RE: No more political propaganda ...

At 11:49 AM 3/23/2006, Dick Fischer wrote:

>I think that what one “is” or does for a living
>should be disassociated from what one believes
>in their heart, and whoever subscribes to our
>Christian beliefs and our statement of faith is
>welcome to be part of our discussion as long as
>what they post has relevance to science and/or
>Christianity. .... They do have debates on the
>Free Republic list on ID verses evolution
>similar to ours, though perhaps a little less
>charitable at times. So I don’t think where we
>get our information is all that
>important. Heck, some of you post comments from
>AIG and ICR, and those organizations are warts
>on the backside of Christianity. (In my humble opinion, of course.)

@ Thanks! I appreciate your opinion.

The bodily resurrection of Christ is one of the
"central" doctrines of the "Christian" faith that
ASA expects list participants to subscribe to, isn't it?

At 01:08 PM 3/23/2006, Lawrence Johnston wrote:

>Yes, Janice, you are herewith getting some
>thanks for helping to keep us on the straight
>and balanced path. I value the relaxed, just
>tell it like you see it attitude that seems to
>prevail here on ASA, and that can hardly fail to
>show our political leanings sometimes. Thank you for documenting this.

@ Thanks so much!! What I documented was merely
the tip of the iceberg of what's
available. Since the philosophical views /
positions of one particular political party in
the USA has been predominately espoused here day
in and day out for years, I'm glad to be among
those who are willing to provide some balance to it.

At 06:07 PM 3/23/2006, Fivefree@aol.com wrote:

>In a message dated 3/23/2006 11:02:00 A.M.
>Mountain Standard Time, igd.strachan@gmail.com writes:
>Well, I think Janice's recent post emphasises
>her agenda; pasting in copies of supposedly
>left-wing sympathetic posts to ASA that
>dangerous lefties such as George and Burgy have
>placed in there... One would have thought we were still in the McCarthy era!
>Bob Dylan's "Talking John Birch Paranoid Blues",
>which was first introduced to me by a good
>friend of mine (actually my "best man") who has
>been a life-long committed Christian and Socialist.
>The Liberal/Left leaning tilt of many here is
>apparent in their theology and not so subtle
>digs and everything short of cursing's given to
>conservative politicians and ministers as an
>aside posted on some other topic. Or, as a stand
>alone topic but with their stature in the group
>it is not questioned or disciplined. I speak of
>the 2 above specifically. I myself read or look
>at 25-50% of the postings as it is usually from
>a small group who interact mostly with, and
>agree with each other and/or the topic is not of
>interest to me. Others have been brow beaten and
>eventually leave the list. Great intellectual
>discourse. Agree amongst each other and
>castigate anyone who disagrees or introduces something new.
>
>The first comment in red above is characteristic
>of Liberal academia. When in doubt or challenged
>or threatened, scream McCarthyism. Loudly. Ward
>Churchill in Colorado has done the same thing.
>If past posts are brought up and prove a point a
>political prejudice then 'well done', I say.
>Most Liberals hate to be pinned as such. Most
>liberals, by the way, lose in the market place
>of ideas. In the church, where liberal churches
>are losing members VERY quickly (old ones are
>dying and young don't buy it), to politics,
>where destruction inevitably follows see Canada.
>Or France, the Socialist paradise.
>
>The second red comment is also typical of
>Liberals. Paranoia's of some extreme
>conservatives is ridiculed but not acknowledged
>in themselves with their own McCarthyistic
>hysterias. Sigh. I think Janice's post add some
>sparkle now and again and a different train of
>thought sometimes to an otherwise
>inter-congratulatory, inbreed group that mostly
>agrees with itself on most things. ...." ~ Jack Jackson

@ Thanks for your comments, I appreciate them.

I have a feeling you'll appreciate this comment
(and the link to the full article) too:

Why do some people look at a smoking ruin and see
the lives lost ­ the secretary standing by the
photocopier ­ and others see only confirmation of
their thesis on Kyoto? ~ Mark Steyn

"Churchill once said that "a fanatic is someone
who can't change his mind and won't change the
subject." 911 has made it easy to identify the
fanatics--they're the ones that attribute the
atrocity to the subject of their obsession. The
enviornmentalists blame it on our failure to
ratify Kyoto--nevermind that the planning for the
attacks predates Bush's announcement of his
candidacy. The race baiters (e.g., J Jackson, A
Sharpton) blame it on our walking out of the UN's
Durban Conference on Racism and yadda yadda
yadda. The New Leftists blame it on Amercian
Imperialism. Middle East peaceniks see it as the
consequence of the breakdown in
Isreali-Palestinian negotiations. To these people
everything--no matter how horrendous or
unrelated--comes back to the only issue that matters to them.

Relatedly, the historian Paul Johnson noted that
intellectuals who speak about humanity in the
abstract (e.g., Rousseau, Marx, Lenin) almost
always treat real human beings with utter
contempt and disrespect. The complete lack of
empathy for individuals and the elevation of
abstract cause over the suffering of real people
is just a character trait possessed by
collectivists from time immemorial. Stalin said
something to the effect that the death of one
person is a tragedy, but the death of millions is
a statistic. Steyn shouldn't be surprised at the
reactions of those people. To expect them to
behave any differently is as futile as expecting
whales to
fly." http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/539538/posts?page=54#54

Full 10/04/2001 article:

<http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/539538/posts>Mark
Steyn: People who hate people
The Spectator (U.K.) ^ | 10/06/2001 | Mark Steyn
Posted on 10/04/2001 11:29:29 AM EDT by Pokey78
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/539538/posts

At 09:25 PM 3/23/2006, Terry M. Gray wrote:

>"..Let's do keep in mind that expressing one's
>disgust with someone else's political views as
>they may leak out from time to time is as
>off-topic and inappropriate as the initial leak.
>I'm not going to tell Janice that she can't be
>a conservative and a Christian and have strong
>opinions about various of the things that come
>up on this list. I will echo Ted's comments and
>encourage Janice (and all) to listen, reflect,
>learn, engage, etc. things that I'm sure she
>values as much as the rest of us. Who knows, somebody might learn something
>from Janice (or something she points us to).
>Most of us in the ASA believe in the wholistic
>character of our knowledge and it's not
>that easy to compartmentalize stuff. So while
>we do encourage our group to have limited scope
>(faith-science) we all know that both of
>those areas of our thinking impinge on the rest of our thinking. ..."

@ Thanks for your comments, Terry.

FYI - I've already been "listening, reflecting,
and learning" things for the several number of
years that I've been lurking here and eventually did decide to "engage".

Jack Jackson spoke of the ".. small group who
interact mostly with, and agree with each other .
...Others have been brow beaten and eventually
leave the list. Great intellectual discourse.
Agree amongst each other and castigate anyone who
disagrees or introduces something new.

During my lurking days, I, too, watched this
"small group" ridicule and intimidate others into
either silence, or leaving the list.

That won't work with me.

At 09:45 AM 3/24/2006, Debbie Mann wrote:

>"..Janice strikes me as doing a classic 'woman lacking confidence' pattern.

@ Aside from the fact that all my friends would
laugh - long and loud -- at your "analysis" of
me, I hope that you and the others really do
believe that. There's nothing I like better than being underestimated. :)

>You guys are all guys. Had you all been women
>(or had a couple of you had a stronger feminine
>side), you probably would have responded earlier
>and less intensely and Janice would have learned and grown......"

@ You must have missed all my references to the
feminized male Castrati - either that, or it went
right over your head.. That you think I'd
prefer guys to exhibit a "stronger feminine side" is hilarious beyond comment!

~ Janice
Received on Sun Mar 26 22:55:49 2006