http://gamingtrend.com
April 16, 2014, 05:48:57 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Expelled  (Read 12832 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #80 on: April 20, 2008, 03:02:00 PM »

Let's revisit this comment in light of this new information available to you, Mr. msduncan.

As linked above, Falwell claimed that the United States bore responsibility for 9/11 because of its tolerance, saying that the terrorists "gave us what we deserve."  He said this three days after September 11th.

Falwell and McCain became BFFs.

For extra credit, we'll note that Hagee, another McCain endorser and noted anti-Catholic, blames the devastation of hurricane Katrina on New Orleans' liberal leanings.  And yet, McCain actively sought his endorsement.
Logged
msduncan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2973


Roll Tide!!!!


View Profile
« Reply #81 on: April 20, 2008, 03:07:03 PM »

Quote from: Blackadar on April 20, 2008, 02:50:22 PM

Quote from: msduncan on April 20, 2008, 02:30:57 PM

It could be ignorance if what Fireball said above is accurate.    If Falwell and Robertson said those things, they definately are just as wrong as Wright.

I do not appreciate being called a bigot either by the way.    That is inflamatory and unnecessary.  (not to mention completely incorrect)

The only thing I can say is "too bad".  It's either one or the other - there is no other reasonable conclusion.  You've chosen ignorance.  In the words of the immortal Holy Grail protector, "You have chosen poorly".

The problem with your debating skills is very similar to former liberal member of this board who is no longer allowed here: ideological demonization (even if your styles are thankfully different).  As a result, you have major difficulties considering the other side of the discussion and cannot see the flaws on your side.  That you wouldn't know the very widespread remarks of Falwell and Robertson on a number of issues - including their pathetic 9/11 comments - shows how insulated your data-gathering is.  When you choose sources that only support one side, you've ensured that your opinion has been made for you.  Reading sources that support a predetermined conclusion isn't a substitute for real research or even thinking.  It's called herd mentality, and you're a sheep.

You are lecturing me on my debating skills when there is only one of us that has elevated this to calling the other a bigot and a sheep?    You are elevating this to personal, and I'm not going to take part.    Calling someone a bigot is every bit as bad as calling someone any other code of conduct violating term in my book -- possibly worse since it implies that the person is guilty of one of the more personally offensive things a person can be.

Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #82 on: April 20, 2008, 03:10:20 PM »

Ah, yes, it's inconceivable that a guy who is totally fixated on condemning the practice of black theology, and has set, as his avatar, an image specifically intended to antagonize supporters of an African-American presidential candidate, might qualify for that term.
Logged
msduncan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2973


Roll Tide!!!!


View Profile
« Reply #83 on: April 20, 2008, 03:11:01 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 03:02:00 PM

Let's revisit this comment in light of this new information available to you, Mr. msduncan.

As linked above, Falwell claimed that the United States bore responsibility for 9/11 because of its tolerance, saying that the terrorists "gave us what we deserve."  He said this three days after September 11th.

Falwell and McCain became BFFs.

For extra credit, we'll note that Hagee, another McCain endorser and noted anti-Catholic, blames the devastation of hurricane Katrina on New Orleans' liberal leanings.  And yet, McCain actively sought his endorsement.

Can you link the comments by Falwell?   Not because I don't believe you, but because I want to read them.    

I still maintain that there is a huge difference between having an endorsement from someone, and including them in your personal group of advisors and having that person as a mentor for a number of years.    

BTW my family is Catholic and we do not like Hagee.
Logged
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1572


View Profile WWW
« Reply #84 on: April 20, 2008, 03:13:01 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 03:10:20 PM

Ah, yes, it's inconceivable that a guy who is totally fixated on condemning the practice of black theology, and has set, as his avatar, an image specifically intended to antagonize supporters of an African-American presidential candidate, might qualify for that term.

You don't know this guy very well, do you? He commonly uses his avatar or tagline to try to inflame other people.
Logged

msduncan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2973


Roll Tide!!!!


View Profile
« Reply #85 on: April 20, 2008, 03:16:01 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 03:10:20 PM

Ah, yes, it's inconceivable that a guy who is totally fixated on condemning the practice of black theology, and has set, as his avatar, an image specifically intended to antagonize supporters of an African-American presidential candidate, might qualify for that term.

Ok I'm officially done here.   I'm not going to be called a bigot because I have an avatar that attacks a guy that spouts anti-white propaganda.   This is NOT the norm for 'black theology', and to say so is ludicrous.    

Bottom line:  you guys can't debate issues without throwing around personal attacks and insults like bigot and sheep.    I'm out of here.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2008, 03:17:59 PM by msduncan » Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #86 on: April 20, 2008, 03:18:40 PM »

Of course it's the norm for black liberation theology - I went to a lot of effort in the other thread about your offensive avatar.  I like how this eject button strategy of yours gets you out of acknowledging the inconsistencies in your beliefs.  Well played!

I do find it hilarious that so many conservatives, who frequently throw around the accusation that "political correctness" suppresses their free speech, are shrinking violets when they're challenged.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #87 on: April 20, 2008, 03:20:27 PM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on April 20, 2008, 03:13:01 PM

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 03:10:20 PM

Ah, yes, it's inconceivable that a guy who is totally fixated on condemning the practice of black theology, and has set, as his avatar, an image specifically intended to antagonize supporters of an African-American presidential candidate, might qualify for that term.

You don't know this guy very well, do you? He commonly uses his avatar or tagline to try to inflame other people.

I think I'd observed it once in the past but assumed it was somehow meant ironically.  My mistake!
Logged
JohnathanStrange
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 604


Noted Humanitarian


View Profile
« Reply #88 on: April 20, 2008, 03:20:50 PM »

I'll see the movie.

Although, I have to admit that I was/am a bit disappointed with Ben Stein for what I regard as his seeming anti-science, anti-evolution beliefs that I've heard and read about these last few months.   

I still admire Stein regardless - if I write off as an "idiot" everyone who had a completely opposite opinion from mine on an issue or two, then I'd have to write off virtually the entire forum except for that one guy who made one post "Fallout Rules!" and then never posted again. Yes, friend, Fallout does indeed rule.

I find it valuable to at least attempt to understand why people have certain beliefs. And I don't mean in a condescending pyschological "they cling to their old beliefs" way but in their words. I like to hear their evidence. It doesn't mean I have to accept it.

Anyway, over the years, I've read dozens of books on evolution, human origins and genetics and I find evolution very compelling. The few - maybe a dozen - anti-evolution books I've read have been far less convincing; only a few mathematical improbability arguments seem somewhat weightier. As an engineer, I do find numbers more "substantive" but I also know that your assumptions about which data/factors to consider can considerably alter your results. It's tempting to think you know something just because you've assigned a number to it.

I'll also see the movie because the movie from what I've heard is also about academic intolerance. While I regard Intelligent Design as deeply unconvincing both scientifically and philosophically, I'd like to hear our better-informed scientists debate the anti-evolutionists and (presumably) win the debate case based on reason and evidence.  I deeply dislike some intolerant scientist say "The debate is over. I know better and won't listen to any so-called counter evidence."

I'm no fan of Creationism and Intelligent Design. Their arguments and evidence don't seem compelling at all, not in a testable, verifiable way. Still, millions of intelligent people believe in them so I'd like to hear why.

Here's a link to a review that discusses Expelled and academic intolerance.
Logged

You just don't give up do you? You seize life by the throat and shake it like a topless bartender mixing a martini! -- Mayor Adam West
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1572


View Profile WWW
« Reply #89 on: April 20, 2008, 03:21:06 PM »

Quote from: msduncan on April 20, 2008, 03:16:01 PM

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 03:10:20 PM

Ah, yes, it's inconceivable that a guy who is totally fixated on condemning the practice of black theology, and has set, as his avatar, an image specifically intended to antagonize supporters of an African-American presidential candidate, might qualify for that term.

Ok I'm offcially done here.   I'm not going to be called a bigot because I have an avatar that attacks a guy that spouts anti-white propaganda.   This is NOT the norm for 'black theology', and to say so is ludicrous.    

Bottom line:  you guys can't debate issues without throwing around personal attacks and insults like bigot and sheep.    I'm out of here.

"I AM OUTRAGED!"

By the way, it's one space after a period. One. Not four. ONE.
Logged

Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #90 on: April 20, 2008, 03:28:09 PM »

Quote from: JohnathanStrange on April 20, 2008, 03:20:50 PM

I'll also see the movie because the movie from what I've heard is also about academic intolerance. While I regard Intelligent Design as deeply unconvincing both scientifically and philosophically, I'd like to hear our better-informed scientists debate the anti-evolutionists and (presumably) win the debate case based on reason and evidence.  I deeply dislike some intolerant scientist say "The debate is over. I know better and won't listen to any so-called counter evidence."

I think the point of most evolutionary biologists is that there's no debate - at best, it's like saying that geographers should be forced to argue against flat-earthers.  Evolution by means of natural selection is settled science as much as any science is settled, meaning that anything can be revisited if there's reproducible evidence that contradicts previously held hypotheses.  When you allow faith to come into play, you're no longer working in a scientific and testable environment.  In effect, a biologist can't "win" the debate because the precepts - that God exists, "designed" humans, etc - aren't provable or disprovable.
Logged
msduncan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2973


Roll Tide!!!!


View Profile
« Reply #91 on: April 20, 2008, 03:40:21 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 03:18:40 PM

Of course it's the norm for black liberation theology - I went to a lot of effort in the other thread about your offensive avatar.  I like how this eject button strategy of yours gets you out of acknowledging the inconsistencies in your beliefs.  Well played!

I do find it hilarious that so many conservatives, who frequently throw around the accusation that "political correctness" suppresses their free speech, are shrinking violets when they're challenged.

This will be my last post here in the Politics forum.     

I explained this avatar in the other thread, and in this one.    Let me break it down for you:

1.  He's spouting anti-white speech that inflames and incites hatred.
2.  I do not, apparently unlike you, believe that he in any way represents mainstream african american theological beliefs
3.  This avatar is a way for me to call him out, and also call Obama out for his very close mentor like association with him.

Because you don't like my explaination does not make it a dodge.

And secondly:   I cannot debate you or Blackadar because it took you less than two pages of thread debate to jump right to calling me a bigot.   This is highly offensive, and I believe would be highly offensive to anyone it was leveled at on this forum.      Talk about debate skills -- jumping straight to namecalling and accusations of bigotry on fellow forum members is as poor as it gets.   It's both inflammatory and a cheap debating tactic.    In the past over on OO I've used the occasional anti-american or liberal labels, a practice that I have realized was bad.    I have not, however, ever resorted to calling someone a bigot or a racist.    Fireball:  you're damn right I'm outraged at this particular accusation.   Any decent human being would be. 

So concludes my attempt at discourse here.    You can both call someone else a bigot, sheep or whatever else you want to call them.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #92 on: April 20, 2008, 03:49:32 PM »

Quote from: msduncan on April 20, 2008, 03:40:21 PM

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 03:18:40 PM

Of course it's the norm for black liberation theology - I went to a lot of effort in the other thread about your offensive avatar.  I like how this eject button strategy of yours gets you out of acknowledging the inconsistencies in your beliefs.  Well played!

I do find it hilarious that so many conservatives, who frequently throw around the accusation that "political correctness" suppresses their free speech, are shrinking violets when they're challenged.

This will be my last post here in the Politics forum.     

I explained this avatar in the other thread, and in this one.    Let me break it down for you:

1.  He's spouting anti-white speech that inflames and incites hatred.
2.  I do not, apparently unlike you, believe that he in any way represents mainstream african american theological beliefs
3.  This avatar is a way for me to call him out, and also call Obama out for his very close mentor like association with him.

Go read the material in the post I wrote in the other thread about your offensive avatar.  You should understand that "black liberation theology" is a specific religious movement.  You should understand that "white" and "black" are not strictly racial descriptors in black liberation theology. 

Quote
Because you don't like my explaination does not make it a dodge.

The issue you're dodging is the clear contradiction between your "WHO IS THIS WRIGHT MAN AND WHY DOES HE HATE AMERICA!" screeds and the at-least-equally-offensive statements made on behalf of a Republican who actively sought those people as endorsements to his campaign.

To be clear, I don't think John McCain believes that God sent Hurricane Katrina to punish America - he's pandering to the religious right.  I also don't think Barack Obama believes that the United States should be "damned" - he's just an attendee at a popular and populist church with a message that descends from the civil rights era, where African-Americans had to fight for the basic rights that you enjoy every day, and clearly take for granted.  The issue is your inconsistency, wherein you attempt to perpetuate the ridiculous whisper campaign about "close associations", as though a sitting US Senator is a traitor.  Shame on you.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #93 on: April 20, 2008, 03:52:53 PM »

Quote from: JohnathanStrange on April 20, 2008, 03:20:50 PM

Although, I have to admit that I was/am a bit disappointed with Ben Stein for what I regard as his seeming anti-science, anti-evolution beliefs that I've heard and read about these last few months.   

One other thing I thought of:

More broadly, anti-evolution movies like Expelled are part of a tactic that the Discovery Institute calls their "wedge strategy", and their explicit goals are:

"To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural, and political legacies"
"To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God"

I think the movie could be placed among the phase II initiatives, which try to muddy things sufficiently to make it seem as though these are just two alternative but equally likely alternatives.  That's why they so often use the phrase "teach the controversy", because they just want to ensure that they get additional exposure of their proposal in as many venues as possible (particularly in classrooms, which have an implied authority).
Logged
Lee
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2949


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: April 20, 2008, 04:02:03 PM »

Quote from: JohnathanStrange on April 20, 2008, 03:20:50 PM

I find it valuable to at least attempt to understand why people have certain beliefs. And I don't mean in a condescending pyschological "they cling to their old beliefs" way but in their words. I like to hear their evidence. It doesn't mean I have to accept it.

The problem is the movie is not about other peoples beliefs, the movie is not about ID. Every review I have read says the movie is very vague and misses the opportunity to discuss the belief in fact.

The movie is about people who get blacklisted for their beliefs about ID. And on this basis the movie is completely false. Take one of the people the movie is about, Richard Sternberg. He claims that he lost his job as an editor for publishing a pro-ID paper. If you read the site I linked to it shows that every claim made in the movie is false. Basically he did not lose his job for publishing the paper, he was not fired from his unpaid job, he had actually already put in his resignation 6 months before the paper was published. Every story in the movie is like this, an exaggeration/lie.

Why give people money who made a movie that is a complete lie? You won't be finding out why they believe what they do, you will just hear made up stories of more "Christians are persecuted in this country, poor us" beliefs.

And the clips of the scientists they used? The ones they lied to in order to get an interview? They went out of their way to try to explain themselves and were then taken completely out of context to make them look bad.

On the other hand, a large amount of people have lost their jobs for going against ID in the classroom. And these people get death threats for it. Even PZ Myers (a scientist in the movie) says he is getting a large increase in hate mail since the movie came out. His site is kind of amusing, especially when he talks about disproving ID arguments in some of the crazed emails he gets.

As far as Ben Stein, I always liked him too, and then I started to wonder why. Because he was amusing in a game show. After this movie I have no respect for him. At least make a movie that tries to explain your beliefs instead of one that mutates reality to try to get sympathy for something that isn't there.

I would highly encourage anyone who is considering this movie to do some research on it before seeing it. Then even if you still insist on giving these people money, you will know the truth behind it.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2008, 04:14:51 PM by Lee » Logged
helot2000
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 287


View Profile
« Reply #95 on: April 20, 2008, 04:28:37 PM »

Quote from: msduncan on April 20, 2008, 03:40:21 PM

This will be my last post here in the Politics forum.
I'm sorry to hear it.  On the other hand, I remember a recent vacation to Rocky Mountain National Park where I went 11 days with no TV, internet or newspaper.  The rest of the world could have come crashing down and I wouldn't have known it.  It was quite liberating to be free of the day's events outside of my small existence.  Sometimes I think I should give it a break, skip R& P forum, put my head in the sand, become apolitical, stop voting and the rest. I might still end up there one day.       

Quote from: msduncan
1.  He's spouting anti-white speech that inflames and incites hatred.
To be fair, he retired more than a year ago.  Whatever he might say now, he says as a common man.  No less, no more.


Quote from: msduncan
2.  I do not, apparently unlike you, believe that he in any way represents mainstream african american theological beliefs.
I really don't know and I'm giving this some careful though and consideration.  I think you're using too broad a brush.  Can you tell me what represents mainstream Anglo theological beliefs?  Do you have any african american friends or coworkers you can vet this opinion against?  I have a sum total of one, who once was a small business owner here in the cities.  He lost that business and is now working for an minority owned/operated construction company.  When I talk politics with him, he is very angry about the Bush Years. I have a good guess what he'd say about the Wright dustup.  If I open up this can of worms with him, I'll have to be ready for a rocky ride.  Just to show you how complex people are, my friend is a Hillary backer. 
Quote from: msduncan
3.  This avatar is a way for me to call him out, and also call Obama out for his very close mentor like association with him.
I'm guessing its a whole lot more of the latter and a whole lot less of the former. 

Quote from: msduncan
...calling me a bigot.
Name calling is poor form.  And painting the present state of Alabama with its past legacy is uncalled for.  Minnesota has plenty to be ashamed for in its race history and I bet we can match any state, bigot for bigot. 

Enjoy a nice Spring Sunday...
Logged

Saving the world one post at a time.
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #96 on: April 20, 2008, 05:17:57 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 02:31:43 PM

Yeah, because the 1970s are the distant past.
Who said anything about distant? It is more than a generation ago, however.
Quote
I love how, in your world, it's nonsensical to think the government might experiment on your particular ethnic group
Wrong. Wright is not saying the government might be experimenting on his ethnic group. He is saying the government created a virus in order to perform genocide against his ethnic group. In my world, when there is no evidence to support that claim whatsoever, and when there is plenty of evidence out there one could use to disprove that claim, then yes, it's nonsensical.
Quote
Again with the lack of empathy in conservatives.  I'm beginning to think that's a necessary requirement.
The difference here is Wright is saying 2+2=5. You're saying you understand where he's coming from because of his history and maybe that blacks haven't been good at math in the past. I'm saying he's just wrong.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #97 on: April 20, 2008, 05:30:19 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on April 20, 2008, 05:17:57 PM

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 02:31:43 PM

Yeah, because the 1970s are the distant past.
Who said anything about distant? It is more than a generation ago, however.
Quote
I love how, in your world, it's nonsensical to think the government might experiment on your particular ethnic group
Wrong. Wright is not saying the government might be experimenting on his ethnic group. He is saying the government created a virus in order to perform genocide against his ethnic group. In my world, when there is no evidence to support that claim whatsoever, and when there is plenty of evidence out there one could use to disprove that claim, then yes, it's nonsensical.
Quote
Again with the lack of empathy in conservatives.  I'm beginning to think that's a necessary requirement.
The difference here is Wright is saying 2+2=5. You're saying you understand where he's coming from because of his history and maybe that blacks haven't been good at math in the past. I'm saying he's just wrong.

Haven't been good at math in the past?  You're a piece of work.  The issue here is not whether or not AIDS was created by the federal government (which is vanishingly unlikely), it's whether or not the African-American community is justifiably suspicious of the federal government.  This isn't even a fringe belief of Wright's - it's a widely held view, and largely because blacks are nine times more likely to be infected with it than white men.  Why?  In part, because we incarcerate so many black people.

So, ultimately, the system of segregation and racism that we established in this country is killing black people with AIDS - it's just in an indirect manner.  Fireball's post describes how the existing system contributes to inequality, which in turn contributes to crime, which in turn results in prison sentences, etc, etc.  Couple that with the knowledge that the government has experimented on blacks in the past, and conspiracy theories are born.
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #98 on: April 20, 2008, 05:37:46 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 05:30:19 PM

The issue here is not whether or not AIDS was created by the federal government (which is vanishingly unlikely), it's whether or not the African-American community is justifiably suspicious of the federal government.
Wright isn't "suspicious" of the federal government. Being suspicious is saying, "hey I think they might be doing something wrong." He's not saying that. He's saying it's a fact that the federal government is taking part in ethnic genocide through viral warfare. Not only is he holding this stupid belief, he preached it to others who looked up to him as a spiritual advisor. I know your liberal heart bleeds profusely for him and you're all full of that white guilt, but have the balls to call something wrong when it's wrong, instead of searching for ways to validate his hate-mongering.
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #99 on: April 20, 2008, 05:52:58 PM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on April 20, 2008, 01:42:31 PM

We need a major overhaul of many components of our educational system, but first and foremost we need more money for our schools.
How will the money make black kids attend school? If I give you a $100 bill, you don't suddenly become better at math and science. By all means let's reform education. But blanket statements like this and the following are pointless - you can't just throw money at something and expect it to get better. Except my love life.
Quote
Education should be our highest priority, and our budgets should reflect that. We need to be paying teachers dramatically more, to attract better teachers to the profession.
Have had this argument on OO a few times. It's a popular belief that we need to throw money at teachers because they're practically living in poverty. The fact of the matter is in many states they are paid pretty damn well. Michigan, which is one of the top states for teacher salaries, pays teachers an average of around $60k/yr. This is for a 10 month job, which has every vacation, including spring break, as well as usually having excellent benefits. But the students in Michigan aren't any better than the students in lower paid states.
Quote
If local school boards are a problem, and in many cities they are, then they should be suspended and direct control by state educational agencies or an appointed "czar" should be imposed for a limited period of time, during which school district election districts can be changed, etc.
So you want to remove control of the schools from black people (in the inner cities which are primarily black and underperforming) and replace them with what is probably a predominantly white controlled state government?
Logged
SpaceLord
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 249


View Profile
« Reply #100 on: April 20, 2008, 05:54:49 PM »

Back on Topic:

From SciAm: Six Things in Expelled That Ben Stein Doesn't Want You to Know...

From the article:

Quote from: 'Charles Darwin'
With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.

The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil.

In the film, all the italicized text above was removed, and this was left:

Quote from: 'Ben Stein'
With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. Hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.

Bucking fastards.  mad
« Last Edit: April 20, 2008, 06:00:54 PM by SpaceLord » Logged

There's no place like OO, there's no place like OO. frown
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #101 on: April 20, 2008, 06:02:12 PM »

Oh and btw, concerning Intelligent Design, I find myself mostly unable to argue because I'm still in shock that this 17th century argument has somehow become fashionable today.

I'll probably see Stein's movie when it comes to DVD, just because I like Stein. Hopefully I'll be out of shock by then.
Logged
Lee
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2949


View Profile
« Reply #102 on: April 20, 2008, 06:20:46 PM »

Someone please explain to me why you would see a movie that you know is a complete lie just because you like a guy who used to do an amusing game show. I admit, I was going to see it because I liked Ben Stein, then I looked into it, and as much as I want to see it for the train wreck that it is, I cannot let my money show support for such a slanderous movie.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #103 on: April 20, 2008, 06:32:45 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on April 20, 2008, 05:37:46 PM

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 05:30:19 PM

The issue here is not whether or not AIDS was created by the federal government (which is vanishingly unlikely), it's whether or not the African-American community is justifiably suspicious of the federal government.
Wright isn't "suspicious" of the federal government. Being suspicious is saying, "hey I think they might be doing something wrong." He's not saying that. He's saying it's a fact that the federal government is taking part in ethnic genocide through viral warfare. Not only is he holding this stupid belief, he preached it to others who looked up to him as a spiritual advisor. I know your liberal heart bleeds profusely for him and you're all full of that white guilt, but have the balls to call something wrong when it's wrong, instead of searching for ways to validate his hate-mongering.

Hey, genius, I've already said it's a conspiracy theory that I don't subscribe to.  You're the one saying it's "nonsensical" which is patently stupid given the demonstrated history of oppression in this country.  You're the one who thinks that 1974 is so long ago that it shouldn't count in the collective history of race relations in this country.  You don't get to decide that.

This is all beside the point anyway - regardless of whether his views on government are justifiable or not, it only matters if you think it's going to be some sort of preview of the policies and appointments of a President Obama.  It's not.  It's all a red herring thrown out there into the conservative talk radio echo chamber in order to incite the subliminal fear of race war among moderate white voters in middle America.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3459



View Profile
« Reply #104 on: April 20, 2008, 07:36:52 PM »

Quote from: msduncan on April 20, 2008, 03:40:21 PM

This will be my last post here in the Politics forum.     

I explained this avatar in the other thread, and in this one.    Let me break it down for you:

1.  He's spouting anti-white speech that inflames and incites hatred.
2.  I do not, apparently unlike you, believe that he in any way represents mainstream african american theological beliefs
3.  This avatar is a way for me to call him out, and also call Obama out for his very close mentor like association with him.

Because you don't like my explaination does not make it a dodge.

And secondly:   I cannot debate you or Blackadar because it took you less than two pages of thread debate to jump right to calling me a bigot.   This is highly offensive, and I believe would be highly offensive to anyone it was leveled at on this forum.      Talk about debate skills -- jumping straight to namecalling and accusations of bigotry on fellow forum members is as poor as it gets.   It's both inflammatory and a cheap debating tactic.    In the past over on OO I've used the occasional anti-american or liberal labels, a practice that I have realized was bad.    I have not, however, ever resorted to calling someone a bigot or a racist.    Fireball:  you're damn right I'm outraged at this particular accusation.   Any decent human being would be. 

So concludes my attempt at discourse here.    You can both call someone else a bigot, sheep or whatever else you want to call them.

The simple fact is that you tried baiting here and you got called on it.  As such, I said you were either a bigot or ignorant - note that you've decided which one is applicable, not I.  That's rather telling, don't you think?  Then you decided to play the "I'm wounded" card.  I don't really have any sympathy for you, nor do I have any sympathy for anyone who would defend Wright's comments. 

To quote a particular office linebacker: "You know you can't bring that weak ass shit up in this humpy bumpy!"

Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3459



View Profile
« Reply #105 on: April 20, 2008, 07:41:34 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 06:32:45 PM

t's all a red herring thrown out there into the conservative talk radio echo chamber in order to incite the subliminal fear of race war among moderate white voters in middle America.

Truer words have never been spoken.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
DarkEL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2931



View Profile WWW
« Reply #106 on: April 20, 2008, 07:46:57 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 06:32:45 PM

t's all a red herring thrown out there into the conservative talk radio echo chamber in order to incite the subliminal fear of race war among moderate white voters in middle America.


Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #107 on: April 20, 2008, 07:47:42 PM »

It would be awesome if you could map the white background of that image to the green green hills of Northern Idaho...
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #108 on: April 20, 2008, 08:59:24 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 06:32:45 PM

You're the one saying it's "nonsensical" which is patently stupid given the demonstrated history of oppression in this country.
You don't subscribe to the theory, but me saying that it doesn't make sense that the United States government is actively engaging in ethnic genocide through the manufacture and delivery of a virus is "patently stupid?" I don't care how oppressed you are, 2+2 does not = 5. Liberal condescension is as bad or worse than conservative anti-intellectualism.
Quote
It's all a red herring thrown out there into the conservative talk radio echo chamber in order to incite the subliminal fear of race war among moderate white voters in middle America.
No, it's a presidential candidate supporting a hate-mongering bigot. Personally I would very much rather my candidates not do so, no matter if he's a republican or democrat.
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #109 on: April 20, 2008, 09:06:44 PM »

Quote from: Lee on April 20, 2008, 06:20:46 PM

Someone please explain to me why you would see a movie that you know is a complete lie just because you like a guy who used to do an amusing game show.
1. I don't know that the movie is a complete lie without having seen it. I tend to be distrustful of others and like to see things for myself.
2. I like to see others' points of view.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #110 on: April 20, 2008, 11:52:33 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on April 20, 2008, 08:59:24 PM

Liberal condescension is as bad or worse than conservative anti-intellectualism.

No, no it's not.  Conservative anti-intellectualism keeps us from acting efficiently to address global warming both nationally and internationally, it ruins science education by insisting that religious mores be placated, and, in fact, it kills women by restricting their access to birth control and contraceptives.  That's all far worse than your hurt feelings.

Quote
Quote
It's all a red herring thrown out there into the conservative talk radio echo chamber in order to incite the subliminal fear of race war among moderate white voters in middle America.
No, it's a presidential candidate supporting a hate-mongering bigot. Personally I would very much rather my candidates not do so, no matter if he's a republican or democrat.

Oh, now he's "supporting" a bigot, huh?  You just see what you want to see.  I guess you won't be voting this fall.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2008, 01:00:01 AM by Brendan » Logged
Lee
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2949


View Profile
« Reply #111 on: April 20, 2008, 11:55:08 PM »

Quote from: cheeba on April 20, 2008, 09:06:44 PM

Quote from: Lee on April 20, 2008, 06:20:46 PM

Someone please explain to me why you would see a movie that you know is a complete lie just because you like a guy who used to do an amusing game show.
1. I don't know that the movie is a complete lie without having seen it. I tend to be distrustful of others and like to see things for myself.
2. I like to see others' points of view.

Others point of view is that people are getting fired for ID in the science community. Which maybe true, but it certainly isn't true of the people who are used in the film. Again, the movie is not about ID, it just kind of mentions it.

If you would research it, you wouldn't need to see it to know that it is a lie. Are you going to accept that they are telling the truth when you do see it? Even when every evolutionist involved in the movie is saying they were asked ridiculous question but played along because they were told the movie was going to try to show both beliefs equally and that what they said was taken out of context. When every person they say was fired etc for their beliefs when you can look up online what really happened to these people. You don't need to see the move to find this info out.

That's the problem, people are going to see the movie and take it as fact because it's easier to see the movie than dig into it themselves. The makers of this film should not be rewarded for what they did. Of course I expect the only people are actually going to see it believes in ID, and much like evolution, they will refuse to believe anything that goes against what they want to think. Why let cold hard facts get in the way?
Logged
th'FOOL
Executive Producer and Editor-At-Large
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4989


Never whistle while you're pissing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #112 on: April 21, 2008, 12:50:14 AM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 11:52:33 PM

Quote from: cheeba on April 20, 2008, 08:59:24 PM

Liberal condescension is as bad or worse than conservative anti-intellectualism.

No, no it's not.  Conservative anti-intellectualism keeps us from acting efficiently to address global warming both nationally and internationally, it ruins science education by insisting that religious mores be placated, and, in fact, it kills women by restricting their access to birth control and contraceptives.  That's all far worse than your hurt feelings.

Both are condescension and both stances deter rational discussion.  It has nothing to do with hurt feelings and everything to do with killing discourse entirely.  Being neither liberal or conservative, the minute either party tries to shove their belief into my head I'm more likely to shut it out completely rather than contemplate the merits of what I am being told. 

In other words, everybody resents it when they are spoken down to. 
Logged

Mike Dunn
Executive Producer & Managing Editor, GamingTrend
DarkEL
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2931



View Profile WWW
« Reply #113 on: April 21, 2008, 01:25:08 AM »

Quote from: th'FOOL on April 21, 2008, 12:50:14 AM

Both are condescension and both stances deter rational discussion.  It has nothing to do with hurt feelings and everything to do with killing discourse entirely.  Being neither liberal or conservative, the minute either party tries to shove their belief into my head I'm more likely to shut it out completely rather than contemplate the merits of what I am being told. 

In other words, everybody resents it when they are spoken down to. 

That's gotta be the most intelligent post I've read in this whole thread.
Logged
Jeff
Special Project Group
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3281



View Profile
« Reply #114 on: April 21, 2008, 01:56:16 AM »

Quote from: ATB on February 14, 2008, 03:38:09 PM

I saw this trailer and found it interesting in light of all the claims of theocracy and theocratic stormtrooping. Turns out the 'objective' field of science isn't above being blind and biased either.

Looks like an interesting movie.

Looks to me like it's an embarrassment to the I.D. establishment, and even to general Christianity. Most Christian sites are panning this blatant piece of propaganda garbage.

http://bluecollarscientist.com/2008/04/18/some-expelled-reviews/

9% at RottenTomatoes

3.6/10 at IMDB.

Equating Darwin to Hitler is nothing short of shameful. Stein has made an utter fool of himself with this "documentary".
Logged
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1572


View Profile WWW
« Reply #115 on: April 21, 2008, 02:08:17 AM »

Quote from: cheeba on April 20, 2008, 08:59:24 PM

No, it's a presidential candidate supporting a hate-mongering bigot. Personally I would very much rather my candidates not do so, no matter if he's a republican or democrat.

So I take it you won't be voting for the Hagee-loving, Falwell-approving hate-mongerer-supporting John McCain.
Logged

cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #116 on: April 21, 2008, 02:40:11 AM »

Quote from: Brendan on April 20, 2008, 11:52:33 PM

Conservative anti-intellectualism keeps us from acting efficiently to address global warming both nationally and internationally, it ruins science education by insisting that religious mores be placated, and, in fact, it kills women by restricting their access to birth control and contraceptives.  That's all far worse than your hurt feelings.
Liberal condescension isn't you insulting me. It's when you "empathize" with black people and you take on their cause and fight for them. You're not black. You don't know what it's like to be black. Yet here you are defending someone's hate-mongering views because he's been through stuff you know nothing about. I also know nothing about being black or what Wright's life has been like, so I judge him merely on the statements he makes, not the poor oppressed life I might imagine he's led. Remember Dr. King's dream? Judged by the content of your character and not by the color of your skin? You use Wright's skin color to excuse his views... "you're wrong, Rev Wright, but that's ok I know what you've been through." It's such condescension that has created a culture of entitlement and prohibits true progression in race relations.
Quote
Oh, now he's "supporting" a bigot, huh?  You just see what you want to see.  I guess you won't be voting this fall.
Do you really think in what is it, 20 years or whatever of Obama attending this guy's church that he never once gave any money to this church?
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #117 on: April 21, 2008, 02:49:11 AM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on April 21, 2008, 02:08:17 AM

So I take it you won't be voting for the Hagee-loving, Falwell-approving hate-mongerer-supporting John McCain.
Shall I repeat myself?
Quote
Personally I would very much rather my candidates not do so, no matter if he's a republican or democrat.
I honestly don't know who I'm going to vote for. I detest that both McCain and Obama have such ties, which is why you don't and won't see me defending McCain's ties to Hagee, even though the kool-aid drinkers are still defending Obama.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #118 on: April 21, 2008, 02:57:06 AM »

Quote from: cheeba on April 21, 2008, 02:40:11 AM

Liberal condescension isn't you insulting me. It's when you "empathize" with black people and you take on their cause and fight for them.

Oh, I see.  This explains a lot about you.  NIMBY, huh?  You would've been a real credit in the civil rights era, unlike these guys, who died attempting to remedy social injustice.

Here's a King quote for you:

Quote
"White Americans must recognize that justice for black people cannot be achieved without radical changes in the structure of our society. The comfortable, entrenched, the privileged cannot continue to tremble at the prospect of change of the status quo...This is a multi-racial nation where all groups are dependent on each other...There is no separate white path to power and fulfillment, short of social disaster, that does not share power with black aspirations for freedom and human dignity." -- Where Do We go From Here, 1967

You and Lee Atwater will eventually lose - it'll just take time.
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2045


View Profile
« Reply #119 on: April 21, 2008, 03:08:26 AM »

Quote from: Lee on April 20, 2008, 11:55:08 PM

If you would research it, you wouldn't need to see it to know that it is a lie. Are you going to accept that they are telling the truth when you do see it?
Are you going to accept that the people criticizing the movie are telling the truth because they've blogged about it? Personally I'm going to look at all sides with as much skepticism as I can muster and base my opinions from as broad a view as possible.
Quote
Even when every evolutionist involved in the movie is saying they were asked ridiculous question but played along because they were told the movie was going to try to show both beliefs equally and that what they said was taken out of context.
So it's kinda like The Daily Show? smile
Quote
That's the problem, people are going to see the movie and take it as fact because it's easier to see the movie than dig into it themselves.
I'm sure some will. People do that every day with the nightly news, the talking head shows, and, as I said, even shows like The Daily Show. People need to think more critically in general and I believe rhetoric should be a requirement in high school. Personally, armed with an education in philosophy and having dealt with arguments for intelligent design for a couple of years back before it was resurrected, I feel prepared to watch the movie without becoming brainwashed.
Quote
Of course I expect the only people are actually going to see it believes in ID, and much like evolution, they will refuse to believe anything that goes against what they want to think. Why let cold hard facts get in the way?
You're as closed-minded as these people you just described. People getting information is not a bad thing, even if that information may have some or many inaccuracies or outright falsehoods, so long as the counter information is available as well. If people can do a little digging into the web and find counter-opinions and/or facts, then I see nothing wrong with them having access to what may or may not be a lie.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.186 seconds with 103 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.039s, 2q)