tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post116405997866846798..comments2024-03-28T03:19:40.014-04:00Comments on The Y Files: The faith warsCathy Younghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-16205617329587660912020-02-04T04:38:19.150-05:002020-02-04T04:38:19.150-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.mhoodanghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17177920175795055074noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-91639973372192349942010-11-05T23:37:27.820-04:002010-11-05T23:37:27.820-04:00A smart reproof is better than smooth deceit
Nike...A smart reproof is better than smooth deceit<br /><br /><a href="http://www.nikeshox-clearance.com/" rel="nofollow">Nike shox shoes</a> can surely not let you down,romance yourself with <a href="http://www.nikeshox-clearance.com" rel="nofollow">nike shox</a>Nike shox shoeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05003218693098911563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-55093867855587386112010-01-12T19:38:58.351-05:002010-01-12T19:38:58.351-05:00Rubber. Rubber is widly used in the outsole of the...Rubber. Rubber is widly used in the outsole of the athletic shoes. <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">cheap puma shoes</a><br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">cheap sport shoes</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">discount puma shoes</a><br />It has the advantages of durable, skipproof, flexible, elastic, extensive, stable and proper hardness. <br />But the rubber is weighty and easy to be frosting, nonrecoverable.<br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike shox torch</a><br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike tn dollar</a><br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">cheap nike shox</a><br />PU. PU is a kind of macromolecule polyurethane materials <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">cheap nike shox shoes</a><br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike shox r4</a><br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">puma mens shoes</a><br />Sometimes, it is also used in the outsole of casual shoes. <br />PU is durable, strong hardness, upstanding flexbility and more important, <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">cheap nike max</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">discount nike shox</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">cheap puma ferrari shoes</a><br />The disadvantage is also outstanding. Strong hydroscopic property, go yellow easily,<br /> EVA. Ethylene –Vinyl Acetate Copolymer<br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike mens shoes</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike shox nz</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">discount nike running shoes</a> <br />which is usually used in the midsole of the running shoes and casual shoes. <br />EVA is quite lightweight, elastic, flexible and suitable to a variety of climates. <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">discount nike shoes</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike shox shoes</a><br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">cheap nike shoes</a> <br />Just as the rubber, it is also nonrecoverable and go dirty easily. <br />PHYLON. Phylon is the product of the EVA after the second processing. <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike sports shoes</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">puma running shoes</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">puma sneakers</a> <br />The midsole of running shoes, tennis shoes and basketball shoes in the world is made of the PHYLON. <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike air max tn</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">puma cat</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">puma shoes</a> <br />The upstanding hardness, density, traction and extension make it favorite by the manufacture. <br />Besides, the lightweight and good flexibility could prolong the life of the shoes. <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike running shoes </a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">wholesale nike shoes</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike shoes</a> <br />Just as a coin has two sides, Phylon is nonrecoverable and easily shrink under high temperature.<br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike shoes kids</a> <br /><a href="http://www.shoxsport.com" rel="nofollow">nike women shoes </a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1165070614419978802006-12-02T09:43:00.000-05:002006-12-02T09:43:00.000-05:00You're using a seriously false equivalency here if...<I>You're using a seriously false equivalency here if you think Dawkins has anything approaching the power, influence, or potential danger of the Religious Right. </I><BR/><BR/>I think the false equivalency here is yours. The comparison of one individual with a collective referred to as the "Religious Right" misses the point. Dawkins also belongs to a "collective", or rather many of them. As far as power and influence, the secularists control the vast majority of higher education institutions in this country, and that translates to more power and influence in the modern world than Pat Robertson or his ilk could dream of.<BR/><BR/>The absurdity of some of the claims can be easily demonstrated by Cathy's article. For example:<BR/><BR/><I>Secularists see a creeping theocracy in attempts to outlaw same-sex unions, . . .</I><BR/><BR/>Now I don't equate opposition to same-sex marriage as "theocracy", but for those who do, it should be obvious that the "theocracy" is receding, not creeping forward. SS marriage was never recognized anywhere in the US prior to the late 20th century. Indeed, most non-religious folk would have considered the idea absurd as recently as a couple of decades ago. Now we have one state that recognizes it, another that might, another that has an equivalent (for state purposes) institution, and most observers, and opinion polls, see the momentum as for SS unions. It should be obvious to an objective observer that if we equate SS unions with theocracy, it is receding. Maybe not fast enough for the likes of some, but that is a different matter than creeping forward. <BR/><BR/>I'm a little puzzled as to what Cathy's principled objection is to Dawkins fatwa against religion is. Isn't her fatwa against ID of a like kind?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164742596910174242006-11-28T14:36:00.000-05:002006-11-28T14:36:00.000-05:00You're using a seriously false equivalency here if...You're using a seriously false equivalency here if you think Dawkins has anything approaching the power, influence, or potential danger of the Religious Right. <BR/><BR/>More broadly, the culture wars have nothing to do with religion or secularism. Rather they are about libertarianism vs authoritarianism. Jimmy Carter was an evangelical Christian but he didn't want the government to teach ID-iot brand creationism. Al Gore is a southern Methodist but you can be quite sure that if his presidency had been ratified, he would not have appointed FDA staffers who lie about abortion causing cancer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164422294273819522006-11-24T21:38:00.000-05:002006-11-24T21:38:00.000-05:00sorry, my profile didn't take that time.sorry, my profile didn't take that time.Catnappinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15112190511038404999noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164422245199925372006-11-24T21:37:00.000-05:002006-11-24T21:37:00.000-05:00As a pagan (I'm not new age or wiccan, but as a na...As a pagan (I'm not new age or wiccan, but as a native american, do not have a name for my beliefs, sorry.)<BR/><BR/>..anyway, as a pagan, I fear any and all rightwing monotheists. I see no difference betweeen the christianists and islamists, except funding. If the white separatists in america had the same sponsors as Al Qaeda, they'd be doing exactly the same shit. Hell, they already are, but on a smaller scale.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164395343807884422006-11-24T14:09:00.000-05:002006-11-24T14:09:00.000-05:00synova--not sure what you mean by hardcore. As fa...synova--not sure what you mean by hardcore. As far as I know, the leaders of the Christian right have said that someone like Giuliani cannot get the GOP nomination. You say that people who make this argument come from outside that community. Do you know "non-hardcore" religious conservatives who say they would vote for Giuliani? I'd be happy to be proven wrong on this one.Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164267727873735212006-11-23T02:42:00.000-05:002006-11-23T02:42:00.000-05:00re: Mitt Romney. Being a mormon is probably a big...re: Mitt Romney. Being a mormon is probably a bigger hurdle than Giulliani's social liberalism, dressing in drag and personal problems.<BR/><BR/>It's not that Romney is not quite right and therefore Giulliani would be even *farther* from acceptable, it's that he's mormon, which is not even considered Christian by a whole lot of people. About the only thing worse would be if he were a Scientologist. A great many people believe that the mormons, of any sort, are a cult. The church government is both authoritarian and secretive, which helps not at all. <BR/><BR/>A "different branch of Christianity" would be the Orthodox or Catholic church or the Copts. <BR/><BR/>BUT depending on how he presents himself it may not matter in the end. People can be funny that way. I feel confident that Giulliani could carry all but the most hard-line of the Christian right. The people who tell me I'm wrong about that are from outside that community and are judging from their own assumptions and prejudices. I pay no attention to them. <BR/><BR/>My first reaction is that being a mormon may be insurmountable for Romney, but my second thought is that I'm not sure.Synovahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01311191981918160095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164243768769339592006-11-22T20:02:00.000-05:002006-11-22T20:02:00.000-05:00Joan and synova: I agree that I shoudl have used m...Joan and synova: I agree that I shoudl have used more precisely language re the ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. The point is that religious conservatives are demanding that the government selectively withhold funding from a particular (and highly promising) kind of research on religious grounds. (The existing embroynic stem cells are highly inadequate, so I think that's a bit of a red herring.)<BR/><BR/>As for same-sex unions: first of all, I said that <I>secularists</I> (or many secularists, at least) perceive the effort to outlaw them as creeping theocracy. I actually think you have a point in saying that conservatives are simply trying to preserve the status quo. However, the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment would not simply preclude interference by judicial fiat but would also effectively preclude the legalization of same-sex marriage (and possibly even civil unions) by legislatures. Already existing domestic partner benefits for same-sex couples have been targeted as well.<BR/><BR/>synova: I fully acknowledge in my post that there has been hostility to religion in <I>some</I> public schools, mostly on the East and West coasts. (There have also been cases in the Bible Belt of overt Christian indoctrination/proselytizing in the public schools.) However, that does not justify the teaching of pseudoscience in science classes in the name of religion.<BR/><BR/>As for the atmosphere in the last six years: I have no problem, of course, with presidents and other public figures being religiously observant or at times invoking God. However, in the last few years, there has been, IMO, a very palpable change in the political atmosphere so that wearing one's faith on one's sleeve has become a virtual requirement. We have a situation in which one of the two major political parties is so beholden to a particular branch of Christianity that it is openly said that a candidate who shares its socially conservative platform (Mitt Romney) could not get the presidential nomination because he belongs to a different branch of Christianity. And that's just one example. I get a pervasive message from the conservative establishment that it's impossible to be a good American unless you are religious. And that's something new. 12 years ago when the Republicans took Congress, Newt Gingrich hardly ever mentioned religion. Now every other word coming out of his mouth is about religion.<BR/><BR/>Anonymous -- that's a good idea for pairings of the intolerant. How about Judge Roy Moore and Elton John? *G*Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164153633577386362006-11-21T19:00:00.000-05:002006-11-21T19:00:00.000-05:00Obfuscation... dang it.My spelling skills seem to ...Obfuscation... dang it.<BR/><BR/>My spelling skills seem to be in the toilet lately.Synovahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01311191981918160095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164146002014843192006-11-21T16:53:00.000-05:002006-11-21T16:53:00.000-05:00I was shocked to realize that not only was stem ce...I was shocked to realize that not only was stem cell research legal, but that embryonic stem cell research is legal.<BR/><BR/>I haven't *yet* heard anyone supporting embryonic stem cell research do anything but imply that there is a ban on it. A person has to really look into it before it becomes clear that it's entirely legal in the United States, it just can't be funded with my taxes. Why the obsfucation?<BR/><BR/>And there *are* approved embryonic stem cell lines that can be used for tax funded research... just no new ones.<BR/><BR/>I think that human cloning is fine, BTW, I just want "good faith" care taken of anything that can possibly be considered human. <BR/><BR/>And in India they are worried that poor women will reproduce just so they can sell the cord blood... oh those narrow minded Christians... how can they dare talk about medical ethics?<BR/><BR/>And about that impending theocracy... I'd really like to see some data to back it up, because while I realize that the common refrain is that the theocrats have taken over I think it's likely more hot air than not. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that freedom of religious expression has actually decreased, rather than increased.<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure what Schiavo was supposed to prove about anything whatsoever... yeah, it was a public circus, but are people *really* so evil (no matter if misguided) because they think the error should be made on needlessly keeping people alive rather than needlessly killing them? Are our Eugenic tendancies really so remote that no one remembers them?<BR/><BR/>Intelligent Design seems to me to be a back-lash against an ever increasing secularism in public schools and the feeling that children are being actively and purposefully pushed away from their religious faith. Considering I homeschool and considering the number of times I've heard exactly that argument made for not allowing parents to opt their children *out* of the secular indoctrination... I think it's likely that parents are responding to a real and purposeful anti-theological threat in the form of "science" education.<BR/><BR/>Rather than accept and promote freedom of religious expression for less common religions, proclaiming that people are free to have a religious identity, we have been faced with often nit-picky, sometimes extravegant, efforts to remove Christian symbols from the public sphere, which proclaims that just *seeing* religious symbols is intolerable.<BR/><BR/>Do people wear their faith on their sleeve more than before? Or have we just decided lately that even knowing about someone's religion is excessive? Just seeing a symbol in public is intimidating?<BR/><BR/>Clinton was publically observant and Kerry campaigned by giving the Sunday Sermon in churches...<BR/><BR/>...why have "the last six years" been so uniquely worrisome?Synovahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01311191981918160095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164144297977281342006-11-21T16:24:00.000-05:002006-11-21T16:24:00.000-05:00A few years ago I made a list of people on the lib...A few years ago I made a list of people on the liberal and conservative ends of the political spectrum who were eachother's counterparts. Rush Limbaugh and Michael Moore are counterparts, for example, as are Noam Chomsky and G. Gordon Liddy. (I could go on.)<BR/><BR/>But it now seems that we need a new list: religious fundamentalists and atheist fundamentalists who are counterparts to eachother. The first pairing that comes to my mind is Jerry Falwell and Richard Dawkins. Any other suggestions?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1164082249543615982006-11-20T23:10:00.000-05:002006-11-20T23:10:00.000-05:00It's embryonic stem cell research that religious c...It's <I>embryonic</I> stem cell research that religious conservatives oppose, Cathy, not generic "stem cell research." And there is <I>no</I> "ban" on stem cell research, and there never has been -- there is just no federal funding, which you must acknowledge is nothing even remotely like a ban. <BR/><BR/>The ethical issues surrounding embryonic stem cell research extend into areas like human cloning, which makes many people squirm, not just the religious. <BR/><BR/>It wouldn't cost you much -- three, maybe four words -- to include "embryonic" when talking about stem cells, so that at least there, you'd be accurate.<BR/><BR/>Because here: <I>Secularists see a creeping theocracy in attempts to outlaw same-sex unions...</I><BR/><BR/>You've turned the thing on its head -- same-sex unions have never before been legal, and traditionalists who are trying to preserve the basic unit of society resent having such a thing imposed by judicial fiat.<BR/><BR/>There's a lot going on in this debate, obviously, and I well understand the strict word counts required by op-eds. I kinda think you bit off more than you could chew.Joanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06093453920666892035noreply@blogger.com