Re: same-sex marriage

At 11:02 AM 6/12/2006, gordon brown wrote:

>What does this have to do with Christian faith and science?
>
>On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Janice Matchett wrote:
>
>... "People and Nature Before Profits" .."

@ Probably the same as what these posts below have to do with
them. I'm still in the process of looking for your complaints about them:

"Science & faith are necessarily entwined with politics." ~ John
Burgeson - Tue Nov 30 2004 - 16:27:41 EST
http://www.asa3.org/archive/asa/200411/0222.html

"...thanks, in great part, to Karl Marx. Creation, an outgrowth of
chance, is of no consequence, according to Marx and his intellectual
heirs. Nature is lawless and directionless. Humanity must do the
creating -- progress is the _real_ truth and matter is the material
from which humans create a world worth living in. Humans are their
own creators, and human endeavors will transform, not merely shape or
"dominate" nature / the world. The "new" perspective, the false and
hubristic worship of "progress," that humans are destructive,
parasitic, nature's disease, is the cause of our own and creation's
destruction. ..." ~ Clare W. Parr Tue, 25 Apr 2006 18:21:59 -0500

"...But a significant finding talked up by historians of the 19th and
early 20th centuries is that the push toward more socialism in
government led to less private charity in England and America, the
bulk of which has always been church charity and, indeed, which
supplied more poor aid than government did. Unreached people would
no doubt find Christianity more relevant in their lives if it were
still the chief organ of charity. ... Thus Janice is quite right to
point out that a true Jubilee is a government-mandated structure; you
would have to convince
others who were not Christian to go along with it. .." ~ Chris
Barden Thu, 9 Mar 2006 11:11:57 -0400

"...I try to avoid polemical use of "liberal" or "conservative," ....
but the terms do have some value. I'd be surprised if you really
were puzzled about what classes of political convictions I was
referring to if I said that liberals were generally happier with
rulings of the Warren Court than were conservatives. .." ~ George
Murphy Fri, 23 Dec 2005 16:07:05 -0500

"...the ASA list is for discussions of relationships between science
and Christian faith. Your post, like some others of yours of a
political, economic or generally social nature, simply didn't fit
that description. .." George Murphy Sun, 28 May 2006 17:33:56 -0400

"...I've generally admired McCain & to put things in the most cynical
way hope that he'll just stiff the anti-evolutionists if he is
elected." ~ George Murphy Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:26:56 -0400

"..... I thought this [thread] would be on the number one
ecoterrorist Gale Norton." [President Bush's Secretary of the
Interior, 2001-2006
http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/norton-bio.html ] ~ Michael
Roberts Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:15:28 -0000

"...Perhaps the best way to illustrate Clinton's thinking is to lift
a few quotations. Speaking of professor Quigley, an admired college
professor, he wrote: "His second lasting insight concerned the key to
the greatness of Western civilization, and its continuing capacity
for reform and renewal. He said our civilization's success is rooted
in unique religious and philosophical convictions: that man is
basically good.. ...." Relive the 90s with this book [MY LIFE, by
Bill Clinton] . It reads well. ~
John W. Burgeson http://www.burgy.50megs.com/bill.htm
Re: 9/11 terrorist apologistics:

  "..why are we hated? While "Osama bin Laden and his ilk do not in
any way represent normal forms of behavioral resistance to those
policies of ours that are disliked," the fact remains that there are
a lot of people who would not take violent action against us who
still hate us. Why is that?.." ~ Cheers. John Burgeson (Burgy) Thu
Sep 20 2001 - 10:26:20 EDT http://www.asa3.org/archive/asa/200109/0184.html

"...This kind of garbage is ,,, the result of mendacity and a
determination to interpret everything the US does in the worst
possible light. To take one example from his long list, people like
this regarded the invasion of Grenada, incredibly, as an act of
aggression. The simple fact is that a handful of thugs murdered most
of the government of Grenada. The US went in and removed them from
power, returned control of Grenada to its people, and then poured in
financial aid. The press tried its best to ignore the fact that the
people of Grenada almost uniformly welcomed the U.S. action. Those
who call themselves "liberals" maintained that we should have let
them "work it out on their own" and similar nonsense. If I am flat on
my back in my house facing an armed intruder, and you are my
neighbor, I hope you won't wait for an engraved invitation to come
over and help me.

One of my favorite historians remarked that the essence of
geopolitics is making distinctions between different degrees of evil.
International politics is a rough game, with some very bad actors
always included. There are times when military action, crude
instrument that it is, is the least of the available evils. To refuse
to acknowledge this,
maintaining the moral equivalence of all the players, or worse, to
assert that the U.S., acting in our fumbling way to defend democracy
and legitimate liberty, is somehow the worst
because it is the most powerful, is not the road to the high moral
ground - it is the road to the lowest moral ground of all. The
European press is full of this kind of garbage, and I find it
sickening." ~ Preston G. Tue Sep 18 2001 - 20:24:36
EDT http://www.asa3.org/archive/asa/200109/0165.html

"..Bush has many ties to the radical right. That may explain why he
does not engage his brain very often.
See: http://www.burgy.50megs.com/ties.txt ~ jb - Sat 10/9/2004 4:47 PM
http://www.asa3.org/archive/asa/200410/01 48.html

"..Perhaps I am "left," I know that I am a "liberal." I define that
word as Walter Cronkite does, in these words: "I do not consider a
liberal necessarily to be a leftist. A liberal to me is one who ...
is unbeholden to any specific belief or party or group or person, but
makes up his or her mind on the basis of the facts and the
presentation of the facts at the time. That defines who I am. I have
never voted a party line. I vote on the individual and the issues."
-- Walter Cronkite, interview in TIME magazine, 11/3/2003, page 8." ~
Burgy - Friday, October 15, 2004 12:23
PM http://www.asa3.org/archive/asa/200410/02 48.html

"..This isn't to say that I'm going to vote for GWB: I'm not. But
just on the issue of abortion his position has more substance than
that of the man I will vote for - a man whose own religious tradition
gives him little excuse for the position he takes." ~ Shalom
George Sat Oct 09 2004 - 14:42:37
EDT http://www.asa3.org/archive/asa/200410/0 141.html

Here's one guy's conclusion:

"...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 Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:07:05 EST

~ Janice ... who reeeeally loves this one:

How do we include YEC within ASA when most of us (at least on the
list) have concluded that it borders on madness to believe that stuff
(at least when it is called "science")? What could they publish in
the ASA journal that any of us would allow should we ever be asked to
referee something? And how long would one of those ideologues last
on this list before they would either have to be "moderated" ...Most
all the ideologues who have posted here seem to wear some kind of
mask that obscures any rational discussion about the integrity of
their views. <grin> We, of course, __always__ practice what we
preach. </grin> ..." Wayne Dawsonzhu@aol.com Fri, 16 Dec 2005 22:01:57 EST
Received on Mon Jun 12 14:37:55 2006