Posted on 04/28/2008 12:01:40 PM PDT by Delacon
A populist is a person who is up for whatever the crowd wants today.
There are plenty of people whose religion is reflexive, not considered. If you ask them the most basic questions about their faith, they have no answers. Some of them even act as if having answers is suspect.
Is this a variation on Obama’s “they cling to guns and religion?”
No, it is precisely the opposite.
Millions of Americans believe in God because they have carefully considered Him and accept the truth of what He says. Not because they don't like their job or whatever reason Obama is giving.
And millions of Americans own weapons not just because they make cool loud noises, but because they see how essential a right self-defense is and how important it is to take responsibility for their own safety and that of the Constitution.
If firearm ownership is popular, a populist is all for it. If firearm confiscation becomes popular tomorrow, then he is all for that. He really hasn't given the matter much thought.
I don’t see what one has to do with the other. One is a conspiracy theory. I guess you just have to resort to some kind of putdown type response when you can’t say anything logical. If you read Ethan Clive Osgood’s page, (post 310) you will see the obvious historical connection between racial theories and evolution theory.
There was also Nietzsche and his superman theory where the superior people had the right to kill inferior people. He was said to be a major influence on Hitler. Evolution of course leads logically to the idea that some races can be superior to others.
I should have added in the last post that Nietzsche’s inspiration for his superman theory was Darwin, the key point.
That's not a discovery. That is an opinion.
If you don't know the difference between opinions and science, I can't help you.
>>A populist is a person who is up for whatever the crowd wants today.<<
OK, now I know what you mean by that term. I think your meaning is different from the usual meaning, which is one who opposes the “elites.”
It certainly can. Evolution doesn't deal with the origin of life. Perhaps some scientists who believe in evolution dabble in it, but the Theory doesn't even try to address the origin of life.
There is nothing inconsistent with believing in the Creator and understanding evolution. Nothing.
This guilt by association argument as it relates to science is just so absurd that anyone should be embarrassed for trying it.
What is so insidious about this argument is that is forward-looking. As if you can blame anything bad that ever happens on the theory of evolution. There is no difference between blaming that and the theory of gravity. There wouldn’t be any plane crashes if it weren’t for Sir Isaac Newton, dammit.
This nonsense needs to stop.
“National Center for Science Education “
Speaking of dishonesty,
Why is it called the “National Center for Science Education” and not the “National Center for Darwinian Education”?
How much of their time is spent promoting the vast areas of science that have nothing to do with Darwin? None. “
If you’ll read the post again and pay attention to what you’re reading, you’ll see the “National Center for Science Education”
defends teaching evolution in schools and is trying to discredit Stein’s film.
Never mind, I got it.
Kind of slow tonight.
“What I will say is that Darwinian evolution cannot be intellectually reconciled with the concept “...All men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.””
Yes it can. For one, Darwin never even used the term “survival of the fittest”. Darwin dealt with the biological mechanisms that cause changes in species. IE some mutations increase a species chances of survival. The “all men are created equal” concept is a societal contruct and has nothing to do with biology. The framers were talking about equal rights being God given not equal biologic chances of survival. You don’t really think the framers really believed that a child born retarded has just as good a chance of surviving and thriving as a child born brilliant do you? The framers asserted that all people are created with the same rights to go and try to survive and thrive. Its apples and oranges.
“What is so insidious about this argument is that is forward-looking. As if you can blame anything bad that ever happens on the theory of evolution. There is no difference between blaming that and the theory of gravity. There wouldn’t be any plane crashes if it weren’t for Sir Isaac Newton, dammit. This nonsense needs to stop.”
And the worm can turn as well. People who insist that Darwinism led to the nazis leave themselves open to the accusation that a belief in God has been used by countless indiviguals throughout history to forward their own evil ends killing millions.
That's certainly a connotation of the word "populist" - for example, the class warfare so integral to populist political nostrums.
Both John Edwards (a left-wing populist) and Pat Buchanan (a right-wing populist) bitch and moan about free markets and "CEO pay" and NAFTA and "the elites."
And, of course, one of them is a millionaire trial lawyer and the other is a millionaire Beltway journalist.
Or the peasants like me who opposed last year’s amnesty bill.
Sort of like me writing a book report and getting an F. Well teach, I didn't read it, but several of my friends say the book sucks.
There were many reasons to oppose the bill.
And, of course, you aren't actually a peasant. There aren't any peasants in the USA.
A good question to ask is: why were so many prominent Darwinians involved in eugenic organizations, pushing eugenics both nationally and internationally? You can read about it on my FR page.
Of all philosophers to recommend, can't you at least choose a sane one?
Race hygiene was the continental term for "eugenics". One of the architects of German race hygiene was Rudin. He was assisted and encouraged by British, American, and international eugenic organizations. These british and american eugenic organizations were founded and populated by famous Darwinians. You can read about it on my FR page.
Because people rose up against the Nazis and got rid of them. I think you overestimate how many common people are brainwashed by Darwinism. Every time I ask someone, in private, if they think they evolved from apes, the answer is almost invariably no. Darwinians in Britain discovered this for themselves when popular opinion - the opinion of the man in the street which they seem to so richly despise - turned against their eugenical propaganda, right before World War I. American opinion turned against Darwinian eugenicists only after World War II. Nevertheless, you could say that one of the fruits of widespread Darwinism is the so-called 'culture of death'. I'd like to list some significant scientific fruits that followed from the notion that monkeys accidentally learned how to drive and build cathedrals, but I'll leave that to others.
No - I graduated in the early 90s. However, I have been to several college-level (above, actually) classes regarding my line of work - IT. Why?
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.