Thread Options 
|
#472677 - 12/21/05 08:00 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Sure, then he could go on to say, but no one has ever proven that god exists.
...to his knowledge.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472678 - 12/21/05 08:01 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Power Poster
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,349
|
waiting....
_________________________
If your tagline references disclaimers regarding the nature of political posts, then you should just hit notify.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472679 - 12/21/05 08:02 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
What, OK lets discuss now. Show me god. I'm waiting.....
I never said there was a God. I never said I wanted to discuss God. I said I want to discuss what was there before the big bang and before that and before that, etc.... I'm waiting....
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472680 - 12/21/05 08:03 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
waiting....
I don't need to. He's already shown himself to you and if you missed Him, there's likely not much I can do about it. But that is not what I wanted to discuss.
What was there before and before and before and before....
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472681 - 12/21/05 08:04 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Power Poster
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,349
|
No, you said it may be god. I say, give the scientific community time. You can talk all you want right now, but the answers may not come for a while. All I suggest is that if you think it could be god, first you have to prove one exists. I believe in some higher being, but thats all it is... a belief.
Some believe ID, but those who know anything use evolution.
_________________________
If your tagline references disclaimers regarding the nature of political posts, then you should just hit notify.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472682 - 12/21/05 08:05 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Power Poster
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,349
|
BTW if you want to know what happened before the big bang do a google search on the big bang. The theory now goes well before it, it is a cyclical thing, which I do not have time to explain.
_________________________
If your tagline references disclaimers regarding the nature of political posts, then you should just hit notify.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472683 - 12/21/05 08:06 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Power Poster
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,349
|
waiting...
_________________________
If your tagline references disclaimers regarding the nature of political posts, then you should just hit notify.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472684 - 12/21/05 08:08 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Some believe ID, but those who know anything use evolution.
See, its a cult.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472685 - 12/21/05 08:10 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
But I don't think that separation of church and state is really what that is specifically about. The constitution is a framework for laws to fit within.
So, what was the federal issue?
Quote:
And I think the judges comments, based on our local coverage, were more an admonishment to the parties that there is no place to slide something into the law under the guise that it was something else.
I don't see the relevance. The subject matter either was unconstitutional or it wasn't. I don't see how the motives affect that.
The federal issue (as applied to the states) was the seperation of church and state.
It was unconstitutional. I am giving you what was said. The judge was refering to the evidence from the case to illustrate that this was a religiously motivated act on the part of the board. Do we need to talk about our system of laws based on the case at hand or are you comfortable with my assurance?
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472686 - 12/21/05 08:11 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
BTW if you want to know what happened before the big bang do a google search on the big bang. The theory now goes well before it, it is a cyclical thing, which I do not have time to explain.
OK, nothing was there and nobody put anything there, but then something was there and it banged!!! No, wait. If nothing was there and nobody put anything there, then nothing could have banged. OK, let me start over. Nothing was there, then someone put something there. Wait. If there was nothing, there can't be somebody to put something there because that would prove there wasn't nothing there. OK, then there must be something that was always there. But how can there be an always? Everything needs an Alpha doesn't it???
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472688 - 12/21/05 08:12 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Platinum Poster
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 517
The Land of OZ
|
Quote:
waiting...
Quick! Somebody show -3- God or he/she might hold their breath or even run away to join the circus.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472689 - 12/21/05 08:14 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Power Poster
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,349
|
Wow, Ray comes into a forum to throw out insults. Ray, I thought we were such good friends. Back from the wolves I see. Hope the hook mark heals.
_________________________
If your tagline references disclaimers regarding the nature of political posts, then you should just hit notify.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472691 - 12/21/05 08:26 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
10K Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 12,846
|
Quote:
The federal issue (as applied to the states) was the seperation of church and state.
So why did you say "I don't think that separation of church and state is really what that is specifically about."
Quote:
It was unconstitutional.
I disagree, though I do believe that the judge was following SCOTUS precedent. But there is zero doubt in my mind that a local science cirriculum discussing ID is not a law respecting an establishment of religion.
Quote:
I am giving you what was said. The judge was refering to the evidence from the case to illustrate that this was a religiously motivated act on the part of the board.
Again, what does the motivation matter? I want students to learn about the complexity of a human cell, the mitochondria and the sodium-potassium pump, the ATP cycle and everything else - one of the primary reasons I want this taught is because I believe that it will lead them to philosophically conclude that there is a God. Does that render the teaching of microbiology unconstitutional?
Quote:
Do we need to talk about our system of laws based on the case at hand or are you comfortable with my assurance?
You've crossed the line between self-confidence and arrogance on several occasions lately. Any particular reason?
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472692 - 12/21/05 08:32 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
waiting...
Just because you're waiting doesn't mean the bus has not come and gone and you missed it. 
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472693 - 12/21/05 08:45 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
So why did you say "I don't think that separation of church and state is really what that is specifically about."
Is this a straw man? The state refers to government action in general (as through 200 yrs of precedent)
Quote:
But there is zero doubt in my mind that a local science cirriculum discussing ID is not a law respecting an establishment of religion.
The state funds are the connection here.
Quote:
Again, what does the motivation matter?....Does that render the teaching of microbiology unconstitutional?
Because the case is judged according to all of the facts and the facts of the case indicate that the defendants were speaking from both sides of their mouth as they were on a board representing a government sponsored school.
I don't see how a discussion of secular science would be unconstitutional. I refer you to WT's answers on this subject as he is much better at the nitty gritty than I am
Quote:
You've crossed the line between self-confidence and arrogance on several occasions lately. Any particular reason?[/quotw]
Sorry I didn't realize I was. That answer of mine was actually serious in that I thought you might want me explain something. I really am not arrogant at all. Sometimes I may get tired of explaining things but they are more frustration that I didn't think people read what I posted so maybe I come off that way.
Or maybe I just learned it by watching you 
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472694 - 12/21/05 08:54 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Power Poster
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,349
|
I think you just want to accuse me of going off topic so you don't get stepped on.
_________________________
If your tagline references disclaimers regarding the nature of political posts, then you should just hit notify.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472696 - 12/21/05 08:58 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
10K Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 12,846
|
Quote:
Quote:
So why did you say "I don't think that separation of church and state is really what that is specifically about."
Is this a straw man? The state refers to government action in general (as through 200 yrs of precedent)
No, there's no strawman argument here. You said that separation of church and state was not the issue. You then said that it was. I (recklessly) assume that you are going to stick to this position, so we'll move on...
Quote:
Quote:
But there is zero doubt in my mind that a local science cirriculum discussing ID is not a law respecting an establishment of religion.
The state funds are the connection here.
They may be the connection, but the question is, are they being used to establish a religion. The SCOTUS and Judge Jones believe they are. I disagree.
Quote:
Quote:
Again, what does the motivation matter?
Because the case is judged according to all of the facts and the facts of the case indicate that the defendants were speaking from both sides of their mouth as they were on a board representing a government sponsored school.
So if I was on a school board and voted to teach microbiology, but went to my church and said I was only doing it so that students would conclude there was a God, that would be relevant to a case as to the constitutionality of the subject matter? Don't buy it.
Quote:
I don't see how a discussion of secular science would be unconstitutional.
I don't either. But, making the assumption that a discussion of "non-secular" science would be unconstitutional, I would have liked the judge's opinion to stick to the subject being taught, not the motivation.
Quote:
Sorry I didn't realize I was. That answer of mine was actually serious in that I thought you might want me explain something. I really am not arrogant at all. Sometimes I may get tired of explaining things but they are more frustration that I didn't think people read what I posted so maybe I come off that way.
I think it was the fact that this post came after another this week in which I was asked to allow you to explain my position, and another in which you noted that you were more intelligent than your parents.
Quote:
Or maybe I just learned it by watching you
Perhaps, my young apprentice.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472697 - 12/21/05 09:04 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Platinum Poster
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 517
The Land of OZ
|
Quote:
I think you just want to accuse me of going off topic so you don't get stepped on.
Yep, that's it. You got me again. I don't know how you know me so well, but ya' do.
As Robert De Niro said in Analysis This...
"You.. You... You got a gift my friend."
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472698 - 12/21/05 09:11 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
-3-,
Is your screen name an homage to Dale Earnhart?
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#472699 - 12/21/05 09:15 PM
Re: Way To Go, Judge Jones!!!
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
You know I hate these quote things. (although I learned how to do them so I am pretty proud of myself  ) Here goes: You said Quote:
I don't. I don't think the founding fathers ever intended local school cirriculum, decided by a local school board, to be a federal issue.
I said to that:
Quote:
But I don't think that separation of church and state is really what that is specifically about. The constitution is a framework for laws to fit within
It appeared that you were trying to go down a federalist road and my point was that it was the wrong road to go down.
Quote:
So if I was on a school board and voted to teach microbiology, but went to my church and said I was only doing it so that students would conclude there was a God, that would be relevant to a case as to the constitutionality of the subject matter? Don't buy it.
You are looking for some sort of logical symmetry when it is a one-way street. What your argument says is teaching science as end end around to religion. The fact is, you are teaching science and it doesn't matter what informs that purpose. As long as it is not the other way around.
If you don't buy this, I am not going to convince you why the motivation matters.
As far as the "explanation", I thought that since we basically agreed that it would be easier for me since there would be as much argumentative bias or personal distain. I was simply being practical.
As for the smarterer comment I was being funny but I also believe that I am more intelligent than my parents. Not a big deal. No disrespect to them either.
Quote:
Perhaps, my young apprentice
Touche! That's my joke you thief!
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Thread
Index