A Return to Triangulation (libertarion vs social right)

National Review Online ^ | 10/25/06 | David Boaz & David Kirby

[Blackirish]

As the Republican base fragments and Christian conservatives consider a “fast” from politics, the polling data point to a mid-term Republican thumping. Less than two weeks from now, Republicans will begin their post-mortem soul searching. And as the corpses of their House and Senate majorities grow cold, so should Karl Rove’s 2006 campaign strategy.

[jennyp]

Well, jennyp, if you hate FR so much,

BTW, "hate" is far from the word. Just disappointed & fed up. It was a good thing while it lasted.

[fatima]

Oh my gosh,it really plays the song.I am just trying to keep up with all this.

[Dimensio]

I'm suggesting you should quit working with the leftists and or doing their dirty work for them.

How, exactly, am I doing this?

And you should quit insulting those of us who do believe in the Creator.

I do not believe that I have insulted anyone specifically for that reason. In fact, many who accept the theory of evolution as valid science hold belief in a Creator. Your response appears to be a non-sequitur.

If you guys want to prove the theory of evolution, more power to you.

No theory in science has ever been nor will ever be "proven".

But don't use it as a tool to attempt destroy our faith in God or to destroy our political and religious freedom.

I do not believe that anyone here has made such an attempt. Do you have a reference to someone on Freerepublic attempting to use the theory of evolution to accomplish such a goal?

[ml1954]

Everything can be made political in a democracy. That doesn't change reality and science.

This issue is larger than the US. The voters in the US have a limited influence on what the rest of the world does where science is concerned. If tomorrow the entire population of the US votes to reject the Theory of Evolution, scientific investigation in this area will go on and it will progress in the rest of the world. Some in the US may assert this is all a waste of time and effort. Based on the history of scientific and technological progress in the past few hundred years, and the track record of the ever present opposition to it, I wouldn't bet they'd be right.

[Jim Robinson]

Yeah, well now we see the truth beginning to come out. It is a "worldwide" political issue isn't it?

[grey_whiskers]

I agree that trying to hold to Biblical literalism of the strictest kind, with full knowledge of the scientific data, and not making any concession to the knowledge of discrepancies, *would* be nuts.

In other words, so far as that goes, we agree: except that I am aware that many people who dispute evolution do it in ignorance of the scientific data. And many of the others do it because they implicitly allow for the possibility of supernatural interference, or miracles.

But it sure looked like, from your choice of words, that any mention of miracles or the supernatural, was nuts. And in particular, that miracles are a sort of last-ditch attempt to defend something which has long been discredited or disproven. And it is *THAT* which I was objecting to.

Cheers!

[ml1954]

I guess we have an irreconcilable difference here. I think science is ultimately apolitical. You seem to think it is just another part of an all encompassing and pervasive political process. Oh, well. Too bad we can't meet up in a couple of hundred years, compare notes, and see who's right. Then again, maybe we can.

[Ichneumon]

Yeah, well now we see the truth beginning to come out. It is a "worldwide" political issue isn't it?

No, he's saying that *science* and research into it will go on in the rest of the world, and leave the US behind, if some short-sighted people in the US with a political or religious axe to grind against science wield them to damage science education, or public respect for science, in this country.

Science should not be used as a weapon against political positions or religious views, granted. But neither should political positions or religious views be used as grounds for attacking science. You incorrectly accuse us of doing the former, but it's the latter we have been concerned about during our time at FreeRepublic -- we've been trying to stop science itself from being undermined by those with politically or religiously motivated grudges against science, its methods, or its findings, especially when it's attacked with false claims, false accusations, or misleading propaganda.

Those don't have any place in the conservative movement. Leave the lies to the liberals, we're better than that. Or at least we should be.

[fatima]

Hi RadioAstronomer.

[Liberal Classic]

The reason we're having this discussion is because of the friction between religious and secular conservatives, much along the lines of the National Review article.

The fact is, your people...

I am not a "you people" I am a freeper and have been for a long time.

...are seizing upon this issue to belittle and insult believers in God...

No. I do not belittle and insult Christians just for being Christians. I do not mock faith. I have long argued that faith and science are not in conflict. I have traded barbs with those people who call me an idolater, a nazi, etc. A lot of those kinds of people, frankly, don't belong in polite company. That's what I've been trying to tell you: you have more than just a few nuts.

...and to use so-called "apolitical science" as a means to deprive us of the truths we hold to be self-evident, ie, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

We're back to the Goldwater quote I posted upthread. The men and women who "strive to cure disease, subdue and make fruitful our natural environment" have done nothing of the sort. People who study evolutionary science help make the flu shots every year. People who study micropaleontology help find oil to keep the country running. The "inventive engines of production, science, and technology" add to our lives, liberty, and happiness in measurable ways every day, and have made this nation the envy of the world.

[Jim Robinson]

Yeah, well maybe your people should leave the trashing of religious conservatives and our right to freedom of religion to the evolutionists on the left.

[Jim Robinson]

Uh, I believe the Everlasting Life goes on well beyond two hundred years.

[Jim Robinson]

Well, I'm very happy for you.

[grey_whiskers]

Yes, it helped. It's just that I only heard of the natural atomic piles last week, so it was new to *me*.

I therefore jumped to the conclusion that nobody else had thought about it either :-)

Thanks for your patient answers...

Cheers!

[AndrewC]

Therefore seemingly good conservatives here who defend mainstream science from the constant blizzard of lies from the passionate science-deniers

Oh you mean like Ann Coulter?

[Dimensio]

Oh you mean like Ann Coulter?

I would agree that Ann Coulter is a passionate science denier, as is evidenced by the content of her most recent book.

[AndrewC]

I would agree that Ann Coulter is a passionate science denier, as is evidenced by the content of her most recent book.

Therein lies your problem. You conflate science and Darwinism(IMHO).

[Virginia-American]

Ms. Coulter destroyed her credibility with her idiotic statements about science (yes, evolution is a study within the science of biology). I no longer feel confident quoting any claims from her previous books unless I have researched them myself. I seriously doubt I will ever buy another one of her books.

[Jim Robinson]

Ahem. Weren't we just talking about your people ("Evolution Scientists") trashing religious conservatives on this forum? And didn't one of yours deny that this was happening? I think it was just a few posts back. The ink's not even dry on the pixels yet.

[grey_whiskers]

"Second Law of Thermal Documents" placemark

DING DING DING DING DING DING!

NO more calls, please. We have a winner.

Cheers!