Free Republic

PS I just assumed that the only people that have the power to pull tags off thread are the mods, are you saying people other than the mods can do this???

Then how did the News/Activism get taken off my last two threads. Are your average everyday FReepers able to pull the News tag off themselves whenever they feel like it?

Typical evo...when all else fails, make things up.

Look, no mods have touched this thread and we are getting sick of your accusations.
Yes, Jim said you could posts your threads in tne news forum but it's getting very annoying when you slam the mods constantly, usually for no reason.
FR mods have NOTHING TO DO WITH DC!

My screenname is nowhere listed on that page, so why are you assuming I am that person if you did not get it from RationalWiki??? Or are you just making stuff up again?

I didn’t say it was you (whoever you are), but who else can go back and take the News/Activism tag off my posts after the fact?

And I don’t view it as the “nefarious FR mods” going after me so much as directly violating the wishes of Jim Robinson, who last I checked is FR’s FOUNDER and OWNER.

Crying to daddy about every little thing that irritates you?

He has bigger and better things to worry about than your feelings.

I don’t have a decontamination program on my computer.

I have perused DC on and off over the years since its inception, and found precious little actual scientific discussion going on over there.Participation was sparse on the science threads and overabundant on the bash FR threads.

I purposely checked out the science threads and compared them to the *Other sites* forum and they were the least participated in discussions going, and they tended to degenerate into sharing recipes and talking about drinks at that.

There is no “debate” at DC on evolution issues because no debate is allowed, only dogmatic adherence to the hardline ToE position.

For all the DCers whine about unfair treatment of evolutionists and evol articles here, they are at least allowed to stand. At DC any non-evolution articles are not even permitted. Evolutionists are permitted far more freedom to post and express their opinions on this forum than they grant to opposing viewpoints on theirs.

Eugenics must always be "bad science"; for its fundamental root or premise forever remains outside of science, in some sort of "philosophy" or other.

I don't think that eugenics is a "science" at all. It is a political ideology based almost exclusively on racism.

Eugenics is not rational. For the simple reason that it has no fixed rational standard.

Oh but it does. The standard is that the elite eugenicists are allowed to live, reproduce and prosper. Everyone else exists to serve the elites, aside from that they are deemed worthless and expendable.

What's saddest is to watch people try to "prove" that they belong among the elites. We've seen this on this thread and it is really no different than people like Jesse Jackson or Obama trying to "prove" that they belong among the elites. They have an "Uncle Tom" mentality and they aren't even aware of it.

Yes, some of the most nefarious FR mods, me included, are plotting against you with the DC mods.

Get a life!

"You got that from here, did you not?"

Nope,I got it from where rationalwiki got it.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/holden.html

They can post all they want. On some other forum. Not here.

C. They can ignore the subject of eugenics altogether and blame any criticism of the Darwins on the hatred of science. This seems to be the most popular choice.

Well, be that what it may, and only speaking for myself, may I say: I don't "hate" science. I just hate "bad science."

Eugenics must always be "bad science"; for its fundamental root or premise forever remains outside of science, in some sort of "philosophy" or other.

Eugenics is not rational. For the simple reason that it has no fixed rational standard. It is (historically) nothing but a "movable goal-post" that justifies anything and everything convenient to morally disordered human beings.

That being the case, science it never can be!

JMHO, FWIW

I wasn’t giving you *permission* as you likely knew full well. I have no say in who comes and goes.

Just pointing out the options.

I could be, but I am not, and you know it.

You read minds, do you?

It sure didn’t look like the Long Lance.. that truly was a big ol’ thing. I didnt know the airplanes used the LL... I thought that was just from full-size subs and surface ships.

How about we dig up some "talkorigins.org" source material while we are at it?

Nobody is stopping you from posting your own evo threads.

Go over to the CvE forum over there and have a scientific debate then.

You can’t because all you have are religious quotes to use.

Or is your faith so weak that you are afraid you might have a shred of doubt creep into your mind if you step foot there?

Go over there and slay the heathens with scientific facts (use their own weapons against them)!

Bashing FR is real debate?

Who knew?

That picture has been posted on FR a number of times. It has been removed every time.

Then the zotting is long past due if removing the picture every time isn't enough of a hint to make the poster stop.

Everyone deserves the right to be stupid once in a while, and for some here, that occurs on a daily basis.

And the zottee was. So he got it. Too bad, so sad.....

Maybe. Or you could just be wrong, and it's neither one.

I could be, but I am not, and you know it.

Hey Jim,

The mods have taken to leaving the News/Activism tag on in the beginning, and then removing that tag when they think nobody is looking later on, as you can see from this post, as well as a few others.

All the best—GGG

OK, where is the quote where he denies Darwinism?

For example: From where do we get the right to believe that man was not from the very beginning what he is today. A glance in Nature shows us , that changes and developments happen in the realm of plants and animals. But nowhere do we see inside a kind, a development of the size of the leap that Man must have made, if he supposedly has advanced from an ape-like condition to what he is (now) -Adolf Hitler (Tischgespraeche)

Note that while Hitler seems to support a sort of micro-evolution in plants and non-human animals, he clearly says that he believes that Man had not changed or evolved over time. Hitler also clearly states that he believes that man has not "developed from an ape-like state". Also note that he even used the creationist word "kind" in this statement.

Hitler also instructed that evolution be banned from schools. I have a reference link at home I can post from this later, but the specific wording of the statement was along the lines of 'no subject shall be taught that lowers man to anything less than a divine creation'.

As disgusting as it is, it does serve to show just how disgusting the anti-Christians are. Beneath contempt.

That's why I agree with leaving the post and zotting the poster.

You got that from here, did you not?

http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/List_of_internet_kooks

Did you notice the “citation needed”? Do you always make wild accusations without proof? So now we know that you are both a libeler and a serial plagiarizer. You’re batting a thousand, NL.

If you don't like the decisions of the management himself, you are allowed to leave.

Don't need your permission to stay or go, darlin'. Been here since '98, don't see you doing much here other than defending your creationist position.

But it's so much easier to malign the creationist movement if they can convince themselves that that was the real reason.

Keep up your delusion.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103363/posts

Seems we have to go through this little exercise two or three times a year. That’s why I posted the above statement to our front page several years ago. And it still stands.

We aggressively defend our God-given unalienable rights including the rights to Life, Liberty, free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association and freedom to control the use and content of our own personal private property, etc. All conservatives are welcome to post here, but those who insist on trolling against our stated beliefs and purposes sooner or later are subject to the zot. Just depends on the frequency, nature and degree of outright belligerence or offensiveness.

Martyrs for repugnant causes, malcontents, naysayers and other assorted and sundry trolls are certainly free to exercise their freedom of speech rights, freedom of association rights, private property rights and or freedom from religion (if that’s their preferred viewpoint) rights elsewhere. I will not object to or attempt to troll or interfere with the free exercise of their GOD-GIVEN constitutionally protected and patriot defended rights, and ask only that they not attempt to interfere with ours.

Merry CHRISTmas!

May God bless and protect you and yours and all you hold dear.

http://www.freerepublic.com/home

Heck, all you have to do is look at her posting history here.

Again, thanks for the DC plug! That's Darwin Central for all you interested. Nothing has been deleted over there. Go over and find it.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

That's the stupidest challenge I ever saw.

I hope that whatever you pass off as science meets a higher standard than that.

The point is, the ZOT’s comments had nothing to do with Creation/Intelligent design, and everything to do with insulting Christianity directly, in the most vile sort of way. So let’s not pretend that the ZOT was ZOTTED because he took the evo side of the Creation/Evolution debate. Nothing could be further from the truth.

But it's so much easier to malign the creationist movement if they can convince themselves that that was the real reason. Then they can become DC martyrs and go lick their wounds and whine about what FR is becoming and get their little laurel wreath.

"Go ahead and ask the mods to restore the FR-hating comments I dug up on you over at Darwin Central, and let’s talk about them shall we?"

GGG is talk.origin's most long-lived kook, having been around since around the mid-80's, I believe. GGG is not your average creationist, being more into Velikovsky-style catastrophism and some even more bizarre variants, but he hates evolution with a passion, for reasons that are unclear. GGG's view of human evolution, which is so weird that, to paraphrase physicist Wolfgang Pauli, not only isn't it right, it isn't even wrong.

Mods should pull the thread.

No, you insults would be plenty.

Then you hit the ABUSE and have it removed. It has been done before.

Well, clearly that was done and *it* got removed. Solved the problem permanently.

Nobody is forcing you to stay here. If you don't like the decisions of the management himself, you are allowed to leave.

As disgusting as it is,

it does serve to show just how disgusting the anti-Christians are. Beneath contempt.

You are either a terribly informed individual, or you make it you business to attack Christianity. Maybe both?

Maybe. Or you could just be wrong, and it's neither one.

Is this what FreeRepublic has come to? Zotting known conservatives from the site because we do not accept the Creationist view?

When and where did that happen?

All I saw get zotted was a liberal God hater attacking Christianity.

Yes, huge elements of the Nazi legal system are being incorporated into

I believe you will find that the first gun control law here was almost a direct copy of Hitler's law.

That picture has been posted on FR a number of times. It has been removed every time.

It looks like this go around Jim is leaving the picture up as a reminder of exactly what atheist trolls believe.

Everyone deserves the right to be stupid once in a while, and for some here, that occurs on a daily basis.

Stupid is messing up and using profanity or something along those lines, this post makes it very clear that the posting of the picture was deliberate and calculated.

I can post dozens upon dozens of quotes and statements like this

OK, where is the quote where he denies Darwinism?

In any case his actions certainly don't seem to have been influenced by the quotes you included.

"Go ahead and ask the mods to restore the FR-hating comments I dug up on you over at Darwin Central, and let’s talk about them shall we?"

How about we dig up some "talkorigins.org" source material while we are at it?

Sorry, it’s for real debate, not spamming and testifying will not be tolerated. You have to bring real scientific proof.

Late to the party but ping......

How did camel’s posting of an article work out?

“Elementary logic would make it seem clear that the anti-revisionist writers should be grateful to Revisionists for having demonstrated Roosevelts’ responsibility for this great and benign achievement far more definitively and clearly than the anti-revisionists have ever done. By denying his responsibility for what is to interventionists a superlative act of humanitarian statesmanship the anti-revisionists are depriving him of the credit due him for his allegedly comprehensive service to mankind”

That is not a case of elementary logic. There are other matters for consideration. However much some would like to praise his leadership in bringing civilization back to Western Europe and parts of Asia, or whatever, clandestinely conspiring to precipitate war, up to and including allowing ourselves to be attacked, is just wrong.

You see, one can want war, and one can say we waited too long to get into war, without believing any means of entering the war are allowed. Therefore, even if war is what you wanted, the manner by which FDR entered the war is not necessarily justifiable. For most people, it’s not a matter of “by any means possible”. The author of that paragraph knows better. Morality is complex.

That picture has been posted on FR a number of times. It has been removed every time.

Everyone deserves the right to be stupid once in a while, and for some here, that occurs on a daily basis.

Congratulations troll, it is quite likely that no post will EVER demonstrate the evils of Darwinism as clearly as this one does.

Likely not, and likely they're yucking it up over at other websties about that post.

Is the Nazi Legal System threatening your free exercise of religion?

You are either a terribly informed individual, or you make it you business to attack Christianity. Maybe both?

He does consider himself the reincarnation of Tomás de Torquemada, and in charge of the modern (especially on FR) inquisition...

Funny, I seem to remember some Darwinist troll labeling me the "Grand Inquisitor of Free Republic" over at AtheistCentral.

What the Nazis SAID matters little except as it was a justification for what they DID. So no matter what the blatherings of Hitler about about God it was not the God of the Bible he was ranting about but his own god that would bless his armies and aims.
In that he was like a Mafia chief that proclaims honesty is the best policy because he gets to define honesty for himself.

Like all monsters the Nazis had two faces, one was the scientific, Gaia loving, moralist face. The other was the oculist, destroy all, perversion face of the thug.

Darwinism provided a scientific argument, one that Darwin himself recognized was implied by his theories which but for normal feelings of humanity might be carried out.

So one cannot read chapters four and eleven of Hitler's “Mein Kampf” without realizing the foundations of the Nazi philosophy and their efforts to put it into practice.

Is this what FreeRepublic has come to? Zotting known conservatives from the site because we do not accept the Creationist view?

Please go back and explain why ANYONE who posted the picture in post #43 should be allowed to stay. It is the single most offensive post I have ever seen here.