Reply With Quote
What's the other side? There is no other side. Creationism is religion. It's the belief that God created everything. People claiming this "other side" bull have no idea what they're talking about.
Why so defensive?
What's the other side? There is no other side. Creationism is religion. It's the belief that God created everything. People claiming this "other side" bull have no idea what they're talking about.
Jindal participated in an exorcism, I think. I don't know, I just remember there was something a little nutty in his past. Otherwise, he would have been a good choice for VP this year. He's younger than Obama, yet far more experienced. Smarter, too.
He's pro-life all the way, he supports teaching ID, he supported the flag desecration amendment, he voted for a fence on the border, he voted against stem cell research, he's against same sex marriage, voted for the Patriot Act, favors capital punishment for rape and murder, and believes English should be the official language of the US.
He'll be the nominee in 2012 without question.
You mean he didn't vote present 129 times ?
One positive I can say about Jindal is he's not the anti-intellectual the Republicans have thrown at us previously with Bush and Palin. He was a Rhodes Scholar, so that immediately shows he's smart enough to not be suckered into blindly following an ideology.
If he promises to get rid of the Fed and throw some of these Wall Street banksters in prison, then I won't care if Jindal thinks that William the Conqueror rode a dinosaur across the English Channel.
From what I know he's incredibly smart and has that innate ability to lead. As governor of LA he has done a phenomenal job in his 1st term. He will easily win reelection and likely finish out that term before he runs for President though IMHO to cement his image as that of an effective reformer and governor.
If he won in 2012 or 2016 I wouldn't be upset about it. My concerns are his extremist stances on social issues, if he could promise to keep a muzzle on them and not try and radically change this nation (i.e. keep the status quo) I'd consider voting for him. This is assuming Obama royally s up the country in the next 4-8.
His neck is too thin to be presidential.
Which is provable and observable?
Meh.
My daughter came home with a Science book last night that claimed that, "There will probably Space Farmers on Space stations within 40 years." There was more, but that one stood out. OH, I remember another one; they had a diagram of a tree getting chopped up, and its sawdust entering three different factories; one to turn it into Tomato Juice, one to turn it into Flour, and one to turn it into Vegetable oil. NONE of the technology for this exists; nor did the book explain why we would want to go to all the effort to grow trees, and expend the energy to convert them into Tomatoes, Wheat and Canola - and not just grow those crops themselves. Dedicated two entire, full color, pages to, well, whatever "that" was.
We lost the intellectual high ground on science education at some point in the past 30 years. They're already teaching that is completely made up - I won't even call it "theoretical" - THAT gives it too much credit!. There might be other reasons to leave creationism out of the classroom; but "proveable and observable", unfortunately, ain't it anymore.
btw; my entire idea of creationism is simply that God set the wheels in motion; laid down the rules of space/time/physics - and we're all living by those rules; studying them, and learning them, only makes sense - studying what he did is not possible - only the "why" of it needs study, and THAT, certainly, should be done at home, in bible study, and in Church; NOT in public school. It is the domain of philosophers and believers, NOT of scientists.
True, though he's a bit of a nerd.
Excellent post. Though I'd like to see that science textbook.
he could be the next President after obama s everything up if he can beat out Romney/Huck/Palin/Thompson in the primary.
-Mars
I'll get my daughter to bring it home and get you some scans.
What grade is she in?
Jindal 2016 more than likely
Here's a question for anyone who is in favor of teaching Creationism in school. Would you or would you not support the teaching of Scientology in school?
If Jindal can't beat that crop of garbage then the Republicans are really screwed.
Are you sure that wasnt just metaphor for a process?
Because that sounds an awful lot like an abstract example.
We havent lost that much if youre being honest with yourself.We lost the intellectual high ground on science education at some point in the past 30 years. They're already teaching that is completely made up - I won't even call it "theoretical" - THAT gives it too much credit!. There might be other reasons to leave creationism out of the classroom; but "proveable and observable", unfortunately, ain't it anymore.
"Two tickets to..."btw; my entire idea of creationism is simply that God set the wheels in motion; laid down the rules of space/time/physics - and we're all living by those rules; studying them, and learning them, only makes sense - studying what he did is not possible - only the "why" of it needs study, and THAT, certainly, should be done at home, in bible study, and in Church; NOT in public school. It is the domain of philosophers and believers, NOT of scientists.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions