Jump to content

an American in Texas

Members
  • Posts

    99
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by an American in Texas

  1. Well Leigh, obviously they don't teach reading comprehension in Texas..because, if you had bothered to LOOK, you would have seen this, which was pretty prominently displayed at the bottom of my original post, just before my own comment.   

    "Source: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarnin..._to_suppor.html "

    The Clue for you  should have been the designation "Source" which was the Washington Post Blog that this individual writes for... Oh wait..isnt it the "Source" that you were looking for??  Now that tells ME that You

    A: Were unable to recognize the word "Spource"  (obviously not since you demanded it)

    B:  Were just so utterly quick to bash anything said by anyone on this forum that you just didnt bother to READ the article in the first place, or;

    C:  Are just another ignorant ass who has to try and get the last word in no matter what, even when you are incorrect.

    None of the above. Simply blind as a bat and overlooked it. Mea culpa and apologies.

    Leigh

    Leigh

  2. :ninja:  :ninja:  :ninja:  :ninja:

    No! Again you are incorrect.  The ultimate irony is that you actually think that people care what Paul and his boy Matthew think.  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

    We know who's opinions you worship and hide behind.  The Constitution of the United States of Paul Laclair. Tape that one will you.  :wub:

    :ninja:  :ninja:  :ninja:  :ninja:

    You say many silly things, Bik, but this one I can't let slide by.

    The Constitution is not Paul's, nor would he ever claim it to be. It belongs to the world, and most particularly to those of us in the world who are Americans.

    The profound respect we feel for it is not the same as worship. It arises from our educated evaluation of its content and purpose.

    And far from hiding behind it, we put it right up front, as indeed we should since it is the highest law of our land.

    You are also quite mistaken when you assert that people don't care what Paul and Matthew think. Many of us do care very much, for we realize that without brave citizens like them who will speak up to defend the Constitution, our country is in danger of devolving into a theocracy like, say, Iran's.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  3. Guest, you seem to be unclear on the concept of a citation. It means you're supposed to tell us where these words came from . . . the published source. For example, a link to a transcript of the broadcast. Or heck, even the date, time, and name of the program on which the guy said the words you say he said (we could then try to find the source for ourselves). Or perhaps a link to his apology, in which he presumably tells us when and where he screwed up.

    What you've provided leaves the question of whether he actually *said* this stuff completely up in the air. Perhaps he did; but if so, you should be able to tell us where and when.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  4. A Christian: "There you have it, folks. The Darwiniacs nonsense is exposed. ( a knotted rope EVOLVING into a slide rule ) This is the substance of Darwinism; Disneyland -like magic creating computers from rope (through blind evolution of course)."

    Oh, good lord. It's hard to know how to respond to this kind of foolishness. The analogy obviously had nothing to do with "blind evolution". If anything, I suppose a believer in Intelligent Design could parse it to support his belief. Personally, I don't read it that way.

    The substance of understanding Darwinism, or more broadly the theory of evolution, is to be found in literally thousands of peer-reviewed scientific journals. Even a layman, if well-read and educated, can understand the basics of biology and genetics well enough to comprehend how thoroughly ToE is supported by the evidence.

    And "Biology Teacher", I am not responsible for education in Texas, except insofar as my university degrees were granted by Texas institutions and I might therefore be representative of the quality of education here. I am glad to tell you, however, that those who ARE responsible do ensure that our biology teachers are better-qualified to teach than you are. You can't imagine how glad I am to infer that you are NOT teaching here.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  5. "Biology teacher": If evolution is not intelligent, then it's dumb. And if it's dumb, then it's random. Unless there's an intelligence guiding the evolutionary process, it's a blind, dumb process of hit or miss, or randomness.

    More illogical nonsense. It's neither dumb nor intelligent; it's a process. It is not a random process; in fact it can be described very succinctly as the tendency of better-adapted creatures to fill ecological niches. How did they get better-adapted? Well, maybe they could run a little faster. Or their coloring was darker due to a mutated gene, so predators couldn't see them as well as their lighter kindred. Those adaptations that enable a creature to reproduce, even at only a few percentage points more than its kindred, spread through the population and change it. As we see, this is the opposite of random behavior.

    Over geological time, i.e., millions of years, we wind up with a bewildering variety of creatures who are far more complex that the ones we started out with.

    This process is well-documented and well-supported by thousands and thousands of pieces of evidence from a broad range of scientific disciplines. The vast majority of scientists (I've seen numbers as high as 99.8%) find the theory of evolution non-controversial.

    The only people who have a problem with it are fundamentalist Christians, and to a lesser extent, fundamentalist Muslims.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  6. Graduate_Student (allegedly in biology, which I take leave to doubt): Think about that; if all the living creatures of the world came from a common ancestor, we should be tripping over transitional fossils, yet there are none.

    Nonsense. Here are some hominid transitionals: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/hominids.html

    The web and science journals are full of pictures of transitional fossils of many species. It's purely a lie to say there are none.

    And the 747 thing? Extensively debunked already. But here is a better analogy, shamelessly cribbed from a friend of mine who posts as OncomingTrain on the Beliefnet discussion group Evolution/Creationism:

    "Let me suggest a better comparison:

    Which is more likely:

    1. Someone devised the computer - exactly as it is today - from scratch.

    or

    2. The computer is the result of a long (long) process of trial and error, starting with extremely simple forms (knots in a rope), moving through many intermediate forms (abacus, slide rule, punch cards, pocket calculator, Commodore, Atari, etc.), leading up to today's computers... which will in turn be replaced in the future by superior models that do their jobs better.

    Choice 1 represents "intelligent design". Choice 2 represents evolution. In the case of the computer, the act of selection was done by humans. In the case of life, the selection was merely the ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. But in both cases, each form is the result of trying many variations of the previous form... most of which failed, but a few of which were superior to their predecessor. That's how computers came into being, and that is how the current complexity of life came into being. "

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  7. "The difference between the Christians in Kearny and the Christians in Texas it that we actually "believe that we have to go and make disciples of all nation..." This is a very serious issue and you guys seem to be ignoring it."

    Oh, no, we never ignore it. We work at it a lot and in many different ways. None of them, however, involve subjecting other people's children, a captive audience in the public schools, to proselytizing about our version of Christianity -- thus using the entire community's funds to advertise our views and solicit converts. Preventing such abuse is the very essence of the clause restricting the establishment of religion.

    All the silly ad hominems I've been subjected to are really not worthy of comment (I'm not a barfly, cowmaid, or citizen of a third-world backwater). You folks are free to hold whatever view of Texas seems reasonable to you. I might just mention, however, that many Texans are opposed to the death penalty, and we are working to end this abomination.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  8. Guest wrote: "Just don't forget that christians vote and they are the majority in Kearny!"

    It may not be necessary to point this out, but many Christians, far from being in favor of the actions of Paszkiewicz and the inaction of the Kearny BOE, are horrified by these events.

    People who take our form of government seriously, and who understand the Constitutional issues involved here, are unlikely to vote to continue the status quo in Kearny.

    I can promise you, if this happened in Austin, my church would be in the forefront of those calling for firing the teacher. We, as parents and as members of a Christian community, take our responsibility for providing moral and religious training to our youngsters very seriously. We would be appalled to find the public schools stepping into that role (illegally, I might add).

    So I wouldn't count on the "Christian vote" to validate your beliefs, Guest.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  9. Oooh, 2dumb2live, what a blow! Actually, I'm happily married, have 4 kids (oldest 2 Texas A&M grads, 13-yr-old twins), a master's degree in Computer Science, and am working on my Master Naturalist's certification. My husband, Mr. Science, and I and run our own consulting firm. We stay really busy with Boy and Girl Scouts for the twins.

    I'm very active at our church, where I serve on several committees and used to teach Sunday School and Disciples Bible class (had to give that up because I'm traveling on business a lot now). I also served as president of the twins' school PTA for a couple of years.

    In other words, solid citizen and all-around-nice person.

    So, you're pretty much batting zero on the insult-o-meter, bud. I have on the full armor of God, anyway, so you didn't have much chance to start with. No chinks, you see . . .

    Leigh

  10. Bryan, your debating style is moronic. Plate tectonics does NOT provide any support for the nonsensical idea of a global flood. You seize on one point (plate tectonics implies changes in mountain height) and extend the correctness of that one point to cover your entire argument. Sorry, doll, that fig leaf ain't covering everything!

    My geologist friends make a very nice living doing their thing, BTW (they're in the oil bidness).

    You're ducking and weaving, but still punching the air. I've only posted because I didn't like the idea that nobody was calling you on the hand-waving and hair-splitting. But like Dingo Dave, I'm bored with you, so I'm also saying sayonara, and thanks for all the fish.

    Leigh

  11. Bryan said: “I'm suggesting that a global flood is possible, and that trusting to a constant height for mountains is a faith-based assumption (particularly in light of the findings of plate tectonics) Try to pay attention."

    Plate tectonics? PLATE TECTONICS? You are either absymally ignorant or delusional. No reputable geologist in the world would support that lunacy.

    Given this level of scientific understanding, it's no wonder you confuse faith and science. Magical thinking tends to make for poor comprehension.

    Come on over to Beliefnet/Origins of Life discussion. I'd like to see some of my geologist friends beat up on you for a while.

    By the way, I'm a woman. And I've signed my full name to every post I've ever made in this forum.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  12. Here's another vote for Strife.

    Who cares how tall he is? On the boards, it's the size of your BRAIN that matters.

    Strife's kicking the crap out of these folks, and they can't stand it. On the other hand, they can't play at his level. Thus the ad hominems.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  13. Bryan said: A global flood is not impossible.

    Au contraire, buddy, it's factually and demonstrably impossible.

    Bryan: You think it is, most likely, because you assume a relatively static height for the planet's mountain ranges and such. That is a faith-based assumption.

    Nonsense. Nothing faith-based about it. Geologists have very good models of the kind of surface the earth has had during the historical time period in question.

    Bryan: Plus it begs the entire question of miracles to proclaim it impossible. Like God would have a tough time whipping up some extra water if he needed it.

    Ah, but we're talking about science, not faith.

    Bryan, you talk a whole hell of a lot, and your patter is really smooth and self-confident. But there's NO CONTENT. You're saying inane things in flowing phrases. Your rhetoric is like a marshmallow, all big and fluffy and smooth, but mostly hot air, as this latest silliness demonstrates.

    You've really gone to new heights (depths?) of apologetics absurdity with this defense of Paszkiewicz's letter, slicing and dicing and dancing madly,

    But anyone familiar with David Barton's "scholarship" could have told you right away that the Paszkiewicz letter is straight from that playbook. Hell, my immediate assumption was that Barton wrote the thing, and frankly I'd be astonished to find out he didn't "help".

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  14. 2smart4u: "Evolution is not an assumption?"

    No. Evolution is both an extremely well-supported scientific theory and an observed fact.

    What a goofy question.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  15. 2smart4u: And Paul has become the hero of the left wing anti-God crowd.

    Perhaps. But he is also a hero to the pro-God crowd who understand that a fundamental American principle has been attacked. The Christianists have, through their own words, thrown a strong light onto the issue, highlighting the very problem Paul has uncovered, and made us even more determined to draw the line here and now, lest we fight this same battle over and over again in school districts all over the country.

    It's precisely because I am pro-God that I want to ensure that His name won't be dragged any farther through the mud by his alleged defenders.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  16. Rosa Parks' name is not being used to discredit God. It's being used as an example of standing up against bigotry.

    The Christianists are doing a fine job of discrediting God and the faith on their own. In addition to spitting on the Constitution.

    Leigh

  17. Lawyer Bob, have you listened to the audio files from the class? If so, then you know that these conversations went on over long periods of time and on mutliple days.

    It is immaterial whether the proselytizing speeches were in response to questions (which the recordings show that many were not). Nobody would have a problem with the answer, "My personal faith is just that, personal, and it's not relevent to this class," or even a forthright "I'm a practicing and professing Christian" and letting it go at that. 15 or 20 minutes of preaching on Christian theology, followed by a loaded piece of emotional blackmail like "You belong in hell if you don't agree with my religious views" is absolutely over the line, and you know it.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, TX

  18. 2smart4u: It seems that "separation of church and state" are the most understood words in the U.S. The constitution only states that the government shall not endorse any particular religion. That's it. The radical left has expanded these words to mean any mention of God or religion in any context is illegal

    Well, oddly enough lawyers, judges, the Supreme Court, and educated people don't seem to have trouble understanding it. "The Constitution only states that the government shall not endorse any particular religion."

    Seems to me that when a government employee stands up on government time, in a room where his job is to teach adolescents, and starts preaching the gospel, that action constitutes endorsing a religion.

    And not only did he endorse fundamentalist Christianity, he bashed other religions.

    As I've said before, a clear-cut issue. Note also that God was way more than just mentioned in this case, and that the context was a public school classroom in which the authority figure teaching the class was the proselytizer.

    Doesn't take a radical left-winger to read them bones, buddy.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

  19. Patriot: You nailed it. Reading this garbage from the anti-God crowd you realize how mean-spirited and angry they are. I think what they're missing is God's love in their lives.

    I'm not part of the anti-God crowd. I am a professing and practing Christian. But the hatred and venom the Christianists on this board spew make me sick.

    Likewise the complete inability some of you have to recognize one of the most clear-cut separation of church and state issues I've ever seen.

    I think what you're missing in your life is some rational thought. Not to mention some Christian practice to go with your constant God-talk.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, Texas

    p.s. Patriot, your screen name is quite incredibly ironic.

  20. Exodus: Here's the full link to the article:

    How Dinasours Perished In Noah's Flood

    Yes!!! Praise the loard. That is fantastic. A must read article for all dedicated Christians. Thank you so much.

    Exodus, did you actually READ the article? And how's your reading comprehension?

    The article is about the mass extinction at the end of the Permian period, 250 million years ago. It has nothing . . . absolutely nothing . . . to do with Noah and the flood.

    Leigh Williams

  21. Guest, you can disbelieve or believe whatever fiction you want, but the fact is, climatologists are in agreement. Do some research, for Pete's sake.

    Something tells me you're also a creationist. They're usually the ones claiming that their junk science is "dismissed" by real scientists. Oh, what a shock. Scientists are persuaded by evidence, not your gut feelings or sacred myths (whether you get them from W or from the Bronze Age).

    Unless you're a climatologist or can present compelling evidence, or at least some links to peer-reviewed articles, your opinion is *ahem* unpersuasive. You might want to look at what people who study climate for a living are saying.

    Leigh

  22. An unregistered guest who wisely did not use his name: " . . .you will not make new friends in college. You will live a lonely life. "

    I doubt that. People who are in college are often pretty smart and passionate; Matt will surely be able to connect with those people.

    Guest: Please end this, get out of my life, I was in high school with you but I never saw you then--I leave and you are on CNN when I am trying to relax before an exam.

    So it's all about you? Grow up.

    Guest: Most importantly, when I try to take a break from studying and go onto facebook.com you are there, dominating the groups that all the people I am networked with are in.

    Apparently your friends are more interested in real news than you are.

    Guest: Everyone knew that this teacher was extremely religious. Although you think you have started a news flash...you haven't. The preaching of this teacher have been around before your time.

    But nobody else ever had the balls to put a stop to this illegal activity.

    Guest: I hope you cannot live with yourself knowing that you may potentially ruin this man’s life, and I hope it does not happen now but when you have a family like this man does and someone has the chance to take it out from under you because they felt like being an asshole.

    Matt's father has said that that aspect has been troubling Matt. But I think the teacher must take responsibility for any adverse outcome; he is the one who committed illegal and unethical acts. The school board and the principal also own a piece of the blame. If they had done their jobs, things would never have come to this. And by the way, the school's attorney seems to be incompetent, since he apparently hasn't advised his clients about the clear nature of the law governing proselytizing in the classroom.

    In any case, you entirely miss the point of all this. I hope you haven't taken American history yet at that college of yours. You seem to have no knowledge at all of the Constitution and the larger questions the brouhaha in your little town raise.

    Guest: On CNN, I heard you got death threats, I am sure they were well intended

    Okay, up until this point you merely seemed ignorant, childish, and immature. Now you've crossed in the line and are making threats. It was wise of you not to sign your name, but do you realize that you will probably be investigated by the police? Here in Texas you surely would be.

    Leigh Williams

    Austin, TX

×
×
  • Create New...