Ben Stein's Intelligent Adventure (Review of EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed)

American Thinker ^ | April 13,2008 | Kate Wright

[r9etb]

balanced?

= "agrees with Coyoteman."

[onewhowatches]

Since all Evo's are either Socialist or Communist It is evident you don't like Cohn for his anti-Communism rather than possibly being homosexual; go back to Huffington Post!

Man, you got that socialist/communist bit way off....In fact, the reason I became a Republican, back in the days of Reagan, was because it was the Anti-Communist party.

[celmak]

As to #7: "Care to try again, without the invective and personal attacks this time?

This is a perfect example of your paranoia, there are no personal attacks there, only the fact that there are homosexuals running the magazine. I can tell your a believer in sensitivity training. LOL!

Let's face it Coyoteman, no one with your beliefs can possibly be Conservative, you should just go back to Huffington Post too and leave this site for real Conservatives.

[celmak]

There were personal attacks; that is why your posts were removed by the moderators.

I repeated what was on the removed post in this chain virtually verbatim and the others have not been removed, i.e., that your Evo "sudo-science is killing homosexuals" and they have not been removed.

I never have tried removing someone for writing something I thought was offensive in FreeRepublic although there were, like yours, very offensive writings. I'm seeing that it is evident that the moderator will feel sorry for someone like you and not even read what was written if and when someone reports "Abuse" and remove the "offensive" post like my supposedly "offensive" post.

[celmak]

"Since all..."

OK, I correct myself; "Since most Evo's are either Socialist or Communist...

[atlaw]

“sudo-science” placemarker

[celmak]

I thought about it and I correct myself on this point for the last time:

"Since all devout fundamentalist Evo's are either Socialist or Communist...

[spotbust1]

Your bump for later read may not be worth it. This has become a flame war. I keep waiting to see what people’s opinions of the movie are, but they are arguing about all kind of other stuff. Good luck wading through it. ;-)

[Captainpaintball]

balanced? = "agrees with Coyoteman."

Silly me! I should have known better!

[Gumlegs]

I hope coyoteman will forgive me for reposting this vile piece of trash from celmak, but since celmak can't seem to refrain from lying about his own posting history, I thought this little trip back to post 52 (now deleted), in this thread might be useful for the purposes of finding out who's doing the lying about whom. Here it is in its repellent entirety:

To: Coyoteman

If I hate them than[sic] you obviously love them (probably physically too).

Do you deny the destructiveness of there[sic] lifestyle too? I have and have had homosexual friends and associates, some have died because of there[sic] behavior and some have made the CHOICE to turn away from it. You and your Evo ilk are killing them with your sudo[sic]-science while we want them to live free of their bondage!

52 posted on Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:33:33 PM by celmak

Offensive personal smear bolded for those too dumb to figure it out on their own.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Let's face it Coyoteman, no one with your beliefs can possibly be Conservative

Coyoteman has said that calling conservatives "science deniers" is a leftist smear tactic. Since that's basically all he does on FR, he must be a leftist.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

you obviously love them (probably physically too)... Offensive personal smear bolded

Why do you find that offensive?

[Gumlegs]

It's obvious from celmak's postings that he/she/it finds homosexual behavior repellent. Thus, the accusation that coyoteman might engage in such behavior is a personal attack. The accusation has nothing whatever to do with an argument about science, so celmak would appear to flunk the logic test as well.

I was taking celmak's words as what they were obviously intended to be, a personal attack.

There used to be some rule around here about "no personal attacks." I'm given to understand it's not invoked mucj any more when the personal attacks are directed at someone who has the temerity to defend science against the Yahoos, but for the sake of balance, it might be interesting to try and apply it equally.

Or is that idea now offensive?

[Gumlegs]

That would be “much” not “mucj” in sentence two, paragraph three, above.

[ChessExpert]

Are there rabbit homosexuals? Male couplings wouldn't seem to make much evolutionary sense. Rabbits are reputed to breed often, as the saying goes, like rabbits. This suggests a strong sexual urge. But why would one male rabbit be willing to satisfy the sexual urges of another male? In the case of humans, there is enough intellect to determine a quid-pro-quo arrangement. You satisfy me, and I'll satisfy you (yuck). But whether one believes in Darwinism, God, or both, male-male sex would seem to be some sort of perversion of normal sexual urges.

I'm just curious. Do you suppose that bunny picture (picture of bunny ceramic sculpture?) originally have an innocent intent?

[ChessExpert]

The Harvard letter claims that a clip in the film plagiarizes an "Inner Life of the Cell" animation, and possible further legal action could disrupt the opening of the film on April 18.

I doubt Harvard would have taken this course of action if Ben Stein’s movie had supported evolution. This is a form of censorship. Harvard is making Ben Stein’s case. Those who disagree with Stein, and intelligent design, prefer to censor a debate than to have a debate. Efforts to intimidate and coerce, this being an example, is common on the left. Shame on Harvard.

[ChessExpert]

Good article. Thanks for posting it.

I will go and see this movie, if it is shown. From the article, it seems that Harvard is threatening legal action if the movie is released. I take this to be the Darwinist response. I'm not surprised. It would be a shame if their lawyers have found a valid legal pretext for censorship. So much for their love of freedom, freedom of speech, or the right of conscience.

I'm trying to keep score:

The Path to 9/11 was stopped by liberal censors (one time only showing).

The Passion made it's way to the theaters despite threats and recrimination.

FITNA, the movie by Geert Wilders, was locked out of the theaters and the original two company servers, but can be found on YouTube.

The Global Warming Swindle is excellent, but has been repeatedly "trashed." It can be found on the internet, but the likelihood of a broader showing is remote given the attacks against it.

I'm sure there are many more that I am forgetting, or never knew about.

Censorship, or the attempt, is alive and well. When it doesn't come from liberals it comes from Muslims.

[celmak]

Be careful, Coyoteman and Gumlegs may take offense and feel they have been personally attacked by calling them leftist; LOL!

[celmak]

It's obvious from celmak's postings that he/she/it...

IT??? Oh, I am so hurt by your PERSONAL attack! Why, I think I'll just do what Coyoteman does and whine to the moderator of such brutality! This kind of behavior should invoke more Evos to uphold the rule of censorship "MUCJ (SIC)" more !!!

LOL! That felt good!

PS to Gumlegs: Thanks for proving my point.

[savagesusie]

It's obvious from celmak's postings that he/she/it finds homosexual behavior repellent.

Well, isn't it???? Who could say that it isn't???? HA! Can you admit the TRUTH---that is all that Ben Stein is exposing....the TRUTH. I can not wait to see Expelled!