Replies

Spam.

No, direct evidence, which you can't even begin to deal with, either intellectually or emotionally, so you desperately attempt to dismiss it with a pathetic one-word response which demonstrates quite clearly (especially when taken with all of your *other* posts on these threads) that you have no interest in any of the science which you frequently attack, and have no ability to actually assess it on its own merits, you just operate on your deep bitterness and denial.

Whatever gets you through the day, Mamzelle.

svcw, you expressed surprise that one could conclude that there are science-illiterate religious conservatives. Ask Mamzelle to actually address the contents of post #107, and you'll quickly realize that there are. Now there's nothing wrong with not being conversant on any given topic, of course, UNLESS the person ignorant on [topic X] is arrogant enough to spend a great deal of time attacking [topic X] and denouncing it and attempting to "lecture" and "correct" people on it without actually having any clue what in the hell they're talking about (by actually *understanding* topic X and having a solid knowledge of it)...

There are countless religious conservatives, a large number of them right here on FreeRepublic, who viciously attack evolutionary biology and other fields of science, as well as the people who practice in those fields or who are knowledgeable of those fields and defend them from false attacks, despite not having any real clue about the topics they crusade against.

It gets really old after a while. And worse, this kind of "I don't understand science but I know it's wrong and evil and part of the atheistic conspiracy" folks are very vocal in the public discourse, to the point where a great many people who would otherwise be sympathetic to conservative politics run away screaming after having gotten the impression (which is not far from correct) that conservatism contains a large segment of folks who are wild-eyed anti-science Luddites. This is similar to how the more moderate liberal movements lose support because people are scared off by the more whackjob liberal nuts.

This is *not* a good thing for conservatism. I personally know dozens of people who might otherwise consider voting for conservatives or Republicans, but every time I try to point out how many of their personal views match those of the conservative movement, they recoil in horror and start listing the various antics of the kind of anti-intellectual extremists that have given conservatism a bad name by association.

There's nothing wrong with being religious -- in fact, the *majority* of American "evolutionists" are themselves Christians. But there is a very vocal, very strident, very intolerant, very anti-science segment of religious conservatives who are *not* doing the conservative cause any favors.

No, direct evidence, which you can't even begin to deal with, either intellectually or emotionally, so you desperately attempt to dismiss it with a pathetic one-word response which demonstrates quite clearly (especially when taken with all of your *other* posts on these threads) that you have no interest in any of the science which you frequently attack, and have no ability to actually assess it on its own merits, you just operate on your deep bitterness and denial.
OK I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY YOU ARE INCLUDING ME IN THIS STATEMENT. (CAPS NOT YELLING, JUST COMMENTS ON YOUR COMMENTS)
Whatever gets you through the day, Mamzelle.
svcw, you expressed surprise that one could conclude that there are science-illiterate religious conservatives.
NO, MY REAL SURPRISE IS THOSE WHO BELIVE THAT JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE A RELIOUGS CONCERVATIVE THAT ONE IS “SCIENCE-ILLITERATE”
Ask Mamzelle to actually address the contents of post #107, and you'll quickly realize that there are. Now there's nothing wrong with not being conversant on any given topic, of course, UNLESS the person ignorant on [topic X] is arrogant enough to spend a great deal of time attacking [topic X] and denouncing it and attempting to "lecture" and "correct" people on it without actually having any clue what in the hell they're talking about (by actually *understanding* topic X and having a solid knowledge of it)...
WELL, THANK YOU-THAT “ITS OK TO BE A CONCERVATIVE”. YOUR COMMENT THAT A PERSON MAY BE “IGNORENT” ON A SUBJECT…. I WOULD DISAGREE WITH YOUR CONCLUSION. BECAUSE A PERSON DISAGREES WITH YOU AND USES A DIFFERENT SET TO ARGUE THEIR POINT DOES NOT MAKE THEM IGGNORATE. IT APPEARS THAT ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH YOUR SETS, IS IGNORENT OF THE “FACT”.
There are countless religious conservatives, a large number of them right here on FreeRepublic, who viciously attack evolutionary biology and other fields of science, as well as the people who practice in those fields or who are knowledgeable of those fields and defend them from false attacks, despite not having any real clue about the topics they crusade against.
HERE AGAIN BECAUSE THE PERSON ARGUES WITH YOU THEY DO NOT HAVE A “GRASP” OF THE FACTS, SO THEREFORE THEY ARE IGNORANT.
It gets really old after a while. And worse, this kind of "I don't understand science but I know it's wrong and evil and part of the atheistic conspiracy" folks are very vocal in the public discourse, to the point where a great many people who would otherwise be sympathetic to conservative politics run away screaming after having gotten the impression (which is not far from correct) that conservatism contains a large segment of folks who are wild-eyed anti-science Luddites.
I HAVE NEVER MEET A CHRISTIAN WHO HAS SAID SCIENCE IS BAD OR EVIL. I HAVE HEARD THEM SAY THEY DO NOT AGREE WITH THE DIRECTION SCIENCE MAY BE TAKING IE CLONING. I HAVE NEVER MET A CHRISTIAN WHO IS ANTI-SCIENCE. I HAVE MEET CHRISTIANS WHO ARE ANTI-ARROGANT SO CALLED SCIENTS AND THEIR IRRATIONAL FEAR THAT THERE MAY BE A HIGHER POWER. THIS IRRATIONAL FEAR I BELIEVE STEMS FROM THE FACT THEY FEAR THERE MAY IN FACT BE A JUDGEMENT.
This is similar to how the more moderate liberal movements lose support because people are scared off by the more whackjob liberal nuts.
This is *not* a good thing for conservatism. I personally know dozens of people who might otherwise consider voting for conservatives or Republicans, but every time I try to point out how many of their personal views match those of the conservative movement, they recoil in horror and start listing the various antics of the kind of anti-intellectual extremists WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE YOU SPEAK OF WHO ARE ANTI-INTELECTUALS That have given conservatism a bad name by association.
There's nothing wrong with being religious -- in fact, the *majority* of American "evolutionists" are themselves Christians. But there is a very vocal, very strident, very intolerant, very anti-science segment of religious conservatives who are *not* doing the conservative cause any favors. AND I COULD SAY THE SAME OF ANTI-RELIGIOUS-CHRISTIAN-CONCERVATIVE SUDOINTELLECTUAL SCIENE COMMUNITY.

And worse, this kind of "I don't understand science but I know it's wrong and evil and part of the atheistic conspiracy" folks are very vocal in the public discourse, to the point where a great many people who would otherwise be sympathetic to conservative politics run away screaming after having gotten the impression (which is not far from correct) that conservatism contains a large segment of folks who are wild-eyed anti-science Luddites. This is similar to how the more moderate liberal movements lose support because people are scared off by the more whackjob liberal nuts.

I have real-world colleagues who refuse to vote republican for this very reason.