Posted on 11/07/2002 7:07:47 PM PST by Nebullis
Thanks. Gee, to think that when I was a girl and looked forward to the year 2000 & beyond, I thought I'd be really really old. Like, 42, 43... =:-)
Now I follow, thank you. Actually, I don't disagree with this at all since I see the left as abandoning the uncertianty of democracy and majority rule for the assurance technocracy and expert rule.
152 posted on 9/10/02 12:17 PM Pacific by Liberal Classic
and...
To: f.Christian
Dakmar...
I took a few minutes to decipher that post, and I must say I agree with a lot of what you said.
fC...
These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!
Dakmar...
Where you and I diverge is on the Evolution/Communism thing. You seem to view Darwin and evolution as the beginning of the end for enlighted, moral civilization, while I think Marx, class struggle, and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" are the true dangers.
God bless you, I think we both have a common enemy in the BRAVE-NWO.
452 posted on 9/7/02 8:54 PM Pacific by Dakmar
"dictatorship(evo state/religion taliban) of the proletariat(brainwashed/indoctrinated zombies)" are the true dangers.
Perhaps my memory is faulty, but didn't he also find a GR solution that permitted time-like loops?
To: f.Christian
The fact that the nomenclature of the political spectrum is is reversed in the USA indicates the radical nature of our republic. The radical idea of the 18th century was reducing the power of central authority in favor of individual liberties. American liberals of today seem more interested in returning those hard won individual freedoms to the central government. (I deliberatly use the term central rather than federal because I am a Southerner who recoqnizes the difference.)
American conservatives today are Classical Liberals.
7 posted on 10/25/2002 9:34 PM PDT by limitedgov
Evolutionists are statist luddites...labour party---2nd-3rd wayers(socialists/engineers)!
The nomenclature is a flip/spin/twist/morph----'evolve' in America!
Good. Very good. Or, as Ayn Rand might have said, they seek to use our virtues against us.
[You:] No I did not. According to you and your fellow evolutionists if one does not post the whole book it is a 'doctored quote' an 'out of context quote' or some such insulting garbage.
You not only omitted the next sentence from your quote-- which contradicted the point you were trying to make-- but you also added to Darwin's quote two words that weren't there. If that's not quote doctoring, I don't know what is.
Anyone who wants to see the sequence, please read Gore's original "quotation" from Darwin in post #782, my posting the actual quote in #804, and Gore's repetition of his fraudulent misquote in posts #842 and 863. (I say "fraudulent" because the added words reappeared even after his initial --doubtless inadvertent-- error had been pointed out to him in #804).
Wasp, butterfly, and euglena bones placemarker.
I ain't looking for your respect. I'd be worried if I had it.
Second of all if you are indeed a professor, you should not be. No child should be around such a closed minded, insulting person.
18 - 22 year olds aren't children. But you'll be pleased to know that many feminists and other leftists on campus have said the same thing.
This from the gang who are using state power to force their ideas onto the biology curriculum, over the objections of biologists.
What a wacky crew they are!
I'm just catching up on my reading.You're the same age as my wife (24 I believe).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.