Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Having Fun With Intelligent Design

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Science & Skepticism » Atheists and Agnostics Group Donate to DU
 
Bzzzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 02:05 PM
Original message
Having Fun With Intelligent Design
You're gonna love this: enjoy

>snip
Science teachers can teach intelligent design as an alternative to evolution -- and teach meddling school board members a lesson at the same time.
I have just three words for biology teachers who are wringing their hands as school boards from Kansas to Pennsylvania force them to teach intelligent design as an alternative to evolution: Get over it.

Here's what I think. Science teachers can comply with the requirement and still offer their students a first-rate education. If done with imagination, the new curriculum could end up stimulating more learning and excitement than their traditional explication of Darwinian theory.
http://www.alternet.org/story/22039/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. Has anybody considered teaching ID, but
Edited on Mon May-23-05 02:26 PM by phantom power
spinning it as "aliens". We all know that the "I" in ID is supposed to be the god of the Christian fundies, but since they are trying to act all scientific, we really must explore the equally-likely scenario of aliens. I'm sure the fundies will have no problem with a few slides of monoliths, since it is all in the name of searching for the truth, removing "bias" etc...

For that matter, we could pick from any number of creation myths. "It's turtles, all the way down!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
2. What a scream!
*****
All teachers know that their first and hardest job is to gain the student's attention and interest. What subject best attracts a teenager's undivided attention? Sex. Happily, when it comes to evolution, sex is central.

I recommend that biology teachers begin by discussing Elisabeth A. Lloyd's decidedly scientific book, The Case of the Female Orgasm. No school board member should complain. The book's subtitle, "Bias in the Science of Evolution," clearly fits with the new requirement that teachers critique evolutionary theory.
*****

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YankeyMCC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Ok, that's fantastic!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-05 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. It sure is!
Give the people what they want, right?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-24-05 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
5. LOL, that's a great article.
And one that teachers in religiously insane school districts should be given, no doubt. Turn the tables on these fundies and get their little heads spinning: teaching creation means talking about sex and even homomsexuals... AIEEEEEEE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-24-05 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. "Mommy,
what's an orgasm?"

"I wish I knew, honey"

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-24-05 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. *SNORT*
The female orgasm is a liberal lie perpetuated by atheists!

(No wonder atheists are happier!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-24-05 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Shhhhhhhhhhh !
You don't want to give it away, geez, everybody will want to be an atheist!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bzzzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-24-05 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Yikes.....
the true secret of atheism is out!!!!!! Oh me, Oh my!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-24-05 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. NOW
you've done it!
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-24-05 10:24 PM
Response to Original message
11. Remember when we thought we lived among intelligent beings ?
I wouldn't have made this argument 20 years ago. At that time, school boards' interventions were far more restrictive. Science teachers were obliged to inform their students that the story of Genesis was literally true. But in 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court put a stop to that by declaring the teaching of creationism in the classroom a violation of the Constitutional insistence on the separation of church and state.

The Court decision spawned a more nuanced and sophisticated approach by anti-evolutionists: intelligent design. Intelligent design is not creationism per se. It holds that higher forms of life are so complex they must have been created by an unspecified higher power. The key word here is "unspecified." Many school board members who support an intelligent design mandate believe that higher power is Jesus. But they aren't forcing anyone to teach that in schools.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
12. Other fun ways to teach ID.
1. Teach that the Universe was definitely created by God, but that God was Shiva. Lead the class in a Shakti Dance to celebrate.

2. Have the students write essays explaining why God would make jaws that were too small for our teeth. Part of the exercise would be to derive the "intelligence" in such a design.

3. Have similar essays for tonsils, the appendix, and any other not-so-useful-anymore organs.

4. Archaeopteryx: Bird or reptile? (Hint: It depends on which Creationist you're reading.)

5. Creative arts class: Have the children build a to-scale ark, and then try to fill it with toy replicas of each of the million species.

6. Discuss: How did Adam cut his toenails?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. LOL! I love it! Great post!
Edited on Tue Jun-14-05 08:34 PM by Rhiannon12866
I particularly like #1. It has the added advantage of teaching students about other cultures! :D

How did Adam cut his toenails? Got me swinging... :shrug:

on edit: Welcome,Arianrhod! It's great to have you and your sense of the absurd with us! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-05 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. When it comes to Creationism, the absurdity is built-in. :)
Re: Adam's toenails, it's my speculation that he had Eve bite them off for him. Hence our society's minor predilection for toe-sucking, etc.

;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-05 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I agree. I just can't see how anyone with any intelligence can subscribe
To this. There was a girl at work who was always very pleasant to me, but when I found out that this is what she believed, I decided that she just had to be a benighted nut case. :crazy:

As for Adam, eeewwww! :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. hahaha
Yeah, I'm kind of torn when it comes to my relationships with nice people who actually are members of the Fundamentalist nuthouse. I treat them with courtesy, but I don't make friends of them. Some DUers think I'm heartless--even counterproductive to the "Liberal cause"--for this.

None of us on here should be fooled: ID is nothing but William Jennings Bryan no-nothingness in a lab coat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-05 06:42 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. There's nothing to be gained by being rude, especially if you know
that there's nothing to be gained by proselytizing, and, in this case, I'm sure. Her beliefs are set in stone. My energies are better spent spreading the word when I can actually do some good, like educating my vet's assistant on the Joe Wilson case, or telling my friend what she can say to her friend about exactly why we are not safer with Bush* in office. The main problem is that people just aren't paying attention. And most people are easily fooled. *sigh* :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-05 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. True.
I wonder why it is that "most people are easily fooled"? I always assumed it was a basic foundation of the human condition that we want to know the truth. I have to say, though, that I no longer think that. I now think a better rule of thumb is to assume that people are intent on themselves. :(

I include myself in this, of course. But I struggle against that tendency on a daily basis. Which begs the question: What makes some of us want to pursue deeper knowledge, when so many others have no use for it, and seem to prefer obviously false platitudes in its stead?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-30-05 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. I don't think it's so much a matter of being fooled, but not being told
the truth. *sigh* I really do blame the media. Most people don't get what's going on, because they are never told. They aren't even told the basic facts, and are often lied to. How many people in this country still believe that Saddam Hussein is responsible for 9/11?! We all know that this is a total fallacy, but Bush* had the effrontery, just the other night in his speech, to make this connection. All hell should have broken loose over this, but the fact that he was called on it, at all, was met with outrage. This is totally unacceptable in a democracy such as ours. I, like so many here, am sick to death of the lies, but they persist. But you can't get the truth from the media, if you only watch TV news. You can only get it on-line or from liberal radio. *sigh*

As for your question, it's just easier for most people. And it would never dawn on them that they were being lied to. My mother listens to Faux News, tells me that she's getting the "news," and won't believe me when I tell her that this is just propaganda. She just figures, as most people do, that, if its being broadcast, it's true. And this is the struggle.

What's going on is that most people just believe what they're told, can't believe that the media would lie to them, and aren't willing to make the effort to find the truth. They believe that they're getting it. And this is the danger. I don't have a solution. I think that it's up to Congress, but they don't seem to be stepping up to the plate. Joe Biden did, about Bush*'s abysmal speech, but the status quo was outraged. It will take a concerted effort, and I don't think that we have that yet. *sigh* :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-30-05 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. I don't blame the media at all.
The truth has always been available, to anyone who wanted to see it. And I don't simply mean things like the Internet. I could tell what * was the moment I saw him, and all it took was a single "debate" way back in 2000 to inform me of everything I needed to know to vote against him. The big problem, as I see it, is that people have been conditioned in our society to ignore everything that goes on outside of their homes.

That the media give * a free pass is not surprising to me, although it remains frustrating. The destruction of the media was marvelously portrayed by Paddy Chayevsky in 1977, with his movie Network. In that film, he explicitly laid out all the facts that those of us on DU are today discussing: The takeover of every global system by corporations, the utter bullshit being propagated as "news", the turning of the news departments into entertainment venues that are "right down there on the streets, soliciting viewers" (direct movie quote), the fact that people are desperately clinging to material doodads as a means of denying and ignoring what's going on around them--because what's going on is too terrifying to think about. All of this was known, way back then. The problem is that we have to have something happen to us before we even begin to think about how it might affect anyone else. Human character flaw.

I don't have any answers, either. At least not on a large scale. I do what I can in my individual life, but I've given up arguing with those whose minds are closed. It does no good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-01-05 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Well, I do blame the media.
Too much is being broadcast, in the pursuit of ratings, without the checks and balances necessary to ensure that what's being broadcast is the truth. My mother believes that Bill O'Reilly is telling her the truth, because he's been given a national forum, just as she believes that the company that she employs to apply pesticides to her lawn wouldn't be allowed to use anything if it wasn't "safe." *sigh*

The standards are different in this country than they are in others. It took Greg Palast, from the BBC and "Guardian," to expose the corruption in Florida in our 2000 presidential election. The American media doesn't dare touch certain stories because they know that there will be repercussions, a shameful state of affairs. I used to have ties to CBS News and have long had great respect for Dan Rather. But he said, in an interview with Greg Palast, on BBC's "Newsnight," that any journalist, reporting certain stories in the U.S., would be "necklaced," an apartheid term in which burning tires are placed around an offender's neck. And look what eventually happened to Dan. He crossed an invisible line.

And I have never seen "Network," but, given my experiences with the commercial networks and the current political climate, I really should. You and I may have immediately have seen Bush* for what he really is, but most people aren't paying much attention, and believe what they're told, even if they're being lied to. ;(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-02-05 02:16 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. Yes, I agree with you.
Which is why I don't blame the media; I blame the people themselves.

People are willfully sticking their heads in the sand. If it doesn't affect them personally, then they think it's perfectly ok. They aren't against the Patriot Act because they haven't (yet) been raided by the police and hauled off to jail simply because they were playing Bob Dylan CDs.

Yes, the media is full of lies. And it ought not to be. But the "media" is not really anything at all; it isn't a substantial entity all on its own. It's a group of individuals who have gotten together in order to do a certain thing. These individuals have the capacity to tell the truth--and have chosen not to.

I think we could bring integrity back to the news hours if we took a few of these individuals off their pedestals. A very good start would be to remove Rush Limbaugh from the air, on the basis of his drug abuse and criminal behavior. The grounds are there; the process is broken. I don't know how to fix the process. But the bottom line for me is still that individual people make the decision as to whether they will pursue truth, or simply let someone else feed them crap. Their inability or unwillingness to make the effort is what is truly wrong with our society, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-02-05 04:22 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. Of course the people are at fault. They shouldn't put up with lies.
But they don't know it! My mother also listens to Rush Limbaugh, who was discredited long before his drug charges. Why is he still on the air?! Why is Michael Weiner Savage, the worst of all, who was finally removed from TV "news," but is still on the radio, spewing his particular brand of hate-speak. :grr:

My point is that most people just don't know. And I don't just mean my intentionally blind mother. I am talking about anyone who turns on CNN or MSNBC, just hoping to catch up on things. They just assume that they're getting the latest news, even if they happened on "Scarborough Country." :-(

And, yes, the media has chosen not to broadcast truth. But this was not a conscious choice, but a mandate from the current administration. Jeff Gannon is acceptable while Dan Rather was not, while they don't even exist in the same universe, as far as I'm concerned. It's just nuts. :crazy:

I have hope for John Conyers' hearings on media bias, but he can't take on each and every issue, all by himself. I don't know what we can do, but I'm really scared, since these lies are being broadcast as truth, and people believe them. And not just my Freeper mother, but some guy who just tunes in, hoping to hear the latest about what's going on. He doesn't know that he's being lied to.
:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-02-05 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. Yes, there are people who still somehow don't realize
that they're being lied to--amazing as that seems to me. Yet these same people, who accept as Gospel everything Rush and Fox spew out, also reject out of hand anything Michael Moore says. This is, at the very least, a semi-conscious decision on their part: They have decided to believe the right-wing commentators, and to disbelieve the left-wing ones.

I sympathize with your situation. Both my father and my late mother are/were major neo"Cons", as are my sister and her husband and his entire family. There is no getting through to them. Which is why I have decided to quit trying. "Let the dead bury their dead", says Jesus. "If that city will not hear," he says in another place, "wipe the dirt off your feet as you leave its gates." Though it pains my heart, I can no longer fight against such closed-mindedness.

Maybe I'm wrong for this. But I feel I need to concentrate my energies in more productive areas. I'll let my life act as witness to what I know, and no longer get entangled in no-win arguments.

Somehow, I think I'm in good company with this decision. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-03-05 05:56 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. I don't understand this, either.
People are being lied to, but they absolutely refuse to recognize the truth. You mentioned Michael Moore. How many people dismissed "Fahrenheit 9/11" as just lies without ever having seen it? That was all they had to say, on the subject. And you're right, they trust the RW liars, but dismiss the truth as lies, because of the source. :eyes:

I came late to politics. I had always voted, but I'd check the newspaper on the day of the election, just to see who was running and make some kind of last-minute decision. But 9/11 changed all that for me. I knew that something really terrible had happened, but you can see that I'm not a morning person, so didn't actually see any of the footage until I was held hostage in my dentist's chair and saw that second plane hitting the North Tower, over and over and over. I was scared witless, thinking that the world was about to end. That's when I realized that I had an obligation to really find out the truth about what was going on in this country, and the world.
:scared:

And I have, in many ways, and haven't liked much of what I've learned, at all. But, at least, now I know much more, so am better off than most. I have DU and the internet and more newsletters than I can keep up with. So this is the reason that I get totally frustrated with people, like my mother, who just turn on FAUX News, and assume that they're getting the truth. As you say, it takes an effort to find out what's really going on, and an open mind. And I can sympathize, as well, with what you've faced with your family. But I can't fight it, either. People will do what they want to do. :shrug:

And you are in good company. At least me. :evilgrin:

Rhiannon :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-03-05 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. I also came late to politics.
I was one of those idiots who simply vote for the incumbent, without investigating anything. But Bush pere changed my mind. I realized during the Persian Gulf War, as a noncommissioned officer in the US Army, that what was happening was my responsibility. I immediately changed my party affiliation and voted for Clinton. I took a lot of flack for that. :)

I began arguing against Creationists and Christian Fundamentalists. I come from a deep Fundamentalist background, so I know what I'm talking about when it comes to those anti-Americans. I stunned a lot of them with my knowledge of the Bible and of Church history. I actually turned one Opus Dei member into a sputtering, incoherent blob. hahahahaha That was a lot of fun. :) But I think I surprised even more of them--and of my fellow atheists--with my admiration for the Apostle Paul. (As you can see, I still tend to quote the Bible in my dissertations.)

9/11 shocked me greatly. I watched the entire thing unravel on CNN. But it didn't change my life. I had already been opposed to the * administration, and all the attacks did was make me more opposed to it. I watched in horror as friends and as otherwise intelligent people turned into inhuman, bigoted monsters. I think the true nature of America was revealed on that day, and that all the facades dropped away. We aren't the peace-loving, freedom-loving people that we like to pretend we are. :(

I share your frustrations, and I wish there was a magic spell I could cast that would change the world from what it is to what we want it to be. But there is none. OTOH, I can change myself, and in good secular humanist action, in good 60s counterculture action, in good Pagan action, that is where I am now focusing my energy.

And I am very happy to be in your company. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-05-05 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. I may have come late to politics, but I never just voted for an incumbent
But I understand the inclination. I think that's what many people do, who are too busy or distracted to pay attention. I may come from a family of Republicans, but I have voted for every Democratic candidate since Jimmy Carter. I liked him right from the start, but not for his politics, since I knew nothing about that, but because I recognized that he had a good heart. And he has, since, become one of my heroes, so I know that I didn't judge wrong. I acceded to CatWoman's request to change my avatar to John Conyers, to honor him for his heroic efforts, but I will eventually change mine back to Mr. Carter.
:patriot:

Thank you for sharing your story, which is a pretty amazing one. I understand how you were affected by the Gulf War, appreciate your service and admire your courage to go against all that you'd been taught. My grandmother also woke up in time to vote for Clinton, after a lifetime of voting for Republicans, even against FDR (though my Irish grandfather voted for him). She called me especially to tell me of her change in vote and I told her that, of course, I'd also voted for Clinton, but there was no need to tell any of the others. :D

Your deep knowledge and revelations (no pun intended) are really appreciated here. I attended a religious school, so was forced to study the Bible, but I don't think I retained much. But the fact that you can use this knowledge to change hearts and minds, or just to win arguments and provoke thought, is an invaluable skill. I probably remember more about Paul than the others, and I don't think that your admiration of him is ill-founded. :-)

And, yes, it was also CNN that my dentist had going on her overhead TV on that fateful day. By the time I walked out into the warm September sun, I was so shocked and afraid that I could barely stand. I guess that I had always been a liberal, in my heart, but now I know exactly why and I can take on pretty much anybody who challenges my beliefs. It's not hard, since I have knowledge on my side, I can quote Poppy Bush, as you know, while those who don't agree with me just have their beliefs. :-(

But you're right, you can really only change yourself. I like myself much better since I've become informed, but I'm also much more angry. I don't enjoy that, but there's no getting around it, since the list of indictments against members of the Bush* administration grows, exponentially, day by day. I didn't vote for Reagan, but I didn't hate him, either. :grr:

And I am very grateful to be in your company, though we have totally hijacked this thread, LOL! But it's worth it, to me, to have had such a good and thought-provoking conversation and to have met such a kindred spirit. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-06-05 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. I know what you mean about liking yourself better, yet
being angrier. I fight anger all the time, more than I ever had to before. And having to fight anger makes me even angrier! hahaha But that dilutes my ability to argue, so it's really a vicious circle for me.

Meanwhile, the indictments against this administration wouldn't bother me so much if we still had a justice system in this country. . . . I think what concerns me the most about all of this is the feeling that we have no recourse anymore. Actually, it's more than a feeling; we don't have recourse anymore. . . .

:mad:

But yes, I've enjoyed this thread-jacking very much. . . .

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. Your statement that anger dilutes the ability to argue is very true.
But I don't go around having heated arguments with Freepers, LOL! There was only the woman who was threatening me with her crutch, and I was deadly calm and quiet with her. If only she'd been calm and quiet enough to listen to the important snip of truth that I shared with her.

I guess what I mean is that my anger motivates me to find out the truth. I never would have had the patience or energy to listen, read or research what I now do, if I'd remained as complacent as I was.

And I also agree with you about our justice system. And it is more than a feeling. If you were list all the possible indictments that could be made against Bush* et al, since they hijacked this country, there would be enough to keep our courts busy for years. But who is, so far, even under indictment? We get our hopes up that this has to be the one thing that has to bring them down, and the next day or week or month, there's something new, often worse, and the previous case slips from the national consciousness.

And I also agree, there should definitely be more threadjackings on DU, but only in certain cases. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-12-05 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. Well, we seem to have killed the thread
so I guess it belongs to us now! hahaha

I've quit arguing with Freepers, but I still debate the occasional Creationist who wanders haplessly across my path. The neoCons in my office tend to gather in little cliques now, and no longer engage me in open conversation. They prefer to make outrageous assertions as loudly as they can instead. I ignore them. I won't be baited.

Anger isn't always negative, as you point out. It can motivate us in good ways. My problem is that I have a very aggressive debating style, which is compounded by anger, so anger just gets me confused. hahaha I much prefer to use someone else's anger against them--which isn't difficult with Freepers. :)

Meanwhile, the Republicans have so sealed up all the avenues of power that there's no way to indict them anymore. I fear that every one of them is going to get away with their crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 04:58 AM
Response to Reply #38
39. Yikes! I'm afraid so! But it's hardly my first time...
I agree that there's little point in arguing with Freepers, as I said, because they have neither facts nor logic on their side, only misguided beliefs and empty, repeated rhetoric. As for Creationists, I only met that one, but consider them to be both brainwashed and benighted, hardly worthy of your time. It's the political neophytes, the infamous "undecideds," that are the most worthwhile. Also, IMO, who compromise the greatest numbers. Most people just aren't paying attention. :shrug:

Also, IMO, you need to work on your debating technique. Use The Magistrate's technique of aggressive politeness, which tends to disarm your opponent, while keeping you from "bashing him over the head" (quoting my friend). Anger tends to confuse logic, as you said, and puts you at a noticeable disadvantage. If they believe that they've gotten to you, they'll assume that they've won. As with the last Freep that crossed me, I had facts on my side; she just had temper. :grr:

I share your fears about the Republicans, and have for a long time. But I think that the Rove case gives us a foot in the door. Somebody's probably going down for this. And when one falls, the others will realize that they're not infallible, which is what has given them all such brazen over-confidence. It just takes one casualty to cause the whole conspiracy to begin to unravel... :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-05 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #39
40. Unraveling: Indeed. :)
I actually stated early into *'s first term that, if he were somehow to fall, he'd take the whole neoCon Party with him. If we could get Rove, I think many would quickly follow.

They knew this when they seized power. They'd been building their defenses for several decades--buying power, installing the propaganda machine, demoralizing Democrats--and struck at their first opportunity. Many on DU have commented over the years how quickly this administration was implementing its agenda. They also understand that, especially if a key player falls, they all are in danger.

I honestly don't know how the Rove thing is going to fall out, but I'm hoping that this, at last, is the breaking point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rhiannon12866 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-26-05 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. Sorry I've been absent, but I'm back. I always come back...:-)
As for the Rove case, it's not going away anytime soon. The republicans are getting desperate, resorting to blatant lies, from the likes of Ken Mehlman, who is just not that good at it, and keeps tripping over his own words and can't keep his story straight. The most that they can do is repeat the lies, such as the one that Valerie Plame was the one who sent her husband to Niger. But nobody's buying it. I think it was Keith Olbermann who asked, tonight, while laughing, exactly when was she running the CIA?! And the contention that she wasn't really "undercover," because she was currently working a desk job at Langley, isn't flying, either. There are too many "experts" out there to explain exactly how these things work. :eyes:

The democrats are taking this and running with it. I caught hearings this weekend on C-Span, led by Waxman and Conyers, with testimony from those such as ex-CIA Larry Johnson, who explained in front of the world how these things work and how deadly serious it is to expose an undercover operative, that this bungling shut down an entire network of operatives working to obtain information on WMDs. Talk about shooting themselves in the foot, let alone making us even more vulnerable to terrorism. But Bush*s foolhardy foreign policy has placed us in even greater danger long before this latest.
:scared:

And the stupidity with which they've attacked Joe Wilson just demonstrates how desperate that they are. They are in serious trouble for attempting to smear him, so their solution is to just attempt more of the same! :crazy:

And I totally agree that, if one player falls, they will take the rest down with him. That's how this cabal works; they are all committed to keeping each other's secrets and, as such, are all joined at the hip. In any other organization, for example, Rumsfeld would be long gone, for the botched intelligence about Iraq, for Abu Ghraib, for the lack of preparation, non-existent exit strategy and the worst abomination of all, sending American troops into harm's way without adequate equipment to protect their lives. Just one of these revelations should have been enough to send him to the unemployment line. But he knows too much; they all do. And so they're going to stand together to the bitter end, no matter how ludicrous that Bush*'s actions seem to us or to the rest of the world. But because they function as one, hopefully they'll fall together, as well. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-05 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #42
43. Been offline for a while myself. :)
I've come to the point, over the past 5 years, where I no longer allow myself to get my hopes up when the criminal behavior of this administration is sometimes exposed. They're too good at spinning things, and the country seems too willing to believe the spin. But I do hope that Rove just might become the lynchpin here--pull that one out, and the whole structure collapses. :) I continue to push the meme.

And you're right: They have totally bungled their entire defense. They have nothing to stand on, and they know it. This makes them scared to death. But we should take a warning on this: When the ax is about to fall, another "terrorist attack" is almost inevitable. To tell the truth, I'm surprised we haven't had any "alerts" lately. . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reprobate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-10-05 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #12
34. I beg your pardon. My cat is Shiva, Destroyer of Living Rooms.


I assume you are talking of a different Shiva. Mine only creates clumps in the sandbox.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-10-05 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. ROFLMAO !!!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arianrhod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-11-05 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. "Shiva" is a perfect name for a cat. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
13. This is too good to keep to ourselves!
I'm going to share it with GD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. It is, isn't it?
Edited on Tue Jun-14-05 02:06 PM by beam me up scottie
on edit: Don't tell them about the orgasm part, we don't have the room for that many converts...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. I restricted it to what Beetwasher called the "Interior Design theory"
of homosexuality. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-14-05 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. BWAHAHAHA!!!
:rofl:
Beetwasher is a cad!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mich Otter Donating Member (887 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-02-05 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
29. If "Intelligent Design" is so intelligent, why do males have nipples?
Who screwed that up?
If there is no truth to evolution, doesn't that mean we all look exactly alike; and that we all look like Adam?
If there was a caring god, why are babies born with defects or into a world where they can starve to death?
The almighty, all-knowing, all-powerful god is a sorry SOB. Anyone who would worship such a being ought to reconsider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reprobate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-14-05 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #29
41. Not a sorry SOB. Just mightily pissed that Ashera isn't with him now.

Ashera was his consort (wife) before the isrealites took him from sumer. I'd be pissed too if I was taken from my home and they refused to take my wife too. Must have been a lonely five millenia. No wonder he's so mean to us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Dec 22nd 2014, 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Science & Skepticism » Atheists and Agnostics Group Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC