This new age Science has become a political tool for the Left to push their environmental agendas.
Liberals have hated fossil feuls for deacdes, yet we are suppose to believe every theory they have concerning their hatred of fossil fuels, and believe everything they say. They have been wrong almost 100% of the time!
Columbus didn't show the world was flat, it was fairly common knowledge long before he sailed the oceans.
Science isn't wrong in evolution, there is a ton of evidence supporting it and not much evidence to the contrary. If anything it'd be nice for people to have an open mind about a higher being than themselves but to each their own really.
I'm also not too keen about the gravity theory. I mean, it's not that I don't believe in gravity. It's that I don't think it is pulling me down. It more like it's pushing me down. ;)
I'm also not too keen about the gravity theory. I mean, it's not that I don't believe in gravity. It's that I don't think it is pulling me down. It more like it's pushing me down. ;)
I'm also not too keen about the gravity theory. I mean, it's not that I don't believe in gravity. It's that I don't think it is pulling me down. It more like it's pushing me down. ;)
Yes, it's quite laughable listening to Progressives constantly bashing Conservatives as Science deniers, while the Left is made up of the biggest Science deniers on the planet. BIOLOGY? HELLO?
I am willing to consider the evidence......................................................................................................................................
100% of doctors once understood Homosexuality as being unnatural UNTIL the new science denying Leftwing Progressives sued them if they dared make such claims.
Yes we have science deniers on the Left who are far more outspoken on their denials of Biology than any Global cooling, I mean Global warming, I mean climate change denier.
Natural: this is a word which means "occurring in nature".
Nature: What exists: the physucal world.
Therefore, anything that occurs in the physical world is by definition: natural.
Homosexuality happens in nature. Therefore it is natural.
What you are trying to do is conflate the biological meaning of the word "natural", with the social/moral meaning. They are different. Homosexuality is biologically "natural". But by your reckoning it is not morally "natural".
But science deals in facts and realities. It doesn't concern itself with moral reasoning, which is by definition subjective. It concerns itself with physically manifested phenomena.
You are yet one more naive person who simply accepts the deception from the Left.
There are NO Gay animals in nature! The animals these liars talk about would hump your leg when aroused or going through mating season. They do not reframe from having sex with the opposite sex!
Gay people say they have no desire to have sex with the opposite sex. SHOW ME AN ANIMAL WHO ONLY HAS SEX WITH SAME SEX!
Show me any Gay pet, or Gay farm animal, or any other animal we see every day. THEY DO NOT EXIST!
Do not be so easiy lied to. Open your eyes and see these extremists for who they are.
I HAVE NEVER SAID I CARE WHAT OTHER PEOPLE DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
STOP LYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For the millionth time, I am trying to stop the activists from indoctrinating our impressionable children to unnatural abnormal sex. I believe in teaching our children the science of Biology, not an anything goes sexual revolution of weird fetishes.
Does it bother you we have Transgenders and Drag Queens talking to our children? Nah, you Leftists live in some kind of fantasy world where the Left has made you believe that you are phobic if you state the obvious.
WAKE UP!
You are no different then every other Liberal on this site. You deny the obvious and always spew pure lies and deception.
What a shock, you showed me no evidence of gay pets or farm animals. The same as every other liar on this site.. They never show me Gay pets!!!!! WHY NOT? According to Progressives, they are all over the place in nature.
If homosexuality happens in nature, why are none of our pets or livestock Gay?
I never said you care what other people do either. But quite clearly, you do care. Otherwise you wouldn't ramble incessantly on about how "unnatural" sticking your penis in an anus is.
Your God really is a pathetic fuckwit if that's what he has you spending time on, honestly.
You have when you banned me for no justifiable reason.......................................................................................................................
Yes it is............................................................................................................................................................................................
No, it really isn't. What constitutes the biological organism homo sapiens sapiens (colloquially know as a 'human') is a subject of science. What constitutes a person is a non-scientific subject of social philosophy.
This is, e.g., why we can coherently discuss whether or not other animals should be considered as persons on the basis of their having the characteristics we value (e.g. intelligence, culture, sociability, etc.).
Yes it is, and you are trolling.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
I support legalized abortion and custodial infanticide, actually. Your disinterest isn't motivated by my position, but by your aversion to explaining your own position.
Infanticide is taking this too far. Just saying. .................................................................................................................................
It's a baby by then, hun. Any human organism with sufficient brainwaves, is a person that should be allowed to live, unless they are able to choose otherwise. Antichoice people who want to ban abortion, often cite your position on infanticide as a sort of slippery slope fallacy against abortion. I do agree that extreme medical cases exist where both parent can consent to withhold life support from their born child, to prevent him from further suffering, but not over custody issues. I am willing to debate with you.
Kindly dispense with the condescension, hun. I know infants are babies, obviously.
I care about the effects of my actions on others only insofar as there is an other to be affected. Infants lack a sense of self and therefore there is no other whom I can take as an object of my concern. To the extent that I acknowledge any state authority, it is because I find it useful in negotiating my relationship with other self-possessed beings.
Shrimp also have brain activity but I'd find it ludicrous for the state to have authority over the relationship I have towards shrimp. I presume the same could be said of most people, really. Mere brainwaves simply aren't the standard by which we ascribe personhood and the right to life; it's quite commonplace and permissible (legally as well as socially) for us to kill creatures with brain activity, even if we don't need to and even if doing so doesn't give us any great satisfaction.
Anti-abortionists only conflate abortion with infanticide because they presume (usually correctly) that pro-abortionists are anti-infanticide. That doesn't suggest anything about the correctness of my pro-infanticide position.
By custodial infanticide I do not mean infanticide over custody issues (I'm not really sure what you even mean by that). I mean infanticide committed by those who have legal custody of the infant. Basically, heading off the strawman that my position means anyone could kill others' infants if they wanted.
You really need to chill out. I did nothing wrong to you, but disagree with your opinion. People like you are an insult to prochoicers ever, because most prichoicers oppose infanticide, which is what antis always accuse prochoicers of doing.
Pointing out something obvious as though another person doesn't understand it and then calling them 'hun' is condescending. I don't think I've gone out on a wild limb there, and I'm not going to apologize for asking you to treat me with respect.
I also don't care if my existence is offensive to you because you don't like other people incorrectly comparing you to me. That's still not an argument against my position, but so kind of you to whip out that ad hominem. "Willing to debate"... yeah, right.
Prove it, by responding to everything I said.................................................................................................................................
I am genuinely under the impression that I have responded to everything you said. Which is why I asked you what exactly you think it is that I haven't responded to. I'm willing to do it, but I can't unless you let me know what it is you feel I've neglected. I don't think that's an unreasonable clarification to request. It should also be pretty easy for you to do.
The scientific community continually changed their minds in the light of superior evidence. We proved the Earth was round and the scientific community adopted it. We proved that the Earth revolved around the sun, and the scientific community adopted it. and when the scientific community believed that life was created, Darwin proved that it was evolved, and guess what the scientific community did? That's right. Ten points. They adopted it.
The time isn't coming Joe. It's been "nigh upon us" and the "end of days" for about 4,000 years now. I think it's time all you climate change denying scientifically illiterate cavemen woke up and faced the real world. Mary was an unfaithful cheat; Jesus was probably the son of a Roman soldier or some other fella who took Mary's fancy, and he spent his life being deluded into believing fairytales told to him by a woman who couldn't bear to be seen to be unfaithful; and your bible is a collection of petulant writing stitched together with less care than a cheap Chinese stuffed animal.
The wildfires will only attack California as the Democrats live in the dark. Something has to done about the evil Global Warming just attacking Democrats.
