Z-S: A Bastion of Free Speech and Thought
Mister Fedward Hyde, posting an email of mine on his sister blog Chez Fedward, has censored a number of comments that I made regarding his statements on Iran and the Middle East. In the spirit of free expression and exchange, I reproduce that paragraph here with the edited bits in boldface:
As much as you decry the largesse doled out by Bush and the Republican Congress, the more you open your mouth the more you undermine your pretensions towards moderation. For, if fiscal responsibility is so important to you, if large government and its resultant excesses is such a travesty, what could be the source of your rabid support for the Republicans--a party that never puts political expediency above its uncorruptable principles of wise economic stewardship--if not the radical foreign policy agenda of the Bush Administration. What with your thoughtful, centre-of-the-road policy proposals like: "modernize, or we bomb you [Middle Eastern] primitives back to the Stone Age;" your calls for preemptively striking Iranian uranium enrichment facilities and letting the ISRAELIS take the credit; your opposition of homosexual union; your laissez-faire attitude regarding Roe v. Wade (G*d only knows if you actually support the abstenance-centred family planning initiatives considering your recent rediscovery of Jesus these past few months); and your utter and vituperative contempt for the positions of people to your left, reason can only dictate that that you are, as you have claimed, a paragon of compassionate Republican moderation.
PS: For those of you puzzling over my use of "G*d", try starting a theological conversation with our newly converted Creationist buddy and you'll see what I mean.
As much as you decry the largesse doled out by Bush and the Republican Congress, the more you open your mouth the more you undermine your pretensions towards moderation. For, if fiscal responsibility is so important to you, if large government and its resultant excesses is such a travesty, what could be the source of your rabid support for the Republicans--a party that never puts political expediency above its uncorruptable principles of wise economic stewardship--if not the radical foreign policy agenda of the Bush Administration. What with your thoughtful, centre-of-the-road policy proposals like: "modernize, or we bomb you [Middle Eastern] primitives back to the Stone Age;" your calls for preemptively striking Iranian uranium enrichment facilities and letting the ISRAELIS take the credit; your opposition of homosexual union; your laissez-faire attitude regarding Roe v. Wade (G*d only knows if you actually support the abstenance-centred family planning initiatives considering your recent rediscovery of Jesus these past few months); and your utter and vituperative contempt for the positions of people to your left, reason can only dictate that that you are, as you have claimed, a paragon of compassionate Republican moderation.
PS: For those of you puzzling over my use of "G*d", try starting a theological conversation with our newly converted Creationist buddy and you'll see what I mean.
posted by Det. John Kimble at 14:26
11 Comments:
I am frankly shocked and dazzled by those comments that, supposedly, **I** have said???
Fed, you're not a creationis t are you? That's insane!
Tikkitorch,
well yes, unlike some of the extremist zealots and leftist hardliners/militants infesting this page while plotting collectively (ah ah, pun) against Yours Truly, as a True Moderate (*trademark), i don't find that Creationism is at loggerheads with the much beloved by our "progressive scientists" theory of evolution...
Murda Dawg has NEVER beaten Fedward Hyde at chess. I repeat: HE HAS NEVER BEATEN Fedward Hyde at chess.
-sincerely
Mohammad al Sahaf, Director of Strategy, Democratic Party, USA.
How is creationism not at loggerheads with evolutionary theory? One says that we originated from a primordial soup hundreds of millions of years ago, the other says we came from god 5000 years ago. I can't think of many theories that contradict each other more than that.
As a Moderate, i'm not surprised that you "cannot see it", my wingnut, extremist zealot friend.
So the Universe(s?) began with the Big Bang (?) at t=0.
How did we get to t=0? By "chance"?* Don't make me laugh.
*rethorical question: it is clear that G*d got us there.
"It is clear that G*d got us there."
How is this so clear?
So, you are saying that there is a higher force that set into motion the Big Bang, from which everything in the Universe originated. The problem is that is not Creationism, which is, as The Terror that Flaps in the Night points out, in direct contradiction to evolutionary theory because it states that man was put on Earth along with the beasts as they are now. The fossil record blows this theory out of the water.
Now, you will probably say, "you extremist zealots have mischaracterized my position. I am, in fact, not a creationist, which proves the point that I am a moderate." Fair enough, that would make you more of a deist. But if you only believe in a limited God that set into motion the heavens and the earth, why do you adhere to a strict Christian morality (though in your case we can't really say you adhere to it--invoke is a better word). This God of which you conceive, did he/she/it descend to Earth in the form of a man who cured the blind and sick, who walked on water, and who ultimately died for humanity's sins on the cross? If not, why do you subscribe to this particular belief system and no other?
How did we get to t=0? By "chance"?* Don't make me laugh.
I don’t know how we got to t=0, but just because I don’t know IT IN NO WAY CONSTITUTES PROOF FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. I might as well say a giant invisible penis floating in nothingness created the universe. I have about as much evidence for that and besides, it validates my… errr… inferiority complex.
Liukas, at the same time it does not disprove it. And what bothers me about many "evolutionary" theorists is that they commit my same fallacy, but backwards. "oh what, G*d whispered that to you while having tea last night", the dumbest of them "quip". lol
Julius, great post. I guess I am a deist then, I stand corrected. I shall still try not to pronounce His name in vain :p
I'm not sure if I agree with you there Fed. Yes there is a lot of speculation in science, but there is also some evidence for evolutionary theory. There is no evidence for God, and there never will be. Belief in science just isn’t as much of an act of faith as a belief in a higher power. That said, I don’t think there is anything necessarily wrong with that. Why try to put religion on the same level as science? Doesn’t that just cheapen religion? Shouldn’t religion be about faith above all else and not about whether one has a reason to believe the bible? Creationist attempts to rewrite science seem like a lack of faith to me, because they admit to feeling challenged by the discoveries of evolutionary theory. It seems better to me to live with the contradiction and interpret it as a test of faith. In short, read some Kierkegaard, he’ll straighten you out.
Post a Comment
<< Home