George Bush is a prude.

[DELIRI0US N0MAD]

Well one leads to the other. The government deregulated the monopoly and private companies took over.

PS. If you would explain quick the differences between a deregulated market where private companies act and "pure" privatization, that would be great so I´ll understand more what you mean! DS.

I was merely saying that "privatization" is taking a sector that is run by the government and handing it over to the private sector to run it. "Deregulation" is taking a sector that is already run by private companies, but taking the caps and floors off of their business and letting the free market take over.

I never said that the prices would go down. They may very well go up, but the private sector will undoubtedly give a better product with better service.

Again,....legitimate debate on this subject.

 

[DELIRI0US N0MAD]

There is no debate.
Creationism may be a religious theory,, but it is not a scientific theory.

A scientific theory is based on cold, hard, mathematical facts. It can be proved or disproved with further investigation.

Evolution is based on physical evidence, such as fossils, carbon dating, and genetics. Hence, it is a scientific theory on the origins of life, and should be taught in certain Science classes. ( Biology and Anthropology)

Creationism is based on spirituality, philosophy, and faith. It cannot be proved or disproved in a science lab.

Creationism is not science. It is a religious theory. It can be taught in Theology classes and Philosophy classes, and even Sociology classes, but it is not Biology.

Yes.....there is a debate.

If "A scientific theory is based on cold, hard, mathematical facts. It can be proved or disproved with further investigation", then it would no longer be a theory....it would be a fact. When I last looked, evolution was still a theory. Please let me know when they changed that.

There is nothing wrong with wanting the theory that most people believe in, scientific or not, to at least be taught as a theory in public schools.

Both sides have valid points.
Another legitimate debate that could go on forever.

 

[Arg_Hamster]

I was merely saying that "privatization" is taking a sector that is run by the government and handing it over to the private sector to run it. "Deregulation" is taking a sector that is already run by private companies, but taking the caps and floors off of their business and letting the free market take over.

I never said that the prices would go down. They may very well go up, but the private sector will undoubtedly give a better product with better service.

Again,....legitimate debate on this subject.

Okey, I understand how you meant now! Thanks for the explanation.

 

[Arg_Hamster]

I wish my far superior theory of life was thaught in school.

6 billion fucking cagemonkeys and yes, your precious god really gives great head!

But seriously the coolest theory is the "mistake" or "accident" theory. It seem to scare people though.

 

[Dr.TEETH]

Yes.....there is a debate.

If "A scientific theory is based on cold, hard, mathematical facts. It can be proved or disproved with further investigation", then it would no longer be a theory....it would be a fact. When I last looked, evolution was still a theory. Please let me know when they changed that.

There is nothing wrong with wanting the theory that most people believe in, scientific or not, to at least be taught as a theory in public schools.

Both sides have valid points.
Another legitimate debate that could go on forever.

Indeed it is still a theory, but it is a theory based upon facts. It can be proved or diproved with more facts. Science is not based on belief. Now that I think about it, Science has a way of disproving popular beliefs........ex. Flat Earth, and the Earth being the center of the universe................
Religion, however, is not based on scientific evidence. It is based on a personal belief. It cannot be proved or disproved with scientific study.

Both sides do not have valid points in the scientific method. Religion may have valid points when it comes to the philosophy of life, but there are no scientific points in religion whatsoever. Religion does not equal science. And the more that the Bossman keeps trying to mix religion with science, the more the science professors are going to resent him.

 

[ThraxDude]

Alright guys, heres a different spin on this. The Bush administration is fucking with the US tourist trade. How you ask, well heres the reason. Now if you want to visit the US from here in the UK, if your pasport is under a certain age(cant remember the exact time limit) you have to apply for a visa. No problem there you may think, but if you have any kind of conviction, you will be refused. This includes a driving penalty, which almost 1/3 of UK drivers have. Now to get your visa, if your alowd one, you have to go for an interview to an American embasy. That isint to bad either, untill you consider that I myself live in Scotland and would have to travel to London (over 800 miles round trip) take my partner and baby with me(as they need visas aswell), stay overnight in a hotel, and take 3 days off my work. Now all that will cost a coupla hundred pounds. Now I love your country, but I'm afraid I wont be back for a long time now. Im not alone in this as I have friends who are in the same position as myself who wont be coming back. I also have a friend whos family are now US citizens, but as they have a driving conviction cannot get into your country to see her mum and dad. This is the same rules being applyed to everyone from every country in the world. So watch your tourist trade drop rapidly over the next few years and your debt to mount cause there isint as much forign money coming into your federal bank. They say these security measures have been put in place to stop terrorist's and criminals entering the US, but how does a speeding ticket make you a terrorist.

Don't blame Bush. Blame terrorism.

 

[DELIRI0US N0MAD]

Indeed it is still a theory, but it is a theory based upon facts. It can be proved or diproved with more facts. Science is not based on belief. Now that I think about it, Science has a way of disproving popular beliefs........ex. Flat Earth, and the Earth being the center of the universe................
Religion, however, is not based on scientific evidence. It is based on a personal belief. It cannot be proved or disproved with scientific study.

Both sides do not have valid points in the scientific method. Religion may have valid points when it comes to the philosophy of life, but there are no scientific points in religion whatsoever. Religion does not equal science. And the more that the Bossman keeps trying to mix religion with science, the more the science professors are going to resent him.

You keep taking this debate to whether it's "scientific" or not. Quite frankly, I couldn't give a rats ass whether anything can be proven or disproven by science. That is not the end-all of whether something should be taught or not.
The fact is that they are both theories, of which, Creation is accepted by more people than evolution.
You must be assuming that I'm saying that Creation should be taught as fact.
We're going in circles.
:Spin:

 

[DELIRI0US N0MAD]

Don't blame Bush. Blame terrorism.

Yes...it's unfortunate that good people get caught up in the clamping down on US visitation, but we have to draw the line somewhere. It is much too cumbersome to begin making all kinds of exceptions.

But you're right. It isn't Bush that caused this.
In fact, most people here are upset that Bush ISN'T TOUGH ENOUGH on the borders.

 

[ThraxDude]

You keep taking this debate to whether it's "scientific" or not. Quite frankly, I couldn't give a rats ass whether anything can be proven or disproven by science. That is not the end-all of whether something should be taught or not.
The fact is that they are both theories, of which, Creation is accepted by more people than evolution.
You must be assuming that I'm saying that Creation should be taught as fact.
We're going in circles.
:Spin:

Exactly. And let's not forget the fact that our country was taken over by Christians. Most of our American ancestors are. Except the Native Americans. (I'm part both actually)

You're free to believe whatever-the-fuck you want in America. But most of us are Christians so get-fucking-used to it.

 

[jdelpi]

You keep taking this debate to whether it's "scientific" or not. Quite frankly, I couldn't give a rats ass whether anything can be proven or disproven by science. That is not the end-all of whether something should be taught or not.
The fact is that they are both theories, of which, Creation is accepted by more people than evolution.
You must be assuming that I'm saying that Creation should be taught as fact.
We're going in circles.
:Spin:

Time in science class should not be wasted on such nonsense. If it were actually science, there would be peer-reviewed research on it in scientific journals. There's not. There's no controversy to teach. Since evolution's proponents have provided extensive research to back their claims, creationists should do the same if they want to be accepted in public schools.

 

[jdelpi]

Exactly. And let's not forget the fact that our country was taken over by Christians. Most of our American ancestors are. Except the Native Americans. (I'm part both actually)

You're free to believe whatever-the-fuck you want in America. But most of us are Christians so get-fucking-used to it.

1. Might does not make right.
2. We still have the First Amendment, though rarely used.
3. If you feel the need to shove your religion down everyone's throats (through the government), that says a lot about your religion's claim on morality.
4. We're already pretty used to it. Christians control the White House, Congress and the judiciary.*



* An atheist is in charge of the Federal Reserve. bwahahaha

 

[DELIRI0US N0MAD]

Time in science class should not be wasted on such nonsense. If it were actually science, there would be peer-reviewed research on it in scientific journals. There's not. There's no controversy to teach. Since evolution's proponents have provided extensive research to back their claims, creationists should do the same if they want to be accepted in public schools.

Quite a debate here for something that's "not debatable".
:Spin:

 

[ThraxDude]

1. Might does not make right.
2. We still have the First Amendment, though rarely used.
3. If you feel the need to shove your religion down everyone's throats (through the government), that says a lot about your religion's claim on morality.
4. We're already pretty used to it. Christians control the White House, Congress and the judiciary.*



* An atheist is in charge of the Federal Reserve. bwahahaha

I agree, man. I'm NOT saying "might makes right". I'm just saying get used to it. America was taken over by Christians, and the majority is Christian. I have atheist friends, I have Jewish friends, I even have Jehovah's witnesses friends.
What I'm saying is, no matter how much we (including myself) think religion shouldn't lead the way, it likely will.

For the record, I'm a non-practicing Christian. I believe in Christ yet I don't believe in the junk in the bible. I think the bible is based on a true story.

 

[KY_Fried442]

 

[I_am_138]

Thank you for the great post.

The "Liberals" aren't anti-religious. They're against mixing Religion and Government. Giving a religion Government powers would be tyrantical. For example: The Taliban, The Spanish Inquisition, The Salem Witch Trials, Virgin Sacrifices, The Genocide of the Christians by the Muslims in an African country (i forget which one), and especially The Old Testament of the Bible (The punishment for adultry in the old testament was a public stoning to death, and was the Jewish law in ancient times.) Imagine if we gave Satanism political power. Murdering Christians would be legal. The "Liberals" think that religion is a personal thing and not to be forced onto anybody.

As for your comment on gayness, who are you?? the sex police??? It is none of the government's business what somebody does in their personal life. And it sure isn't any of your business what goes on in somebody else's bedroom. How would you like it if Jerry Falwell had you arrested for having sexual relations outside of marriage and charged you with infidelity. That sounds absurd, but if you let the religious kooks make the laws, we would be faced with all kinds of absurd laws and brutal, Taliban-like punishments.

 

[Dr.TEETH]

You keep taking this debate to whether it's "scientific" or not. Quite frankly, I couldn't give a rats ass whether anything can be proven or disproven by science. That is not the end-all of whether something should be taught or not.
The fact is that they are both theories, of which, Creation is accepted by more people than evolution.
You must be assuming that I'm saying that Creation should be taught as fact.
We're going in circles.
:Spin:

The key word here is Scientific, as in the Scientific Method. For something to be taught in a science class, the end-all is its capability to be tested using the Scientific Method. It does not matter how many people accept it. What matters is the ability to be proved mathematically true or false. Science is the study of the physical universe, not of the spiritual universe. For some reason, George Bush just doesn't understand that. He will be taking the advancement of science back 200 years if he forces the science programs to teach unprovable beliefs.

 

[Dr.TEETH]

Quite a debate here for something that's "not debatable".
:Spin:

There is a debate and there isn't a debate.

Your debate is political. Politically,yes there is a debate. You argue that since most people believe in God, the government should force the schools to teach religion in Biology classes. The Science Departments of schools, as well as science nerds like myself find this notion ridiculous, and are fighting against it. That is a political debate.

My debate is scientific. Scientifically, NO, there is no debate. I am arguing that there is no way to prove or disprove the existance of God. The only "evidence of God" that we have so far is stories and texts written hundreds and thousands of years ago. These texts could, at best, be taught in Social Studies or Philosophy class. Used in ther right context, they can be used as a detail in History class, but they have no place in the science class. That is a Scientific debate.

My debate ceased to be political when I announced that there is no debate, and started to explain the definition of science.

That is why you think that we are arguing ourselves into a circle.

 

[DELIRI0US N0MAD]

There is a debate and there isn't a debate.

Your debate is political. Politically,yes there is a debate. You argue that since most people believe in God, the government should force the schools to teach religion in Biology classes. The Science Departments of schools, as well as science nerds like myself find this notion ridiculous, and are fighting against it. That is a political debate.

My debate is scientific. Scientifically, NO, there is no debate. I am arguing that there is no way to prove or disprove the existance of God. The only "evidence of God" that we have so far is stories and texts written hundreds and thousands of years ago. These texts could, at best, be taught in Social Studies or Philosophy class. Used in ther right context, they can be used as a detail in History class, but they have no place in the science class. That is a Scientific debate.

My debate ceased to be political when I announced that there is no debate, and started to explain the definition of science.

That is why you think that we are arguing ourselves into a circle.

Fair enough. You are correct. I am talking "political" and you are talking "scientific". It doesn't change the fact that I think it's ok to teach that creation is a theory. I don't think that the government should "force" (as you put it) schools to teach it, but I do think that some schools should be "allowed" to teach it. As it stands, it is not allowed.
But then, that's just my opinion.

I follow the old saying, "When you take God out of the schools, you let the devil in"

The "Christian Right" may be going too far trying to put religion INTO the schools and society, but the ACLU is going WAY too far trying to take religion OUT of schools and society....i.e. - trying to get the Pledge of Allegiance outlawed in schools because it has the word "God" in it.......OH MY GOD! MY RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED AND I'M SCARRED FOR LIFE!!!!
For Christ's sake, if you don't want to say the word "God" then don't freakin' say it......Stop getting your panties in a bunch.
There should be some common sense ground that we can all agree on.

 

[Ragman_kd]

Yes...it's unfortunate that good people get caught up in the clamping down on US visitation, but we have to draw the line somewhere. It is much too cumbersome to begin making all kinds of exceptions.

But you're right. It isn't Bush that caused this.
In fact, most people here are upset that Bush ISN'T TOUGH ENOUGH on the borders.

I understand that things have to be tightened up in light of everything that’s happened/happening. My problem is that ppl are being turned down from visiting the US for completely unreasonable and stupid reasons. As I said my friend isn’t allowed into the States to visit their family because of a SPEEDING TICKET. Tell me that’s right and fair. I know you say it’s not G.W.B.’s fault, but he is the man who ultimately has final say on all government matters. The buck stops with him. I know there are many levels to the US government, but he’s the top man. If this were a company we were talking about, he WOULD get the blame because he is supposed to be in ultimate charge of all aspects of the company.

 

[Dr.TEETH]

Fair enough. You are correct. I am talking "political" and you are talking "scientific". It doesn't change the fact that I think it's ok to teach that creation is a theory. I don't think that the government should "force" (as you put it) schools to teach it, but I do think that some schools should be "allowed" to teach it. As it stands, it is not allowed.
But then, that's just my opinion.

I follow the old saying, "When you take God out of the schools, you let the devil in"

The "Christian Right" may be going too far trying to put religion INTO the schools and society, but the ACLU is going WAY too far trying to take religion OUT of schools and society....i.e. - trying to get the Pledge of Allegiance outlawed in schools because it has the word "God" in it.......OH MY GOD! MY RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED AND I'M SCARRED FOR LIFE!!!!
For Christ's sake, if you don't want to say the word "God" then don't freakin' say it......Stop getting your panties in a bunch.
There should be some common sense ground that we can all agree on.

I agree with the common sense statement.
For starters, wouldn't it be sensible if we all stopped politicallly labeling each other????? Why can't a person can't be a free thinker, and not be a part of some "political gang". It does nothing but divide people. Some people who take politics too seriously become obnoxious. The most obnoxious thing that I have ever seen was during the Bush vs. Kerry election coverage on Fox News last year. Michael Moore was a guest on Bill O'Reilly's talk show, and of course they argued. At first they were arguing about important subjects, like the war, tax cuts, and privacy issues, but sooner than later, the interview became an insult match (you're a liberal this/you're a conservative that). It was hard to believe that two middle-aged men arguing like children, was on a supposed news channel. I thought both guys were jerks, and if they represent the idealogy of our political choices.....we're doomed.