Excellent post, Teddy!

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Obviously, no human being on earth can say with any degree of credibility that agnostics call out to Jesus when the time is near. Nobody can possibly know what every other person on earth calls out, if anything.

For some, peace comes from religion. Others are able to find peace within themselves. Some never find it. Each person must follow their heart and brain and find the niche that works best for them.

I guess Islamic fascists aren't the only ones who try to force their religion on everyone else. The difference is that the United States isn't supposed to favor one religion over another. We're supposed to be a nation that has religious freedom.

This is especially dangerous during a time when war with religious fanatics is involved. To pledge undying, unquestioning loyalty and support of Israel in political matters (even if some feel they have acted badly) soley for personal religious reasons (to insure one's place in heaven) is very dangerous to the United States and the rest of the world. This is why politics and religion don't mix, and this is why the United States is becoming such a scary place. :-(

I couldn't agree more with everything you wrote. I hope you keep writing posts like this. It's one of the reasons I keep visiting this board.

I admit that I'd lost mine, but now I do somewhat have it back. I want to keep it, and that depends on MY actions and the actions of other Americans who also believe in hope.

I think yesterday's plane wreck in New York into the Hudson River is an excellent example of what truly patriotic Americans do when faced with a deadly situation, and it makes me seriously wonder what some on this board would have done if faced with the same situation.

WE need to change this country if we want change. We will soon have a President who actually knows "we" exist and that not all Americans are billionaires. We will have a President who can easily tell you how many homes he owns. We will have a President who will treat the rest of the world as if they are human beings, certainly something they haven't felt in the last eight years and the main reason why the USA was so hated under Bush.

It was "us" who voted Obama into office. I'm (hesitantly) hopeful and happy, and I'm glad I was one of "us," because from what I read on this board, being one of "them" must be a very sad and dreary existence.

Either way, we are ALL Americans, so we can all either get together and help make this country a better place, or some of us can just continue to moan and groan and complain about how bad things will be under a President who has yet to even be sworn in.

I never complained about Bush until he did things to deserve it. The same with Clinton (and, yes, I DID complain a lot about Clinton's actions which I felt were very disrespectful to the Office of the President). I will not complain about Obama UNTIL I truly have something to complain about.

He will be the first black American President, and as such, he has a much higher burden to haul than any white guy if there is ever to be a second black American President.

Earlier today, I finally got sick and tired of all the insults, and I started firing back.

Then I realized that I had sunk down to their slimy level and became someone I normally am not.

I think if religion is removed from the Politics Board and is put where it belongs, on the Faith Board, this might be a more meaningful place to discuss political ideas.

However, for me, it's become too toxic of a place. I can't believe these self-described "Christians" harbor so much hatred and rage. It's really quite frightening at times because I'm not sure there's a limit to what they are willing to do to get their way and overturn the will of the American people.

I think I'm much better off leaving this board for a while and letting the goodness and happiness of life flow back into me because each time I visit here, it really brings me down.

I feel sorry for these people. I hope they someday can look into their hearts and souls and feel some happiness and joy. You are right that their hatred isn't contagious, but neither is joy and happiness. That has to come from within, and I suppose, with all the rage and hate they possess, there just isn't enough room for goodness and light to enter.

Your posts are great. Please keep posting. As for me, I just can't take this hatred any more and need (at least) a break.

Liberals run in tolerant circles. The thought of others letting them *get away* with their own personal freedom of speech doesn't even occur to them. They don't demand that every single American follow in step and say the *right* words...or else. They promote truth and honesty and detest dirty tricks and lies that are designed to benefit the rich, while the poor work harder and get poorer.

And 100% accurate. I was reading the same posts you were reading. Anything -- and I mean ANYTHING -- they could do to obstruct, they did, just as the Congressional Republicans are doing now.

Obama has kept his word about bipartisanship and has tried to include the Republicans -- meeting with them several times -- but it's a waste of time because they're more interested in obstructing everything Obama does instead of working together with him.

It seems as if some Republican governors are at least giving Obama a chance and trying to work together with him, or at least the Republican governors who care about the citizens they govern do. I think most people can see the pathetic tantrums thrown by Congressional Republicans for what it is.

As far as Bush, I never voted for him, but I wasn't against him, either, at first. In fact, the day he stood in that rubble at "Ground Zero" with that megaphone, I actually began to respect him.

However, that was short lived because once I realized that he was incapable of telling the truth, I lost any trust for him that I had had. It was his ACTIONS that made me feel that way, not his party affiliation.

The PALPABLE hatred for Obama is overwhelming on this board and has been since well before the election.

For Immediate Release: December 28, 2006
Contact: Carol Goldberg (202) 265-7337

HOW OLD IS THE GRAND CANYON? PARK SERVICE WON�T SAY � Orders to Cater to Creationists Makes National Park Agnostic on Geology

Washington, DC � Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to pressure from Bush administration appointees. Despite promising a prompt review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years later no review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

�In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National Park Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology,� stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. �It is disconcerting that the official position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand Canyon is �no comment.��

In a letter released today, PEER urged the new Director of the National Park Service (NPS), Mary Bomar, to end the stalling tactics, remove the book from sale at the park and allow park interpretive rangers to honestly answer questions from the public about the geologic age of the Grand Canyon. PEER is also asking Director Bomar to approve a pamphlet, suppressed since 2002 by Bush appointees, providing guidance for rangers and other interpretive staff in making distinctions between science and religion when speaking to park visitors about geologic issues.

In August 2003, Park Superintendent Joe Alston attempted to block the sale at park bookstores of Grand Canyon: A Different View by Tom Vail, a book claiming the Canyon developed on a biblical rather than an evolutionary time scale. NPS Headquarters, however, intervened and overruled Alston. To quiet the resulting furor, NPS Chief of Communications David Barna told reporters and members of Congress that there would be a high-level policy review of the issue.

According to a recent NPS response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by PEER, no such review was ever requested, let alone conducted or completed.

Park officials have defended the decision to approve the sale of Grand Canyon: A Different View, claiming that park bookstores are like libraries, where the broadest range of views are displayed. In fact, however, both law and park policies make it clear that the park bookstores are more like schoolrooms rather than libraries. As such, materials are only to reflect the highest quality science and are supposed to closely support approved interpretive themes. Moreover, unlike a library the approval process is very selective. Records released to PEER show that during 2003, Grand Canyon officials rejected 22 books and other products for bookstore placement while approving only one new sale item � the creationist book.

Ironically, in 2005, two years after the Grand Canyon creationist controversy erupted, NPS approved a new directive on �Interpretation and Education (Director�s Order #6) which reinforces the posture that materials on the �history of the Earth must be based on the best scientific evidence available, as found in scholarly sources that have stood the test of scientific peer review and criticism [and] Interpretive and educational programs must refrain from appearing to endorse religious beliefs explaining natural processes.�

�As one park geologist said, this is equivalent of Yellowstone National Park selling a book entitled Geysers of Old Faithful: Nostrils of Satan,� Ruch added, pointing to the fact that previous NPS leadership ignored strong protests from both its own scientists and leading geological societies against the agency approval of the creationist book. �We sincerely hope that the new Director of the Park Service now has the autonomy to do her job.�

Read the PEER letter to NPS Director Bomar

View the NPS admission that no policy review on the creationist book has occurred

See the 2005 NPS Director�s Order #6 on Interpretation

8.4.2 Historical and Scientific Research. Superintendents, historians, scientists, and interpretive staff are responsible for ensuring that park interpretive and educational programs and media are accurate and reflect current scholarship�Questions often arise round the presentation of geological, biological, and evolutionary processes. The interpretive and educational treatment used to explain the natural processes and history of the Earth must be based on the best scientific evidence available, as found in scholarly sources that have stood the test of scientific peer review and criticism. The facts, theories, and interpretations to be used will reflect the thinking of the scientific community in such fields as biology, geology, physics, astronomy, chemistry, and paleontology. Interpretive and educational programs must refrain from appearing to endorse religious beliefs explaining natural processes. Programs, however, may acknowledge or explain other explanations of natural processes and events. (Emphasis added)

Trace how the creationist book controversy started and grew

Look at tax dollars used to support the Bush administration program of �Faith-Based Parks�