Recruiting Forum Off Topic Thread III

[jakez4ut]

For me when people say “oh you’re overreacting. They’ll never do _________” I just think of men in women’s bathroom and the backlash NC received. If that’s what’s happening now just imagine where it’s headed.

Yeah, bigger picture, that whole thing was just scary, given the precedents being set.... on both sides.

 

[drvenner]

Hitler

Was he a Darwinist? I think he was just evil. It also seems to me that I recall that the Catholic Church was supportive or at least turned a blind eye to much of what he did.

 

[Bassmaster_Vol]

Was he a Darwinist? I think he was just evil. It also seems to me that I recall that the Catholic Church was supportive or at least turned a blind eye to much of what he did.

He was absolutely a Darwinist.

I’m not Catholic, take it up with the Pope.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Hate speech is not a crime in this country. A hate crime is, but there has to be an act associated with it. Not sure what you are referring to. Even in civil court, it arises to more of a freedom of speech.

You’re right. Hate speech was the wrong term for what I was thinking of. I was trying to get at the whole imminent violence thing. But they are different and I was conflating them.

 

[VolGee4]

You’re right. Hate speech was the wrong term for what I was thinking of. I was trying to get at the whole imminent violence thing. But they are different and I was conflating them.

No problem.

 

[chargervol]

Hitler

Hitler did not kill in the name of atheism. That's just bs.
Of course their have been psycho atheists but seriously, how many people have killed in the name of or for the purpose of atheism?

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

How is going into a one hole bathroom with nobody else in there, locking the door, and doing your business remotely close to a man going into a multi-toilet restroom with ladies present and claiming that because he feels pretty it is his right?

Both feature someone with a Y chromosome making chocolate soft serve in a ladies room. A law forbidding men from using women’s restrooms could punish both, potentially. If you wanna play the whole slippery slope game, that is.

 

[BigZiti09]

Both feature someone with a Y chromosome making chocolate soft serve in a ladies room. A law forbidding men from using women’s restrooms could punish both, potentially. If you wanna play the whole slippery slope game, that is.

This is where common sense needs to come into play. I realize that’s not allowed anymore.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

For me when people say “oh you’re overreacting. They’ll never do _________” I just think of men in women’s bathroom and the backlash NC received. If that’s what’s happening now just imagine where it’s headed.

Those were private businesses choosing/threatening to take their business elsewhere because of NC’s legislative choices. Very different from the government punishing people for their religious beliefs.

 

[jakez4ut]

Hitler did not kill in the name of atheism. That's just bs.
Of course their have been psycho atheists but seriously, how many people have killed in the name of or for the purpose of atheism?

Agreed. You could probably link some Darwinist principles to his belief structure. But he didn't do what he did in the name of it.

 

[VolunteerVandiver]

It’s not as easy as people act like. Dating is not done by observation, obviously. They run tests, but those tests involve assumptions such as uniformitarianism and others. If those assumptions are wrong, the date would be changed dramatically.

What objective proof do you have that the Earth is 6,000 years old? What "tests" can be run? Radiometric dating is extremely accurate, so much so that carbon dating can actually be used as evidence in court.

The science behind it is very solid, as it has held up to the rigors of thousands of scientific experiments. It is the result of radioactive decay of unstable isotopes, which is undeniable.

"Radiometric dating(radioactive dating)*The most precise method of dating rocks, in which the relative percentages of ‘parent’ and ‘daughter’ isotopes of a given radioactive element are eastimated." (radioactive dating facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about radioactive dating)

I use data to make decisions in my day to day life. Car coming? I can see it, so I don't cross the street. What to eat? Look up nutritional information and research the inflammatory/digestive implications.

I do not adhere to blind faith in any decision making, especially not something that impacts my life as strongly as religion.

When I do good, I feel good; and when I do bad, I feel bad. That is my religion... if I am to be punished for eternity for that, then so be it.

 

[Bassmaster_Vol]

Hitler did not kill in the name of atheism. That's just bs.
Of course their have been psycho atheists but seriously, how many people have killed in the name of or for the purpose of atheism?

Nobody kills “in the name of atheism.” But that worldview, especially an evolutionary worldview does lead people to kill. As it did Hitler

 

[chargervol]

Nobody kills “in the name of atheism.” But that worldview, especially an evolutionary worldview does lead people to kill. As it did Hitler

Bass, come on.
Hitler was a power-hungry psycho. An evolutionary view did not lead him to kill. Racism was a primary motivator also and that completely goes against the theory of evolution.

There is not one single historical writing or speech from Hitler mentioning Charles Darwin, only a vague reference to survival of the fittest.
And he was using that as survival of the strongest. Which had nothing to do with Evolution. Survival of the fittest entails a creature's ability to adapt. Not force their will on others. Every single concept of evolution is completely anti "Master race".

 

[VolunteerVandiver]

Nobody kills “in the name of atheism.” But that worldview, especially an evolutionary worldview does lead people to kill. As it did Hitler

Maybe if you are a psychopath, yes. Evil exists in many forms and comes in many disguises; however, if you need the guidance of the Bible to not kill people, then there is something extremely wrong with you.

 

[Glitch]

I am a criminal defense attorney and never represented someone for hate speech, because it's not a crime. People don't get arrested for it.

Now, is it free from consequences? No. Do I condone it? No. But I was just reacting to the statement that hate speech is punishable by a court of law. It's punishable by the court of public opinion.

Where is the line between free speech and hate speech? I don't agree with racial slurs and don't use them, but why are some people allowed to say whatever they want and others are labeled hate speakers. Again, slippery slope.

 

[Glitch]

Both feature someone with a Y chromosome making chocolate soft serve in a ladies room. A law forbidding men from using women’s restrooms could punish both, potentially. If you wanna play the whole slippery slope game, that is.

You can see the difference so I'm not going to argue with you on this. I see your point about the law could punish both but like Ziti said.... let's have some common sense please.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

Hitler did not kill in the name of atheism. That's just bs.
Of course their have been psycho atheists but seriously, how many people have killed in the name of or for the purpose of atheism?

Social Darwinism was (probably still is) real and terrible. It’s a bastardization of Darwin’s theory, of course and people who used it to do awful things were just latching on to something to justify terrible things they wanted to do.


But that argument works in favor of Christians who’ve used scripture to do awful things as well.


Social Darwinists never did anything in the name of Darwin or evolution, but southern plantation owners never really bought slaves in the name of Jesus, either. Both groups just used those ideas to justify s***ty things they did.

 

[chargervol]

Social Darwinism was (probably still is) real and terrible. It’s a bastardization of Darwin’s theory, of course and people who used it to do awful things were just latching on to something to justify terrible things they wanted to do.


But that argument works in favor of Christians who’ve used scripture to do awful things as well.


Social Darwinists never did anything in the name of Darwin or evolution, but southern plantation owners never really bought slaves in the name of Jesus, either. Both groups just used those ideas to justify s***ty things they did.

Exactly.
One of the absolute biggest travesties of social Darwinism was trying to attach themselves to his name and theories which were completely different.

 

[Darth_Shiveman]

You can see the difference so I'm not going to argue with you on this. I see your point about the law could punish both but like Ziti said.... let's have some common sense please.

I do see the difference, of course.

My only point is that I don’t think a hardline, no room for shades of grey, “no men in a women’s room, or else” view can be justified either.

At the end of the day, 99.99999 percent of people who enter a restroom just wanna s*** or piss.

 

[jakez4ut]

I do see the difference, of course.

My only point is that I don’t think a hardline, no room for shades of grey, “no men in a women’s room, or else” view can be justified either.

At the end of the day, 99.99999 percent of people who enter a restroom just wanna s*** or piss.

Exactly. And it was the .01% that wound up creating the mess our state was in for nearly 2 years.

So I go back to 2 wrongs don't make a right, and ziti is correct..,, common sense left the building and didn't come back.

No way that issue should have EVER...EVAH EVAH... gotten to the point it did.

 

[Chief Vol 13]

Science is hard.

I'd encourage you to look up a guy by the name of Brad Harrub. Might change your mind, if you're open minded on the topic.

 

[Glitch]

I do see the difference, of course.

My only point is that I don’t think a hardline, no room for shades of grey, “no men in a women’s room, or else” view can be justified either.

At the end of the day, 99.99999 percent of people who enter a restroom just wanna s*** or piss.

I can't remember, do you have kids? As I parent, I can't keep my kids from all hurt and pain. Nor should I. They can't grow if they don't feel a little hurt every now and then. However, it is also my job to keep them safe, and a if people are allowed to use the restroom of their choice only because they "identify" as the opposite sex, there are sick twisted pervs that will take advantage of that. That is how I feel and I may be slightly irrational about it, but in this day with all of the sexual harassment issues swirling around, it is lunacy to even be discussing this. It is a recipe for disaster. We don't need a law either though. Common sense should rule the day here. If you are a dude, go to the dude's room. If you are a lady, go to the ladies room. If it is a one hiker with a lock and you are a dude that is about to crap their pants and no ladies are waiting and the men's room has been locked for 10 minutes.... go in the ladies room, lock the door, and clean the seat thoroughly upon your departure as a courtesy.

 

[VolunteerVandiver]

I'd encourage you to look up a guy by the name of Brad Harrub. Might change your mind, if you're open minded on the topic.

About science being hard? Might I suggest Carl Sagan, as he words difficult concepts incredibly well.

 

[chargervol]

Agreed. You could probably link some Darwinist principles to his belief structure. But he didn't do what he did in the name of it.

As DS pointed out, the link has been attempted many times. Even been books written by the hardcore. It's a cheap parlor trick like that 700 club guy blaming Katrina and 9/11 on the sins of the cities.

Jim Jones and David Koresh were just evil and I would never blame their acts as a Christian related culture.
There are evil people and their thoughts on our origin play absolutely no part in their sickness.

 

[Bassmaster_Vol]

What objective proof do you have that the Earth is 6,000 years old? What "tests" can be run? Radiometric dating is extremely accurate, so much so that carbon dating can actually be used as evidence in court.

The science behind it is very solid, as it has held up to the rigors of thousands of scientific experiments. It is the result of radioactive decay of unstable isotopes, which is undeniable.

"Radiometric dating(radioactive dating)*The most precise method of dating rocks, in which the relative percentages of ‘parent’ and ‘daughter’ isotopes of a given radioactive element are eastimated." (radioactive dating facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about radioactive dating)

I use data to make decisions in my day to day life. Car coming? I can see it, so I don't cross the street. What to eat? Look up nutritional information and research the inflammatory/digestive implications.

I do not adhere to blind faith in any decision making, especially not something that impacts my life as strongly as religion.

When I do good, I feel good; and when I do bad, I feel bad. That is my religion... if I am to be punished for eternity for that, then so be it.

First I don’t exercise blind faith.

Second, I’m not getting into a debate about the age of the earth. I know Christians who are old earth and Christians who are young earth. There are serious scientists who believe in a young earth and offer up tons of scientific evidence.

And again, the dating methods you cite involve assumptions. Assumptions which cannot be proven such as uniformitarianism. That’s all I will contribute to this discussion.