The KGB Oracle Forums General Public Discussion (PUBLIC) The Pub Who is your choice for US President?

As before I don't plan to debate these topics but will comment on a few of your misconceptions or misleading comments.

Quote:

---

Stem cell research G.W. Bush is the only president that has ever given money to this. So anti stem cell he is not. Now I am thinking you mean the stem cells that you kill babys to get. But did you know that adult stem cells are where the money is at. With adult stem cells they have made great progress with and the baby killer ones they have not.

---

Bush Vetoed the stem cell research bill that had been passed by the senate. It's true that currently the only tretments from stem cells come from adult stem cells, however embryonic stem cells are much more versatile and likely in the end to provide more treatments. Both types need continued research and both have the potential to save and improve the lives of many millions of people.

The word baby killer is wholey misleading, embryonic stem cells come from 4-5 day old embryos consisting of less than 150 cells, you can fit multiple of these embryos on the head of a pin and they are not babies. These stem cells come from embryos created for IVF treatments that and I'm sorry to use capitals but it's so important WERE GOING TO BE DESTROYED ANYWAY!!!! or were going to be stored way past their life span which is in essense the same as destroying them. These embryos are far less life than the tiny flys that your car kills everytime you go anywhere and they are much much less life than the cow killed to put the yummy fillet steak on your plate.

Quote:

---

Anti abortion. So what. I dont think killing babys is a nice thing to do.

---

abortion is a much more difficult topic especially as the age in which a featus can survive gets lower, no one wants to kill a featus but many are pro choice and see abortion as a last resort. There are many cases where abortion is the better of two bad options. Of course the best thing to do is to put systems in place to reduce as much as possible the cases of unwanted pregnancy, again in general republicans and more specifically Palin and McCain fall down here with abstinance only policys that simply do not work. Sex eductation and information about controception are much more effective

Quote:

---

Creationist and wanting to teach that in science lessons. I send my kids to private school, they teach both not much of a problem there. BTW THEORY OF EVOLUTION. Its a theory because they havent proven it yet.

---

If you teach creationism in relgion classes and Evolution in science classes there is no problem, there certianly is a problem if you try to teach creationism in science classes and give it equal weight to evolution. People often use the word theory to attack evolution, in science a theory isn't a guess as it often is in everyday speech. Evolution has over 100 years of evidence and testing behind it. Evolution is both a theory and a fact just as the theory of gravity is both a theory and a fact. Exactly how they work are theorys but both gravity and evolution themselves are proven facts.

Shit I am not mad. I am the guy that walks up to a bear and pokes him in the eye with a stick.
I could care less what people think its up to them to belive what they want.
Just dont knock on my door and tell me to think like you.

Yes Bush did veto the last round of funding, but has funded before which included dead baby cells. Cant say that about any other president. The veto was to prevent a new line of dead baby cells to be used in research.

With stem cell the is not the only country doing work in it. But yet adult stem cells are still the only one makeing results.
But where do you draw the line. It can come down to girls getting pregnate and selling to doctors. But this is another part of the debate on how far should we go. You can say its not killing babys all you want but they are still dead babys.

Anti abortion people are supprised when someone goes to term with a baby they know to have some form of defect. Enough said about that.

Theory -a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact

Sorry had to look that up I am not as smart as most of you. Hell I still think the world is flat. But evolution is still a theory.

The whole teaching religion thing I will not debate. I stated my solution and it works for me. My oldest daughter had the highest score on the yearly state test(forgot what it is called I told you I am stupid) so I really cant complain. They even taught her about dinosours!!!!!!


When you say "It's almost impossible to debate someone who belives in creationism, intelligent design or in the literal interpretation of the Old Testement without offending or upseting them. After all you are in essence going to be trying to disprove everything they belive in."

Flip that to what you belive in. I love how liberals bitch about people not being open minded but bitch even louder when everyone doesnt belive in what they say.
Not saying you are like that but I hear and see it alot.

Why do people have issues with someone beliving God created all life. Does it really effect you if they do.

Try some of what the teachers are teaching kids today that goes above and beyond what the text books have in them.

Global Warming being man made. Thats a theory. But how many kids had to sit through Al "the internet" Gores movie.
Why do so many people belive in it. LIBERAL propaganda(I hate the ultra right just as much as the ultra left). But thats ok????? There is no evidence suporting it but its the new religion.

Fuck I have to stop posting I sound like I am in a log cabin making letter bombs. No wonder rep thinks I am mad.

I will post my manifesto later.

Sweet Baby Jesus it looks even worst then I thought because I dont know how to line item qoute

You are correct about theories, however Evolution is still the mainstay of science, and does have a good degree of supporting evidence.

Not to say Intelligent Design and Evolution are incompatible... I dont think that in the least. Evolution is only incompatible with Old-Testament literalism.

If a man can dig a series of trenches on a hill, and thus predict where the water would flow if he brought a hose to the top and started pumping - who is to say God couldnt form
a ball of energy out of nothingness knowing ahead of time the form it would take when he released it, based on how he created it?

However, at the same time- Science, as in the best empirical work of the *VAST* majority of those PhD's who spend their lifes work attempting to understand biology, and the natural world hold evolution as far and away the most likely scenario to describe the actual mechanics of how the current state of life came to be on this planet.

Saying that modern science, or that any significant body of modern scientists support I.D. as an alternative theory is patently false.... and in science class, what should be taught are the views and deductions of scientists.

I think studying the metaphysical and religeous aspects are also important, culturally if nothing else - however it really irks me when people try and pass I.D. off as science... because its not.

Thats not to say people shouldnt believe in it, or the idea shouldnt be introduced to the young - but honestly I would think its proponents should work out their strategy to where they didnt have to rely on deception to attempt to achieve mainstream status with the ideal.

Those who push I.D. as true science do more to discredit the idea than anyone. Most people are smart enough to be able to believe something that science doesnt currently account for, because they also realize the infinite limitations of the state of modern science - its easy to tell that its rather incomplete, we are at the tip of the iceberg in relative terms to all the knowledge and understanding to be had in the universe.

However, science is the art of whats known, understood, and the best hypothesis, theories and work of those trying to make things known and understood.

Anything not falling under those criteria and having met the scrutiny of peer-review within the community should not be passed off as "science" and not sold as such to those who dont know any better. Its not fair to those who expect to learn science in a science class.

Agreed Derid, it's perfectly possible to belive in science and at the same time belive in God and the fact he guided the creation of the earth, as long as you don't insist on the literal translation of the Old Testment. There are also many other good reasons not to belive the Old Testment is literal other than the fact it's disproved by science.

I think you miss understood what some of what I was saying. First of my kids school have seperate religion and science classes. I agree with you that they should be seperate.
I guess I dont know what you mean by the world is 10,000 years old. Who the hell belives that.

I may be wrong but Bush will not give money to those but is it against the law for private research to use them????
Everytime you say they are not babys I will say they are killing babys

Not anti but crazy left wing liberals is what I meant. Those that will kill a baby with downs syndrom just because it may be alittle harder to raise them. And yes there is a right answer no grey areas.

Every time you say evolution is not a theory I will say evolution is a theory.

Are you saying Palin belives the world is 10,000 years old??

I wont vote for Obama because he is a socialist/commy. And his god is Karl Marx. I could careless what his religion is.
Did you hear what Obama's minister rants and raves about, do you really know what Obama belives in?
I would rather have Clinton as president before Obama, atleast you know what she is all about.

I think Obama is better than Clinton, but I have an almost impossible time supporting a Socialist myself... but I consider Bush pretty Socialist in practice, even if his friends and cohorts are industrial elites.

If McCain were the McCain of 8 years ago I would have no issues voting for him, in fact I voted for him in the GOP primaries... however the new, NeoCon face of McCain is rather unsettling... combined with his age.

Impossible pick either way TBH.

Best case Scenario would be Obama getting President and conservatives controlling congress... not thinking this is a likely scenario, but it would be the most ideal.

Obama to combat the remnants of the Bush taint, and root out the obviously incompetant and corrupt ( even though Obamas replacements wouldnt likely be saints themselves, internal buearacratic conflict and changing personel would help alot of things) and a conservative congress to simply not pass Socialist legislation...

Embroil the whole govt in deadlock, and political fighting.

That is the best case scenario that has even a remote possibility of happening.