Evolution, Politics and Religion

Discussions related to politics and social issues
(the impact of religion on society)

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby romansh » Sun Mar 01, 2015 2:56 pm

Bill wrote: Au contraire - we have heard the argument "the right to know" trotted out by all and sundry. That you personally do not make such a claim does not make it a straw man fallacy - it simply shows that you disavow yourself of the majority position on this issue.

I am having trouble finding this all and sundry. A quick google search seems to find a few such claims.
Bill wrote:I may believe that asking "have you stopped beating your wife yet?" is an equally valid question. That I believe it is valid does not give me "the right" to ask it. Saying that candidates are free to ignore such a probe seems to highlight that I had no right to start off with.

I have absolutely no problem answering such a question
I have never beaten my wife.
And this will highlight the inane question. But then again whether I beat my wife or not has little bearing on whether I can deliver sound public policy.
Bill wrote:But if we are to have an acid test on whether a candidate's belief system is one that makes them unfit to serve office, would you care to explain how that works - other than your personal preference on such a matter?

The ability of a person to answer a difficult question honestly is not relevant to public office?
Bill wrote:At this stage all we have is that you don't want to elect anyone who does not believe in evolution. That tells us something about you, but very little about how we should modify the electoral process so that your way of thinking will prevail upon everyone else.

You are not talking about modifying the electoral process. You are talking about how another person (other than you) should assess the suitability of candidate. I personally think it is a valid question ... if nothing else it gives me a sense of how honest the politician is.
one of the fruits from the google search
http://www.alternet.org/media/why-publi ... -evolution
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
Douglas Adams
User avatar
romansh
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4671
Images: 23
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:46 pm
Location: BC/US border - in the woods
Affiliation: Agnostic

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby Bill » Sun Mar 01, 2015 3:23 pm

romansh wrote:. But then again whether I beat my wife or not has little bearing on whether I can deliver sound public policy.

No dots to link wife beating to lack of ability to deliver sound public policy. I am indeed forced to agree with you, which is why I posed such an inane and pointless question - simply to show that pointless and inane questions are ones that people have no real "right" to ask. But I am sure you will agree that we would not want to willingly elect a wife beater, so perhaps it is a question that we put to every candidate with a demand for an honest and truthful answer. (Heaven help any candidate whose wife is deeply into "50 Shades of Grey": but - hey - how can anyone be relied upon to deliver sound public policy if they are so lacking in judgment as to marry a kinky wife?

The issue you relentless go to lengths to avoid is that there is also a lack of dots to link lack of believe in evolution to lack of ability to deliver sound public policy. I concede that the Tea Party has a lack of ability to deliver sound public party, but I also have an inkling that that has absolutely nothing to do with evolution, but the need to pay back the puppet masters who purchased their election.

All I see in your case is that you have a personal aversion to those who do not have the same belief system as yourself. Plus, the tenet that everyone knows we have the innate right to ask any question we want regardless of how irrelevant the question is to the making of public policy, as well, too.
The only reality is the moment that we call "Now".
= = = =
We evolved to seek dinner, not to seek the truth - Mark Whatever
User avatar
Bill
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5027
Images: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: South Orange, CA
Blog: View Blog (8)
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby Bill » Sun Mar 01, 2015 3:33 pm

romansh wrote: A quick google search seems to find a few such claims.

"Even if accompanied by a picture and a quotation, you must not believe everything you read on the internet" - Abraham Lincoln.
The only reality is the moment that we call "Now".
= = = =
We evolved to seek dinner, not to seek the truth - Mark Whatever
User avatar
Bill
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5027
Images: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: South Orange, CA
Blog: View Blog (8)
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby Bill » Sun Mar 01, 2015 4:03 pm

romansh wrote:one of the fruits from the google search
http://www.alternet.org/media/why-publi ... -evolution

Ah - so the Media Matters for America PAC is of the opinion that a lack of belief in evolution is grounds for concern. The Media Matters for America? Who they?

Media Matters for America (MMfA) is a politically progressive media watchdog and lobbying group with a stated mission of "comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media"


Eric Boehlert writes for MM for A, And he shows that evolution is good science and anyone who is not convinced of it is probably a rat fink bum who should be run out of town. (My interpretation, not his specific words)

He does not bother to connect any dots either, since he thinks he is dealing with the self evident truth that all right wing candidates are incapable of making good public policy: the question is designed to weed out such right wing candidates even if they wear the clothing of more liberal, and therefore more right minded, thinkers.
The only reality is the moment that we call "Now".
= = = =
We evolved to seek dinner, not to seek the truth - Mark Whatever
User avatar
Bill
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5027
Images: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: South Orange, CA
Blog: View Blog (8)
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby romansh » Sun Mar 01, 2015 4:06 pm

Bill wrote:No dots to link wife beating to lack of ability to deliver sound public policy. I am indeed forced to agree with you, which is why I posed such an inane and pointless question - simply to show that pointless and inane questions are ones that people have no real "right" to ask. But I am sure you will agree that we would not want to willingly elect a wife beater, so perhaps it is a question that we put to every candidate with a demand for an honest and truthful answer.

Call me old fashioned, but I would not vote for a wife beater no matter how good his policies appear to be.

The issue you relentless go to lengths to avoid is that there is also a lack of dots to link lack of believe in evolution to lack of ability to deliver sound public policy. I concede that the Tea Party has a lack of ability to deliver sound public party, but I also have an inkling that that has absolutely nothing to do with evolution, but the need to pay back the puppet masters who purchased their election.

The issue you avoid is it is a test of an honest politician.
At least by the evolution metric McCain and Romney were honest (probably) when answering the evolution litmus test.
The link had link to Senator Obama's position on was the Earth made in six days. I disagreed with his answer, but I still would have voted for him.

Bill wrote:All I see in your case is that you have a personal aversion to those who do not have the same belief system as yourself. Plus, the tenet that everyone knows we have the innate right to ask any question we want regardless of how irrelevant the question is to the making of public policy, as well, too.

If you had two candidates who were ostensibly identical in terms of ability and policy, but one believed in evolution and the other believed the Earth is six thousand years old, who would you vote for?
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
Douglas Adams
User avatar
romansh
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4671
Images: 23
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:46 pm
Location: BC/US border - in the woods
Affiliation: Agnostic

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby Bill » Sun Mar 01, 2015 4:16 pm

romansh wrote:At least by the evolution metric McCain and Romney were honest (probably) when answering the evolution litmus test.

Who, when and where was it decided that evolution was a litmus test, and ditto that it was one that every right wing candidate was required to undergo?

And why was the electorate not consulted?

I demand a referendum on this issue, not some pundits deciding for me on my behalf without my permission.

For we all agree that the more important question of wife beating should be center stage. That question eliminates liberals as will as right wingers, and is therefore far more fairer. At the moment it does seem that it is more important to identify and eliminate bible literalists from public office (despite a lack of reasoning behind the decision) than scum bags who should be run out of town for their abusive psychological personalities.

So - if you had two candidates who appear identical in every respect: which matters more to you - that one is wife beater or that the other has faith?
The only reality is the moment that we call "Now".
= = = =
We evolved to seek dinner, not to seek the truth - Mark Whatever
User avatar
Bill
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5027
Images: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: South Orange, CA
Blog: View Blog (8)
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby romansh » Sun Mar 01, 2015 4:18 pm

Bill wrote:So - if you had two candidates who appear identical in every respect: which matters more to you - that one is wife beater or that the other has faith?

Please have a go at answering my question.
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
Douglas Adams
User avatar
romansh
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4671
Images: 23
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:46 pm
Location: BC/US border - in the woods
Affiliation: Agnostic

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby Bill » Sun Mar 01, 2015 4:33 pm

Your question is predicated on me asking a question that I never asked. And would never ask. And I still have nothing to tell me that a lack of belief in evolution is proof positive of a lack of ability to make public policy. We are at an impasse.

Unless, of course, you are actually able to produce a) two candidates of identical qualities, b) the knowledge that one of them has a faith based element in his belief system and c) a case that shows such a belief is a fatal flaw in his psychological make up. Otherwise our impasse remains resolutely locked.

I really am not impressed with the "everyone knows" logic that has so far been proffered to support your position. By asking me to make the same irrational decision as you would not legitimize it. It would just show that everyone is capable of making irrational decisions.
The only reality is the moment that we call "Now".
= = = =
We evolved to seek dinner, not to seek the truth - Mark Whatever
User avatar
Bill
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5027
Images: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: South Orange, CA
Blog: View Blog (8)
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby romansh » Sun Mar 01, 2015 11:24 pm

Bill wrote:Your question is predicated on me asking a question that I never asked. And would never ask. And I still have nothing to tell me that a lack of belief in evolution is proof positive of a lack of ability to make public policy. We are at an impasse.

No it is predicated on you knowing that one of two otherwise ostensibly identical candidates believes in a six thousand year old Earth.

Now I understand that by your axioms it would be irrational to choose one over the other, but I am asking who would you choose?

Be honest Bill, who would you choose?
"That's right!" shouted Vroomfondel, "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
Douglas Adams
User avatar
romansh
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4671
Images: 23
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:46 pm
Location: BC/US border - in the woods
Affiliation: Agnostic

Re: Evolution, Politics and Religion

Postby Bill » Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:23 am

You are beginning to sound like Chapabel with his constant "sins:" nag. He would not let up until others told him how annoying he was.

We are at an impasse.

Whether a candidate believes in evolution or not is irrelevant to me whether he is able to make sound decisions over public policy, and you have not given me a single ratiional reason why I should join you in your witch hunt,

So - please give me some rational or leave me in peace.

Thank you,
The only reality is the moment that we call "Now".
= = = =
We evolved to seek dinner, not to seek the truth - Mark Whatever
User avatar
Bill
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5027
Images: 1
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm
Location: South Orange, CA
Blog: View Blog (8)
Affiliation: Agnostic
Country: United States

PreviousNext

Return to Political and Social Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron