Well, at least I can finally get some more of this awesomeness:
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2010/01/16/scott-brown-bites-the-heads-off-little-children-and-drinks-their-blood/Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 23.01.2010 @ 13:19
How can a “true” conservative believe that any of those things are the proper function of government?
Would any "true" conservative up in the Nut House here care to actually define what a "true" conservative actually is? That would be awesome.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 20.01.2010 @ 12:47
The Blues didn’t seem to be able to accomplish anything WITH a fil-proof majority. What — are they going to accomplish LESS than nothing now? Sure this makes HCR more unlikely, but it was pretty rocky at 60 Dems too for some inexplicable reason.
The opposition is basically handing them one of the best excuses ever for accomplishing nothing.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 19.01.2010 @ 17:28
Morality is a product of evolution. This is a fact. Design whatever feel-good framework you want around it, but your framing changes nothing. No deity is required for human beings to behave morally.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 15.01.2010 @ 10:38
I see that CT is totally unfamiliar with the full concept of Natural Law. That must mean that he is also either atheistic or agnostic. Read up!
Natural law seems to simply be a set of stated "laws" concerning morality. I'm assuming you subscribe to some sort of Christian version of Natural Law, though Hobbes sums things up rather nicely in a secularish way.
Morality arises specifically through evolution as a way to ensure survival of groups. Without morality, humans couldn't form protective groups that would reliably work together to ensure the survival of the group, and thus themselves. Morality is the evolutionary glue that holds humans together. Call it Natural Law, or whatever, but it's just a way of describing what's built into our DNA through the process of natural selection. There's nothing decidedly spiritual about any of that.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 15.01.2010 @ 01:38
I suggest that it would be very hard for an atheist to accept the full scale of Natural Law, with its decidedly spiritual content.
What does this even mean?Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 14.01.2010 @ 14:59
I reject that notion and point to this response of some conservatives as evidence that the excessively ideological prism by which many on the right look at the world causes them to abandon reason and logic, substituting a comforting credo that cannot be amended.
The excessive ideological prism is faith based.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 14.01.2010 @ 12:50
Without reason and logic, that's all you're left with.
This is a fantastic piece.
In fact, as I will show tomorrow, there is cause for some hope that younger, more intellectually muscular conservatives who are questioning everything while searching for a new conservative paradigm that would re-integrate movement conservatives into a re-energized whole, may be the beginning of a conservative revival.
Do you believe that these younger more intellectually muscular conservatives will exist in the numbers required to bring about such a paradigm shift?
It seems like young voters won't be as susceptible to the same fears as the current Republican voting block. The word socialism doesn't carry the same impact, and generate the same fear response as it once did.
That is not to say that there isn't something that can be found that will spur them into action. I'm not quite sure what that might be though.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 12.01.2010 @ 15:12
Oh seriously…to the monkey who said no one should be elected that does not “believe” (and that’s ALL it is- “belief” NOT fact) in evolution-apparently you have not evolved enough yourself because your brain is only functioning on sea turtle level.Please go lay out on the beach where you belong.
Do you realize that you just said evolution was not a fact, and in the exact same sentence said I was not evolved enough to understand that it wasn't a fact?
Your logic is dizzying. You win.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 8.01.2010 @ 17:45
So now we have yet another litmus test, born of the necessity for atheists to have confirmation of their beliefs in a mechanical Universe.
Just because you and Sarah Palin don't understand something, doesn't make it false.
Why should true scientists ever close their minds to possibilities and attempt to shut off debate?
Scientists do exactly the opposite of this. Every single day. It's built into the job description via the Scientific Method.
Denying evolution and saying nonsense about the incompleteness of the fossil history is simply to deny the gigantic mountains of verifiable evidence science has collected. Speciation has been observed. You are completely and utterly 100% wrong.Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 8.01.2010 @ 16:00