, and so on.

There just isn't enough class time for that.

 

[Yakuza]

Christ, I'm glad people like you don't run the government. We could come to a reasonable agreement? No, I don't think we could. There should never be any religious belief taught in schools, whatsoever. If you show a single aspect of christianity in schools it automatically forces you to show a similar aspect of every single other religion in the country.

Like I said, you don't seem to understand the laws and provisions of this country which allow you freedom of religion. You think no allowing religion in public shools is religious interference? No, not allowing religion in schools is called religious tolerance. There is a difference between your own freedom of religion and everyone's freedom of religion.

Do you actualy read my posts. Where did I state that religion should be taught. Gimmie a freakin break dude, people say no gay stuff and people get their panties in a bind. Then I say why cant we have the freedom of expressing our faith in a reasonable way at school, and your like, lets burn this idot. If I wanna go to school and start a bible study at lunch or somthing, why cant I? If I wanna get a group of Christians together just before class starts, so we can pray why cant I?

Not every one can afford to go to a "Christian School". And if we are going to look at it like that, why dont the homosexuals go somewhere were homosexuality is accepted, Like Canada

 

[Yakuza]

Any theory? There are an infinite number of potential theories on how we got here. To see this, take the "theory" that we were created by a single God. Then take another theory that says we were created by two Gods, three Gods, and so on.

There just isn't enough class time for that.

No, but the teacher could take a count of hands on how many people in the class believe in something different than what the education system says. The teachers could then explain on those who raised there hands, or give the student an opertunity to share with the class what there views are, but give them a particualr criteria. As in share what you believe just dont cram it down any throats.

 

[Onions]

if i had a usa vote, it would go to bush

 

[Yakuza]

science could never show the religion aspect b/c science tells you to have PROOF.

there is no proof of god or adam and eve. so you can not have it in science even if you wanted.

So do you have or know ALL proof to make that claim. You say proof like it has to be 100%, if this is the case then the science class would be real quiet cause even they cant claim 100% proof of what they believe.

 

[Ikerous]

I wouldn't so much like them to teach creationism
As much i would like for them to teach the shortcoming of evolution