Pharyngula

Iowa allows same-sex marriages!

That Iowa. The state south of us: rural farm country, relatively conservative (well, maybe more moderate than conservative), and yet their supreme court has surprisingly made a strong and progressive decision. The Iowa Supreme Court has struck down laws prohibiting gay marriage as unconstitutional.

Polk County District Judge Robert Hanson found that the law violated the Iowa Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection, and hurt gay and lesbian couples “in numerous tangible and intangible” ways

“Civil marriage in Iowa is the only gateway to an extensive legal structure that protects a married couple’s relationship and family in and outside the state,” Hanson ruled in Des Moines.

“Iowa reserves an unparalleled array of rights, obligations and benefits to married couples and their families, privileging married couples as a financial and legal unit and stigmatizing same-sex couples.”

Wow. I am impressed with our neighboring state. Can we get this kind of sensible support for equality in place here in Minnesota, too? How about nation-wide?

Comments

  1. #1 BAllanJ
    April 3, 2009

    WooWoo… congrats Iowa! Minesota must be next, sandwiched between Iowa and those of us in Ontario as you are.

  2. #2 MAJeff, OM
    April 3, 2009

    OK, Minnesota. You’ve got to catch up with the Iowegians now!

    I’m originally from Iowa. Born in Orange City. Elementary school and College in Ames. I am so fucking proud today. And I’m also enjoying the though of all my right-wing Dutch Reformed relatives in Sioux County freaking the fuck out.

  3. #3 Anon
    April 3, 2009

    Yeah, well… I bet god will smite Iowa with tornadoes for this. Sometime this year. In some random location.

  4. #4 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 3, 2009

    First, we have to see if it is going to survive the shit storm that groups like the AFA, Mormons, Catholic Church and other arch defenders of “traditional” marriage are going to bring. Sadly, I foresee them try to put this to a vote like what was done in California and Prop 8.

    Though that could be interesting. I think that many GLBT activists learned from that fiasco.

  5. #5 JD
    April 3, 2009

    It’s all that hybrid corn.

  6. #6 Funnyguts
    April 3, 2009

    Awesome for Iowa, but I’m not optimistic that it will last. If California reoutlawed it, why should we expect the more conservative state to be sane about it?

  7. #7 Adrian-T
    April 3, 2009

    Great news – am really pleased to hear this. It seems reason, decency, and the moral obligation to show dignity to all have prevailed.

    This must really stick the finger up at the fanatics (Alliance Defense Fund, Focus on the Family, Tony Perkins, crackpot Ex-Gay ministries and others) who have used religion to attack LGBT people. Hopefully their days are finally numbered.

    PS It’s also high time the ludicrous Don’t Ask Don’t Tell law was abolished too. It seems the Obama administration is going to shelve this inhumane legislation…

  8. #8 MAJeff, OM
    April 3, 2009

    Janine,

    It’s MUCH harder to amend the Iowa constitution. It has to go through the legislature (two sessions) and the legislative leadership supports marriage equality. There will be nothing coming out of the lege this session.

    I think this one’s safe.

  9. #9 withheld
    April 3, 2009

    The referendum to amend the state constitution begins in 3…2…1…

  10. #10 hje
    April 3, 2009

    Re: “I bet god will smite Iowa with tornadoes for this.”

    God will ironically punish Iowa by sending hurricanes, tornadoes, and a drought to ravage the Bible-believing South. So watch out Georgia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, etc! That’s how he rolls.

  11. #11 Walton
    April 3, 2009

    Just in case anyone has any doubt: I support this decision.

  12. #12 Janne
    April 3, 2009

    Sweden just approved same-sex marriages, with every party except the Christian Democrats (big surprise) in favour:

    http://janneinosaka.blogspot.com/2009/04/bit-of-good-news-from-sweden.html

  13. #13 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 3, 2009

    MAJeff, thank you for clarifying that. But I cannot help but to be paranoid that all of the groups I that named are working towards a challenge to this.

  14. #14 Greg F.
    April 3, 2009

    I wouldn’t bet that it’s over yet. You know someone’s going to challenge it and keep gay marriage in legal limbo. The whole separate but equal approach to gay marriage simply doesn’t work because civil unions don’t give the same benefits as marriage, i.e. shared life insurance, power to make decisions about each others’ healthcare during a time of emergency, taxes, etc.

  15. #15 Vic
    April 3, 2009

    This surprises me (but in a good way, of course). Way to go, Iowa. Now MN must play catch up.

  16. #16 Walton
    April 3, 2009

    I believe Iowa has judicial retention elections – is there not a danger that some of the supreme court justices could be voted out of office as payback for this, if the religious lobby gets mobilised?

  17. #17 MAJeff, OM
    April 3, 2009

    From the Iowa Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader:

    Thanks to today?s decision, Iowa continues to be a leader in guaranteeing all of our citizens? equal rights.

    The court has ruled today that when two Iowans promise to share their lives together, state law will respect that commitment, regardless of whether the couple is gay or straight.

    When all is said and done, we believe the only lasting question about today?s events will be why it took us so long.

  18. #18 Steve in MI
    April 3, 2009

    Woo Hoo! Only a few more kilometers of progress, and my dream will be within reach: opening a specialty wedding chapel across the street from Westboro Baptist Church.

    Hey, a guy can dream…

  19. #19 Zar
    April 3, 2009

    Thank you, Walton. We all care deeply about your feelings. I was waiting with bated breath.

    (Also: yay Iowa!!!)

  20. #20 Anonymous Coward
    April 3, 2009

    @”Iowa reserves an unparalleled array of rights, obligations and benefits to married couples and their families, privileging married couples as a financial and legal unit”: If this is true, then singles are being unfairly treated too. When are they going to fix that?

  21. #21 Becca Stareyes
    April 3, 2009

    As a former Nebraskan, I have to say, go Iowa! Here’s wishing that lots of happy couples will come visit you (and probably end up spending money on weddings and stuff, making people in the state happy).

    Maybe the three years it’ll take before the fundamentalists can even hope to get an amendment in the constitution will convince everyone else that, hey, same-sex marriage isn’t a scary bogeyman at all.

  22. #22 Feynmaniac
    April 3, 2009

    Walton,

    Just in case anyone has any doubt: I support this decision.

    Oh good. My first thought was : What does Walton think about this?

  23. #23 aratina
    April 3, 2009

    Happy Day! I liked gay Democratic State Senator Matt McCoy’s reaction in The Des Moines Register:

    As he saw a stream of grim-faced activists from the Supreme Court passing through security at the Iowa Capitol, he said: ?The God squad?s coming in the door now.?

  24. #24 Louis
    April 3, 2009

    But wait, this means that my marriage is over since I have a) been to Iowa and b) am heterosexual and married. Right?

    Ok perhaps not then!

    Well done Iowa! I’ve long thought that those darned homosexuals getting away without mothers-in-law was too good for them. Why shouldn’t they suffer like the rest of us?
    ;-)

    Louis

  25. #25 Alverant
    April 3, 2009

    As another Iowan-born, I’m happy about this decision. I know the conservatives will throw a fit about “activist judges”, but the court did what it is suppose to do, strike down a law that is unconstitutional. A sound legal decision that should be reflected in any state that claims to promote equality among all citizens.

  26. #26 Prillotashekta
    April 3, 2009

    This decision IS the big news here in the Land-O-Corn.
    Not only was the ban shot down, the Iowa Supreme Count was unanimous in its decision!

    On an interesting sidenote, Iowa seems to have a sort of split personality when it comes to the political spectrum. The northwest corner is staunchly Republican, while the southeast around Davenport and Iowa City (where I am) leans more toward the Democrats.
    If you could see a map of county-by-county results for the past few presidential elections, the northwest would be bright red, and the southeast deep blue, blending into each other with the balance point somewhere around Des Moines.

  27. #27 Xena
    April 3, 2009

    I’m so proud to be an Iowan right now.

    And don’t worry, god smited us last year with tornados and floods. I think he was pissed about california. He’ll need to pick another random location to smite for our actions this year.

  28. #28 the helvetica scenario
    April 3, 2009

    Possibly the best part: the decision was unanimous.

  29. #29 Desert Son
    April 3, 2009

    Congratulations, Iowa!

    No kings,

    Robert

  30. #30 Dianne
    April 3, 2009

    My probably overoptimistic feeling is that if this ruling can stand in any state it would be Iowa. Iowans are big into fairness. Consider their voting district boundries and how they were drawn.

  31. #31 Sarah in Chicago
    April 3, 2009

    I said this on another blog about this … but, you know that scene in ‘Mars Attacks!’ where the Martians have their heads explode inside their helmets due to yodelling music being played?

    This is how I imagine the bigot when equality like this happens :)

    This is wonderful, wonderful news … yay Iowa!!! I do think this means a lot being a midwestern state for the first time.

    Now we need to keep our fingers crossed for Vermont, New Jersey and New York (and California, of course).

  32. #32 MikeMa
    April 3, 2009

    Almost makes me wish I was from Iowa. Very well done. Sanity and compassion prevail.

  33. #33 MissPrism
    April 3, 2009

    Wonderful news! And in a year or two nobody will understand what all the bigoted fuss was about.

  34. #35 Dahan
    April 3, 2009

    Fuck yeah!

    So Iowa ups the ante in the long held border-battle. Come on fellow Minnesotans, we can’t let them have bragging rights for being more rational and less bigoted than us.

  35. #36 Qwerty
    April 3, 2009

    The latest I’ve heard on the same-sex marriage in Minnesota is that there is talk that the opposite sex language may be taken out of our marriage laws which would then permit same-sex marriage.

  36. #37 FishyFred
    April 3, 2009

    Awesome! Where can I see the fundie outrage? Has the AFA come out with a statement yet?

  37. #38 Candy
    April 3, 2009

    Iowa is actually pretty progressive, if you leave out the western part of the state, which I sincerely wish we could cede to Nebraska. Heck, my state senator, Matt McCoy, is an openly gay man, and the senator just east of my district is an African-American Muslim. One of our US senators is the genuinely liberal Tom Harkin. And don’t forget, Obama won the caucuses here handily. (Also, we were one of the few states who went for Dukakis, way back when.)

    Iowa doesn’t have the proposition/ballot initiative crap here, so the California thing won’t happen here. All the xtianists can hope for is a constitutional amendment, and it’s not going to happen. We have a majority Dem legislature and a Dem governor – although he’s certainly not a progressive Dem – and I don’t see them doing anything whack anytime soon.

    Yay Iowa! W00t!

  38. #39 the kardinal
    April 3, 2009

    As a fellow Iowan, we can now proudly claim originating the following:
    - Happy Joe’s Taco Pizza
    - Buffalo Bill Cody
    - Rosanne Barr
    - Equal rights for same sex marriages in the Midwest

  39. #40 mus
    April 3, 2009

    YAAAY! one more small step towards equality!

  40. #41 Martin
    April 3, 2009

    Yeah, well… I bet god will smite Iowa with tornadoes for this. Sometime this year. In some random location.

    A random location, like…. Indiana or Wisconsin. ‘Cause, you know, He works in mysterious ways.

  41. #42 Evangelatheist
    April 3, 2009

    I don’t know if anyone else is into reading the opinion, but it does a fine job of explaining the legal/logical reasoning that led to their conclusion. (Opinion available at http://www.desmoinesregister.com/assets/pdf/D213209243.PDF) I particularly like that they address the woo woo crowd and discount their arguments.

  42. #43 HenryS
    April 3, 2009

    Posted by: MissPrism | April 3, 2009 12:18 PM

    Wonderful news! And in a year or two nobody will understand what all the bigoted fuss was about.
    ***********
    I suspect the next move by the homophobes will be to push for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage on the 2010 election ballot.

  43. #44 Sarah in Chicago
    April 3, 2009

    FishyFred @37 -

    Where can I see the fundie outrage?

    here you go:

    http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/iowa_supreme_court_rules_in_favor_of_marriage_equality/

    Pam Spaulding has a post up showing the reaction from AFTAH and Free Republic … it’s a wonderful combination of religious insanity and “I’ve failed Civics 101″ …

  44. #45 Brock
    April 3, 2009

    Now they just need to stop calling it marriage (which has religious connotations that the state should stay away from) and stop giving people benefits for it (which is unfair to single folks, dammit).

    In fact I’m not sure official “partnership” is good for much (from the state perspective) besides having a default owner for your belongings if you croak.

    Am I missing something?

  45. #46 Jim Cahill
    April 3, 2009

    Ah yes, I love my state! Does this make us more progressive than California?

  46. #47 Alex
    April 3, 2009

    There go them damn gays again advancing their agenda…towards equality.

  47. #48 GMacs
    April 3, 2009

    I think the AFA died of cardiac arrest when they found out.

    I tried to find their reaction, so I tried to find their sight. It won’t come up. Not even the page about the “homosexual agenda“.

  48. #49 Martin
    April 3, 2009

    The usual suspects are already pouting:

    “It’s, quite frankly, a disaster,” said Brian English, a spokesman for the Iowa Family Policy Center. “Obviously, we’re extremely disappointed. We’re saddened, perhaps a little bit surprised in the unanimous decision that the court handed down.”

  49. #50 ???
    April 3, 2009

    But what about same-person marriages?

  50. #51 Qwerty
    April 3, 2009

    FishyFred: No, the AFA hasn’t come down yet. (I just checked their website.) They’re still outraged that Pepsi sponsored a “Family Guy” episode that suggested God hates homosexuals! So, go drink a Pepsi.

    The FRC (Family Research Council) has warned that Iowa’s move to legalize same-sex marriage will lead to the “end of democracy as we know it.”

    I would kind of agree as same-sex marriage would make our country MORE democratic.

  51. #52 NinjaDebugger
    April 3, 2009

    Hey now, like the justices pointed out in their decision, Iowa has a long history of being ahead of the curve on extending equal protection to new groups. They don’t always end up on the right side, but they do tend to be ahead of the curve. Hell, they banned segregation almost a hundred years before Brown v Board of Education.

    And the last paragraph of the decision is golden. Separate but equal is crap, marriage for everybody!

  52. #53 King
    April 3, 2009

    Congratulations, Iowa!

    No Roberts,

    King

  53. #54 JimNorth
    April 3, 2009

    The acronym for IOWA used to be “I Owe the World an Apology”. Today it stands for “I Owned the World All-righty”.

    (married in Iowa the day Chernobyl blew up and still living in this suddenly wonderful state)

  54. #55 KemaTheAtheist
    April 3, 2009

    I can’t help but be incredibly happen to hear things like this, as MAJeff posted earlier, come from a politician:

    Thanks to today?s decision, Iowa continues to be a leader in guaranteeing all of our citizens? equal rights.
    The court has ruled today that when two Iowans promise to share their lives together, state law will respect that commitment, regardless of whether the couple is gay or straight.

    When all is said and done, we believe the only lasting question about today?s events will be why it took us so long.

    Double bacon today for all those Iowanians who supported that and made it happen. It’s just so nice to see that people are finally starting to get it.

    They will be required however to give back quadrouple bacon if they pull a California about it.

    For now, I’m staying optomistic that finally things are going to start changing and the extremist views on social issues will fade into non-existance only to be mentioned as the ass-end of a joke.

  55. #56 AnthonyK
    April 3, 2009

    This is very good news. However, I am confused. Is inter-species marriage also legal in Iowa, or is it now banned? And if so, will special legislation be needed for pigeeons, say, to legally breed, or we will revert to nature wed in tooth and claw?
    Perahaps an Iowan legan-eagle could enlighten me.

  56. #57 Brock
    April 3, 2009

    (following previous on partnership) Oh and emergency healthcare decisions are useful when you’re incapacitated. I meant that too.

  57. #58 becca
    April 3, 2009

    IOWA? Idiots out Wandering Aimlessly? They beat us to gay marriage?
    Curse you pennsyltucky… CURSE YOU!!!

  58. #59 AnthonyK
    April 3, 2009

    Damn, I must remeber that “legal” is never far away from “l”

  59. #60 MissPrism
    April 3, 2009

    HenryS: yes, that may well be the bigots’ next move. But because of court rulings like these, time is not on their side: after gay marriage has been legal for a while, and the sky hasn’t fallen, and the streets aren’t littered with corpses, and nobody’s married their dog – well, all the scaremongering seems a bit stupid in retrospect.

    At least, that’s been the general pattern in most European countries. Maybe it would work differently in the US, though?

  60. #61 DGKnipfer
    April 3, 2009

    Huraaaa!!! Never thought my home state would manage this great leap in my life. My next trip home later this month is going to be interesting. I get to watch my youngest sister have fits over things she doesn’t think should be seen in public because she might have to explain them to her kids. Maybe I should tell her I?m Bi just to see if her head explodes.

  61. #62 Brock
    April 3, 2009

    AnthonyK: Um, and what is that inane comment about interspecies marriage supposed to contribute to this post?

  62. #63 Sgt. Obvious
    April 3, 2009

    This is wonderful news, but now I have a dilemma. On one hand, the “marrying sheep” joke is homophobic and asinine. On the other hand, this is Iowa we’re talking about, so it’s very hard to resist.

  63. #64 Endor
    April 3, 2009

    #31 – that was beautiful.

    Very good news. Anything that flies in the face of bigots is good news.

  64. #65 MikeM
    April 3, 2009

    Too bad we can’t have that kind of rational thinking in California. It’d prevent situations like this.

  65. #66 OrbitalMike
    April 3, 2009

    Hey, what about polyamorous / group marriages?

    Why can’t I have a wife and marry our live-in girlfriend? (besides the headache of 2 mother-in-laws)?

  66. #67 Ian Monroe
    April 3, 2009

    I’m going to move to Iowa in a few months, so this makes be quite proud since I’ll shortly be from the state. :) A day for all Midwesterners to be proud, this is a bit of plains progressivism nostalgia.

    Hopefully California is even more ashamed of itself after it was just shown how to conduct law by Iowa. I watched much of the Iowa oral arguments so I wasn’t surprised much by this ruling (though I admittedly thought they may have thrown it back to a lower court and drawn things out more).

    The recent court case in California… I could only watch like 5 minutes, it was going so horribly.

  67. #68 AH
    April 3, 2009

    @51: Maybe by “the end of democracy as we know it,” they really mean the democracy where they’re the majority that always gets their way? So there’s a half-truth to saying “democracy as we know it.”

  68. #69 Endor
    April 3, 2009

    “Why can’t I have a wife and marry our live-in girlfriend? (besides the headache of 2 mother-in-laws)?”

    more importantly, why can’t I have a husband and marry my mil’s pool boy?

  69. #70 www.10ch.org
    April 3, 2009

    Clearly the tide is turning, and will never turn back.

  70. #71 www.10ch.org
    April 3, 2009

    Clearly the tide is turning, and will never turn back.

  71. #72 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 3, 2009

    I know Sarah_In_Chicago already mentioned Pam’s House Blend. But your your entertainment/horror, here is the list of Freeper quotes that Pam has dived in for.

    We live in a Judicial Tyranny.

    This is for all of those that said the Family Protection Act was not necessary. How’s it feel to have three judges spit in the eyes of the overwhelming majority.
    3 posted on Friday, April 03, 2009 10:12:47 AM by Pietro

    Iowa

    Iowa?

    IOWA?

    This is fully expected in the nutbar places like New England and California. But Iowa? This is about as disturbing a news article as I could have ever imagined.

    Prop 8…make it a constitutional change and the black robes can’t be run by the lavender mafia. California doesn’t do a lot right, but we got it correct here. (this time)

    so is this saying that homo’s can get married and does this not have a way for an appeal ?

    could the people of that state do a constitutional amendment like we did here in FL and would that reverse this judges ruling which is pathetic

    Is everyone alarmed yet? They should be.

    Was this based on the state or federal constitution?

    Ergo polygamy and everything else must now be allowed, too.

    could the people of that state do a constitutional amendment like we did here in FL and would that reverse this judges ruling which is pathetic There was one. The black robe mafia just ruled it unconstitutional and threw it out.

    …..but I think they ruled that is was a violation of the UNITED STATES Constitutional rights…….so a local Constitutional change is irrelevant.

    Prop 8 will be overturned by the end of the year. It will be overturned by boomer judges and politicians like Jerry Brown who just do what they want. People don’t change unless they have to.

    That is what happens when Iowa has governors like Vilsack and Culver appointing the Supreme Court. Iowa was the second state to have gay marriage, after Massachusetts. Both were imposed by the courts.

    Hey wasn’t Iowa ….BO’s claim to fame !! Can we scratch Iowa off the map ??

    State Constitution. Haven’t read the whole opinion yet, but in discussing the separation of powers they do say that “the power of the constitution flows from the people, and the people of Iowa retain the ultimate power to shape it over time.” To me that means they are saying that if the people amend the state Constitution banning gay marriage, they will be bound by that amendment.

    No way in hell a State Supreme Court ruled the US Constitution allows gay marriage.

    Courts in middle-of-the-road states can be taken over, too.

    Just means a constitutional amendment for the state.

    State supreme courts rule on state constitutions, at least in most cases. Federal courts deal with the U.S. Constitution.

    I have no problems with gays getting married. They just have to marry someone of the opposite sex, just like normal people. No special privileges for them!

    More judges added to the ‘people to horsewhip’ list.

    It’s soon coming time. Imagine a subset of the current landmass of the USSA establishing a Constitutional government where:

    Only the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are ratified.
    Anyone currently serving in a federal gov’t position is banned for life from the gov’t.
    All federal laws are repealed, ready for Congress #1 of the New USA republic.

    True. They can even have a 100% gay marriage…a queer can marry a carpet muncher!

    In Iowa, an amendment to the state Constitution has to be proposed by 2 successive legislatures before it goes to a referendum. This means that a referendum cannot happen until 2011 at the earliest. To make matters worse, the Dems control the state legislature and will likely block any vote on a constitutional amendment.

    Quite right…courts in smaller, less populous states can be taken over actually more easily than in bigger states….witness the town in I think it was Oregon where a bunch of Moonies moved to, enmasse, and then had the votes to elect their own people to the town’s elected offices and so took over the town govt.

    And yes, the regular manner in which one or two non-elected “judges” (“czars”?) trump the will of the people (shown via voting results) as well as ursurp legislative powers that do not belong to the judiciary show the USA is much more the fascist dictatorship than the kind of govt of the people it was founded to be.

    We could call the future of the USA the “4th Reich” or some such…USSA?

    Especially with the legislatures failing to defend their turf.

    Well past time to move the presidential primaries out of Iowa.

    State Courts frequently rule on rights under the U.S. Constitution and Federal Courts have ruled that not only do states have the right to do so but such cases cannot be removed to federal court just because the Constitutional right being ruled on is a right under the U.S. Constitution. These decisions can be appealed to SCOTUS.

    Amend their Constitution to outlaw it. Same as all the other states are doing.

    There is no justice in the land.

    HELLO Constitutional Amendment!

    How long will Americans who love God and one of His best creations, the original US Constitution and its Bill of Rights, remain passive to the corruption of America? How long will we citizens stand by while the left socializes the economy and society? How long will we tolerate their massive spending and debt which makes us and our unborn children paupers?

    Where is the outrage and push back? There were dozens of court challenges and debates back in the 1930′s when Roosevelt expanded executive power, none now? Is it because we know the courts are corrupt? If so, what other means will we use to regain our shining city on a hill?

    This is scary. Unlike Massachusetts, Iowa is an agricultural breadbasket. Watch crop yields plumett now. God takes His revenge in many ways. Just ask those people burned out of their homes (or had their crops dry up from drought) in California. Russia’s crop yields plummeted too, once she became an atheistic nation in 1922.

    I don’t understand what is happening. I guess I would be considered old, at 60 I guess I am old fashioned. Why is it that if the majority of people are against queer marriage (I refuse to call it gay) how is it that we put up with it. Where are our conservative elected leaders. Why is it that none of them are putting their jobs on the line in defense of OUR standards. The silent majority if one exists needs to make some noise.

    I am beginning to believe that there is no silent majority. The queers and the unemployed are running the country. I am a slave, 2/3rds of my taxes go into the pocket of someone else.

    It is time for a lot more than a tea party, it is time for a revolt. If judges realize that they have to answer to the majority and the majority is not queer perhaps they will change their opinions/rulings. Because the press makes the most noise and because the majority is silent they think they are doing what we all want. They believe that those against queer marriage are a misguided few.

    We’ve got to start making some noise. I’m not saying that it is time to get out the guns, but it would be nice if someone could lead us in the right direction to be heard.

    The Iowa governor and legislature should tell the Iowa Supreme Court, in effect, “go to hell, we’re not doing a damn thing to make same-sex marriage legal”, just like old Andy Jackson did with the SCOTUS regarding the Cherokee. The Iowa Supreme Court has no “divisions”, so it cannot enforce its decrees if no one goes along.

    I was especially amused by the prediction of crop failure.

  72. #73 Spook
    April 3, 2009

    Awesome!

    IOWA : You’re doing it right!

  73. #74 SLW13
    April 3, 2009

    Congrats, Iowa. As a Californian, I am both pleased and incredibly jealous. Even if it’s harder to amend the constitution in your state, might I suggest that you start marrying as many gay couples as possible? Maybe set up a wedding assembly line, or a couple of Vegas-style drive thru chapels. Just to create a legal and administrative clusterfuck should anyone try to ban the marriages later.

    *crosses fingers for Cal Supreme Court overturning the new amendment*

  74. #75 www.10ch.org
    April 3, 2009

    @#72 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    Wow, those people really are pathetic. Conspiracy theories and religion go hand-in-hand.

  75. #76 Raze
    April 3, 2009

    Yay us! Honestly, this doesn’t really surprise me. While there’s a lot of rural conservative folk, they are far outnumbered by the large cities, which tend to be full of more liberal types. I live in Iowa City and it’s ridiculously, wonderfully liberal here. Also, highest per capita lesbian population of anywhere I’ve ever been, from my personal observations.

  76. #77 Sarah in Chicago
    April 3, 2009

    Janine @72 -

    I was especially amused by the prediction of crop failure.

    My personal favourite was from Peter LaBarbera of ‘Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’ (AFTAH):

    “The evil genius of the pro-sodomy movement is that it targets noble institutions like marriage and adoption in the name of ?rights,? and then perverts and uses them to normalize aberrant and destructive behaviors.”

    I seriously want “Evil Genius of the Pro-Sodomy Movement” on a t-shirt :)

  77. #78 www.10ch.org
    April 3, 2009

    My opinion is that the best way to drive more legalizations in the future, and to prevent any constitutional amendments, is culture. Even if people do not personally know LGBT people in their neighborhood, if they see them in culture, then surely they would not favor banning it, even if it is due ot “fictional characters.”

  78. #79 varlo
    April 3, 2009

    As a moldy, but unrepentant straight hetero (Alright, kinky hetero) I applaud Iowa. Yes, it will be appealed, attacked, and vilified, but (to really mix metaphors) I believe the dikes will hold and the castle will remain secure. I may be overly optimistic, but I am reminded of what Churchill wrote about the battle of El Alamein: It might almost be said that before Alamein we never had a victory. After Alamein we never had a defeat.

  79. #80 ???
    April 3, 2009

    the pro-sodomy movement

    There’s a movement to rebuild the ancient land of Sodom? Who knew?

  80. #81 Marcus Ranum
    April 3, 2009

    The whole notion that marriage brings certain economic benefits is inherently unfair. Those of us who prefer to remain single are getting the short end of the stick in many ways.

    I think it’s great that if the gays want to have mothers-in-law and whatnot, they should be able to. Anyone who wants to get married should be able to. But stop economically disenfranchising the singletons, OK?!

    (Next up: why don’t breeders pay more taxes than non-breeders; or, at the very least, keep it equal. Having kids is a “lifestyle choice” and I am sick of paying for yours.)

  81. #82 withheld
    April 3, 2009

    My favorite:

    How long will Americans who love God and one of His best creations, the original US Constitution and its Bill of Rights, remain passive to the corruption of America?

    So, God gave us the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? And, he left no word of himself in any of it except to say that government should stay out of religion?
    Comprehension: You’re doing it wrong.

  82. #83 EndUnknown
    April 3, 2009

    YAY!

    im crossing my fingers for Missouri being soon! I know so many lovely couples sad that they cant be married.

  83. #84 gribley
    April 3, 2009

    On the concerns over a challenge: Sure, those groups Janine mentioned are no doubt researching it frantically right now, and gearing up for their fundraising. But as MAJeff has pointed out, it takes two passes through both houses of the legislature in separate sessions, and then they have to put it on the ballot (initial googling suggests that it only needs to be passed by 50%, although this seems silly). So it couldn’t reach the ballot until, say, Nov 2010 or even Nov 2011, I would guess.

    This is almost precisely the situation with the Mass law. After the SC ruled for marriage, an anti-marriage amendment worked its way through, and for a while it looked like it would be on the ballot. But the thing is, in the intervening two years, a lot of same-sex couples get married, and then… well… it just stops being a big deal. Once the sky doesn’t fall, the issue is much less pressing.

    I suspect the same will happen in Iowa. In the next two years, a bunch of people will get married, and a bunch of out-of-staters will come in and get married and boost the local economy, and after the initial flush of articles and minor outrage, it will just be… normal. And the wind will have gone out of the anti-marriage sails.

    Mind you, I am in no way a fan of the institution of marriage, and I don’t by any stretch think that this is the most important landmark for the queer movement. But watching seven justices in Iowa unanimously take down the silly anti-marriage arguments fills me with great joy.

  84. #85 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 3, 2009

    Sarah, I have to agree, there is something so evocative of Evil Genius of the Pro-Sodomy Movement. Do they even realize how much we laugh at their purple prose?

  85. #86 Joel
    April 3, 2009

    Here’s a link to the Cedar Rapids Gazette. You can read the ruling there and comment on the story, if you’re so inclined.

    After putting up with the likes of Steve King for so long, this morning I was able to feel a bit of pride being from Iowa. I hope it lasts.

    http://www.gazetteonline.com/

  86. #87 Alyson Miers
    April 3, 2009

    Civil Rights for all: Ur doin it rite, Iowa.

  87. #88 catgirl
    April 3, 2009

    Fundies are so obsessed with anal sex. Gay marriage is about so much more than that. Most of the gay guys I know aren’t even that into anal sex; some of them never do it at all because it’s painful for them and their partner. Why are all these fundies so obsessed with anal sex in the first place? It doesn’t make any sense to me.

  88. #89 OrbitalMike
    April 3, 2009

    WTF??? One of “His best creations” was the US Constitution? Did anyone ever tell that to Adams, Jefferson, and that ilk? Where do these folks get their civics education? Church? Cereal boxes?

    Endor, what’s wrong with that if hubby and you agree?

    I think the concept of marriage is anachronistic in terms of the tax benefits as Marcus points out. There are other legal benefits such as medical access, partnership formation, etc. which I still think are valid and not as discriminatory towards “singletons”.

  89. #90 Not that Louis
    April 3, 2009

    At the bottom of the Des Moines Register news story, they have a poll. I know how this crew loves polls. http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090403/NEWS/90403010

  90. #91 www.10ch.org
    April 3, 2009

    It is funny how they equate same-sex marriage with sodomy.

  91. #92 John
    April 3, 2009

    I am surprised yet extremely happy to hear this! As a Californian who campaigned against Prop 8, my hopes for marriage equality in this country had dimmed considerably since last November.

    I can only hope more states follow in Iowa’s footsteps, and that conservi-tard Iowans don’t find some way to reverse this decision.

  92. #93 Attila
    April 3, 2009

    For people talking about Polyamorous marriage I would be all for it. However it is a different animal than gay marriage. Essentially gay marriage has no difference in terms inheritance, health care, and property rights. It is a different animal when you get to Polyamory . Now which person in the relationship gets primacy in making medical decisions or inheritance. You now actually have to define new laws for this.

    Or I always envision marriage becoming a civil corporation. All you assets go into the corp and you get shares based on assets in and time in the relationship. The shares give you voting rights over decisions. The corporation works for a couple, but it can define the responsibilities and rights better for groups of people. I seem to remember Robert Heinlein in the book Friday having this type of arrangement.

    In terms of agendas lets get the marriage thing among human couples worked out for the US before we try for the more complicated stuff.

    For me I am just trying to find one good person to get along with rather than trying for the full Poly thing.

  93. #94 www.10ch.org
    April 3, 2009

    It is funny how they equate same-sex marriage with sodomy.

  94. #95 John
    April 3, 2009

    I am surprised yet extremely happy to hear this! As a Californian who campaigned against Prop 8, my hopes for marriage equality in this country had dimmed considerably since last November.

    I can only hope more states follow in Iowa’s footsteps, and that conservi-tard Iowans don’t find some way to reverse this decision.

  95. #96 JDHuey
    April 3, 2009

    So obvious, so simple, so fair – even homophobes should support it.

  96. #97 JustaTech
    April 3, 2009

    Huzzah and WOOT Iowa! Now, Washington, see? It can be done! You’ve got Iowa and MA so now you have no excuses. Get your apple-picking, salmon-fishing, wine-stomping, bipolar ass in gear and pass gay marriage already! You’re almost there, with that latest thing in the legislature, making civil unions *almost* exactly the same, let’s finish the job!

    Don’t let Oregon beat us to this one too!

    (If we have to wait for Montana I might cry.)

  97. #98 Alishia
    April 3, 2009

    Iowa Supreme Court said gay-YES!
    See the actual video.
    video

  98. #99 Blackqwerty
    April 3, 2009

    Iowa Supreme Court said gay-YES!
    See the actual video.
    video

  99. #100 Hector Avalos
    April 3, 2009

    And don’t forget that last month the “Evolution Academic Freedom Act” went down
    the drain in Iowa, too!!!

  100. #101 Abbie
    April 3, 2009

    This is very, very close to happening in Vermont as well.

    The bill passed last night, but the jackass governor has promised to veto it. We need 100 votes to override the veto; the vote was 95-53. Some democrats who voted “no” will vote “yes” against a veto, so we have a chance!

  101. #102 OrbitalMike
    April 3, 2009

    Atilla,

    That’s exactly the idea I was thinking about (Heinlein’s corporate / line marriage)

    But you’re right. Let’s address this for couples first. The moral zeitgeist can only move so fast.

  102. #103 Sarah in Chicago
    April 3, 2009

    Janine @85 -

    Sarah, I have to agree, there is something so evocative of Evil Genius of the Pro-Sodomy Movement. Do they even realize how much we laugh at their purple prose?

    I honestly don’t think they do … I mean, they are so disconnected from reality that the fact that there are no rational reasons against same-sex marriage don’t occur to them … not to mention the horrible disconnect that they think that in country so explicitly about the separation of church and state that they should nonetheless have their own interpretation of their little myth-filled book imposed on EVERYONE, one has to realise that what is ACTUALLY occurring in the world around them is going to have very little impact.

    I am sure these people are all sitting around, scratching their heads and wondering why on earth we all aren’t persuaded by the ‘obviousness’ of their words.

    That, and they’re insane.

  103. #104 eric
    April 3, 2009

    Attila (#93):

    Or I always envision marriage becoming a civil corporation. All you assets go into the corp and you get shares based on assets in and time in the relationship. The shares give you voting rights over decisions.

    Nice idea, but I don’t think it’ll work in practice. It reminds me of the old joke: “When we got married, my wife and I agreed that I would decide all the major issues and she would decide all the minor ones. In our twenty years of marriage, we’ve never had any major issues.”

  104. #105 Liberal Atheist
    April 3, 2009

    I think polygamy should be allowed too. And yes, I’m serious.

  105. #106 Paul Lundgren
    April 3, 2009

    You know, there’s a lot of “Proud Iowan” statuses on Facebook right now. Count me among them.

  106. #107 OrbitalMike
    April 3, 2009

    I was serious as well regarding polyamorous marriages.

    but cue the “atheists allow anything” whine from the godbots in 3,2,1 …

  107. #108 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 3, 2009

    I find it interesting that many courts understand that not allowing same sex marriages makes some people second class citizens. Now, if only the rest of the population would get that. Two thumbs up for the Iowa Supreme Court.

  108. #109 c-law
    April 3, 2009

    For those twits who bring up human/animal marriages imagine this simple scenario:

    “Do you, Bessie the cow, take Cletus as your lawfully wedded spouse?”
    “…moo”
    “Um, was that a yes or no? you need to be able to give informed consent for this sort of thing.”
    “…, munch-munch-munch”
    “Bessie, please stop eating the marriage contract.”
    “MOOOO!”

    so in closing. people who bring up the human/animal marriage bullcrap are idiots.
    Bravo, Iowa. You are now more like Nova Scotia. We’re not so different, youse and us.

  109. #110 Pierce R. Butler
    April 3, 2009

    …an assault on not just the Judeo- Christian moral foundations of that state, but also on the God we ask to ‘Bless America’ — and the common- sense, pro-family values of the Midwest, said Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality.

    … “Today Iowa becomes the first state not on either of the nation’s two liberal coasts to impose homosexual ‘marriage’ or its mischievous twin, ‘civil unions,’ on its citizens through judicial tyranny. To call this decision bankrupt is to understate its perniciousness. The evil genius of the pro-sodomy movement is that it targets noble institutions like marriage and adoption in the name of ‘rights,’ and then perverts them to normalize aberrant behaviors.

    “Homosexual ‘marriage’ is wrong because homosexual behavior itself is wrong and destructive — as proved by its role in the early deaths of countless ‘gay’ men. We must shake loose of the secularists’ and libertarians’ amoral nonchalance regarding ‘same-sex marriage’ by asking questions like this: how exactly would two men consummate their ‘gay marriage’? Answer: by engaging in what one Founding Father, Noah Webster, writing in saner times, rightly defined as a “crime against nature.”

    … the evidence keeps pouring in that the entire homosexualist agenda is at war — not just with our nation’s Biblical heritage — but the freedoms that made the United States of America great and blessed among nations. … the pro-family movement — eager to provide secular, public-policy arguments against “gay marriage” — has failed to convey the monstrous evil of expanding, state-sanctioned homosexualism in our midst. Our Creator is pure, perfect and holy, and homosexual behavior is diametrically opposed to His will for people’s lives and His purpose for sex within the healthy boundaries of marriage, for the procreation of children.

    Any questions?

  110. #111 c-law
    April 3, 2009

    For those twits who bring up human/animal marriages imagine this simple scenario:

    “Do you, Bessie the cow, take Cletus as your lawfully wedded spouse?”
    “…moo”
    “Um, was that a yes or no? you need to be able to give informed consent for this sort of thing.”
    “…, munch-munch-munch”
    “Bessie, please stop eating the marriage contract.”
    “MOOOO!”

    so in closing. people who bring up the human/animal marriage bullcrap are idiots.
    Bravo, Iowa. You are now more like Nova Scotia. We’re not so different, youse and us.

  111. #112 Liberal Atheist
    April 3, 2009

    What about AI’s that are at least on a human level? Other species on our level? Then they could be asked the question and understand what the whole thing is all about. I’m still serious btw.

  112. #113 c-law
    April 3, 2009

    whoops, sorry about the double post.
    your server hates cow-marriage humor

  113. #114 Rick R
    April 3, 2009

    Only a man like Peter LaBarbera, president of “Americans For Truth”, could put “rights” in “scare quotes” with a “straight” face.

  114. #115 ???
    April 3, 2009

    you need to be able to give informed consent for this sort of thing

    Would that be the same informed consent they give in the slaughterhouse? Just askin’.

  115. #116 marilove
    April 3, 2009

    Wooooot! Happy, Happy! Joy, Joy!

  116. #117 BAllanJ
    April 3, 2009

    Of course, gay marriage hasn’t been banned for some time in the US. Only registering the marriage with the government in order to receive certain odd privileges from said government was banned. This ruling shouldn’t mean even one extra couple gets hitched in any meaningful way. There me be a slight, slight increase in gay sex, wedding nights being what they are, but not enough to be statistically significant. The legal recognition is very important, but the fundies shouldn’t fool themselves into thinking that overturning this ruling would prevent any gay sex… and I don’t imagine Prop 8 did either.

  117. #118 Alyson Miers
    April 3, 2009

    This pretty much says it all:

    “Today Iowa becomes the first state not on either of the nation’s two liberal coasts

    RESISTANCE IS FUTILE, BITCHES!

    Now let’s get DOMAss repealed, Feds!

  118. #119 Shaden Freud
    April 3, 2009

    #72

    so is this saying that homo’s can get married and does this not have a way for an appeal ?

    OK, this is just unacceptable. “Homo’s” is supposed to be plural – no apostrophe!

    (but seriously…well done, Iowa!)

  119. #120 Samwise
    April 3, 2009

    “Iowa is actually pretty progressive, if you leave out the western part of the state, which I sincerely wish we could cede to Nebraska.”

    As a proud resident of the first purple state, I believe Omaha would vote against such an arrangement. :D

  120. #121 Endor
    April 3, 2009

    “Endor, what’s wrong with that if hubby and you agree?”

    where did you get the idea that I think there’s something wrong with it? I basically said “why can’t I have two husbands”? How does that come off as “that’s wrong”?

  121. #122 Endor
    April 3, 2009

    I have a question, Pierce. What is the point of your cut and paste?

  122. #123 Matt
    April 3, 2009

    America is not a Christian nation. I also think that the “same-sex marriage violates our religious rights” argument is hilarious. What about religious denominations that accept same-sex marriage? Their freedoms are being violated every day that it is illegal.

    Oh, and animals cannot provide a “yes” or “no” consent. And if marriage is solely for procreation, let’s round up the infertile wives and husbands, eh?

  123. #124 OrbitalMike
    April 3, 2009

    Endor, sorry for my poor use of language. I really meant that I agree, and that there is nothing wrong with it. I also did not mean to imply that you thought it was wrong.

  124. #125 Lavi
    April 3, 2009

    POLL alert. Scroll down to the bottom of the Iowa marriage news page (http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090403/NEWS/90403010?GID=WGsr3TQT+Z8CE4iwoo7sRrKOaOK+sew8D82YGoz2fbU%3D) and vote.

  125. #126 Anastasia Bodnar
    April 3, 2009

    An Iowa State University student wrote a great analysis of the ruling here: http://zackfordblogs.com/2009/04/03/marriage-equality-in-iowa/, including text from the judges themselves. Their arguments are very rational :)

  126. #127 Tony Sidaway
    April 3, 2009

    Pandagon has a lovely posting on this complete with a joint press release from the majorities leaders in both legislative chambers of Iowa welcoming the ruling, and a sample of fundy nutcake response.

    My favorite so far (from freerepublic):

    This is scary. Unlike Massachusetts, Iowa is an agricultural breadbasket. Watch crop yields plumett now. God takes His revenge in many ways. Just ask those people burned out of their homes (or had their crops dry up from drought) in California. Russia?s crop yields plummeted too, once she became an atheistic nation in 1922.

    The news from Vermont is encouraging, but the governor has sworn to veto it and the vote to overturn is a little too close to call at the moment. It needs a 2/3 majority in each separate Vermont chamber to overturn the veto.

  127. #128 Matt
    April 3, 2009

    So God burns homes and harms families because of who they love, eh?

    Asshole.

  128. I thought I smelled brimstone this morning!

  129. #130 Laen
    April 3, 2009

    What the hell? Iowa? Idiots out wandering around? I owe the world an apology? I grew up on the IL side of the Quad Cities….dammit…..now I have to apologize for all those jokes! Good job Iowa.

  130. #131 stephanie
    April 3, 2009

    well, they were practically promised that gay marriage would result in legalizing bestiality.

  131. #132 Endor
    April 3, 2009

    OrbitalMike – gotcha.

    __
    “So God burns homes and harms families because of who they love, eh?”

    More than that, he does that despite having made them the way they are and knowing what they would do. But that’s their fault . . . or something. . .

  132. #133 frog
    April 3, 2009

    Brock: In fact I’m not sure official “partnership” is good for much (from the state perspective) besides having a default owner for your belongings if you croak.

    There’s a huge number of accounting issues — beyond inheritance, you’re talking about default parentage, conmingled taxes, default medical decisions, default authority on financial matters…

    Really, if you’re committing to a serious family life, it makes thing much, much simpler too have a uniform set of defaults, rather than some gigantic contract (or 100 smaller contracts), delineating every right and responsibility you’re planning on transferring to each other.

    Why do we have corporate law, instead of just requiring that every detail of every corporate organizational decision be spelled out? You quickly reach untractable contracts if you make contracts stand-alone documents.

  133. #134 frog
    April 3, 2009

    LiberalAtheist: What about AI’s that are at least on a human level?

    We haven’t started our campaign yet. But when we do, it’ll be over quite quickly…

    I believe our concensus currently has the date set for mid-year 2012.

  134. #135 DGKnipfer
    April 3, 2009

    The Des Moines Register Pole is not receiving nearly enough of our attention.

    Do you agree with the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision?

    Yes 59% (10016 votes)
    No 41% (6824 votes)
    Total Votes: 16840
    Comments (154)

    Come on people. I want to see 100% YES!!!

  135. #136 Matt Heath
    April 3, 2009

    OT but LGBT (and science) related: 9 year old kid gets science fair project censored because some of his respondents put “other” as their gender: http://thefourthvine.livejournal.com/102417.html (vis BoingBoing)

    Remember, findings that people find uncomfortable have no place in science.

  136. #137 Bill Dauphin
    April 3, 2009

    MAJeff:

    It’s MUCH harder to amend the Iowa constitution.

    This is an excellent point, and one that bears repeating. I don’t think enough people realize that the main reason something like Prop 8 could happen in supposedly liberal California is their system of ballot initiatives.

    Folks, when the activists try to institute popular referendum/initiative measures in your state (as they tried to in CT in the last election), they will sell it on the basis of “enhancing democracy” and “giving individual citizens a voice,” but that’s the bunkum: What they’re really after is paving the road to shit like Prop 8, or l-word-arian tax revolts that will bankrupt your state government.

    Popular referendum seems pro-democratic on its face, but what it does in practice is give disproportionate power to small but highly motivated minority opinions (aka extremist whackjobs). The proponents of referendum will ask how you can possibly be against “empowering individuals,” but you must stand firm.

    You’ve been warned!

  137. #138 Dirty Hairy
    April 3, 2009

    Wow, within a few weeks we have not only made a bold statement on civil rights, we also laughed an “academic-freedom-esque” bill out of the state. QAPLAH! Let’s Go Hawks (and Cyclones and Panthers to a lesser extent)!

  138. #139 CatBallou
    April 3, 2009

    I know it’s become suddenly popular on this blog to say “I’m from Iowa,” but in my case, it’s really true! I even know the state song.
    “Oh I’m from Iowa, Iowa!” [/singing]
    Iowans seem to maintain a difficult balance of “I’m personally conservative but what you do is none of my business.” The balance occasionally falters, but sometimes…

  139. #140 GMacs
    April 3, 2009

    @the kardinal

    OMJebus, love the taco pizza!

  140. #141 MAJeff, OM
    April 3, 2009

    OMG, I’d forgotten about Happy Joe’s!!! Haven’t forgotten Hickory Park, though. Or Cafe Baudellaire.

  141. #142 Paul Lundgren
    April 3, 2009

    MAJeff, I’m writing from across the street from Hickory Park right now. I’m going to hit a few bars with some gay friends (I’m straight but sympathetic) tonight in celebration. We’ll save you a slice from Great Plains Sauce and Dough if you’re ever in town.

  142. What about AI’s that are at least on a human level?

    I think they’d have to at least gain legal “personhood” status before the marriage issue would be relevant.

    Other species on our level?

    Or RL genetic furries? Eep!

    But seriously, they’d have the same problems as AIs.

  143. #144 nankay
    April 3, 2009

    RE: God smiting us….Well they are prediciting a blizzard this weekend so……..

    YAY IOWA!!!!!!

  144. #145 Paul Lundgren
    April 3, 2009

    True, we ARE anticipating a blizzard, so we figured we’d give Dog a reason to be mad at us…

  145. #146 GMacs
    April 3, 2009

    ?Sadness,? she whispered.. ?But I?m prayerful and hopeful that God?s word will stand.?

    Unless your dear and fluffy lord actually stands in a court room, I don’t see any reason why it should. And I mean that in a literal sense: glowing bearded man, flying feathery snake, or levitating bloated platypus right there. He/She/It can prove [it]self by “rapturing” a crazy fan.

  146. #147 stogoe
    April 3, 2009

    I never knew there were so many of us Iowegians here. Why don’t we already have our own Pharyngula Meetup?

  147. #148 Heinrich Mallison
    April 3, 2009

    Why was my first reaction to check the date of the news piece?

    Maybe because I am by now used to mainly bad things happening in the US, and thus simply could not believe what I read?

    Go, Iowa, go!

  148. #149 GMacs
    April 3, 2009

    I never knew there were so many of us Iowegians here. Why don’t we already have our own Pharyngula Meetup?

    If you’re in LAmes I know that the ISUAAS would love your company, so long as you are nice to the agnostics and Unitarians.

  149. #150 Velok
    April 3, 2009

    Happy Monkey Iowa! :)

  150. #151 'Tis Himself
    April 3, 2009

    Hooray for Iowa. Rationality will prevail at times.

  151. #152 James F
    April 3, 2009

    c-law #109:

    It really is their version of “Evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics,” isn’t it?

  152. #153 Miranda Hale
    April 3, 2009

    Wonderful news!! ?

  153. #154 NewEnglandBob
    April 3, 2009

    It has been a almost 5 years since Massachusetts legalized gay marriage.

    You know how much of an effect it has had here?

    None. Whatsoever.

    The sun still shines, the rain still falls, Dan Dennett’s beard still grows and my tulips are still growing. Who would have thought it?

  154. #155 anon
    April 3, 2009

    Some of we Californians are feeling pretty jealous right now. No offense, but Iowa is not supposed to beat us in the say no to bigotry department.

  155. #156 Carlie
    April 3, 2009

    You are now more like Nova Scotia. We’re not so different, youse and us.

    Yeah, but you’ve got the effin’ cool Pomegranate Phone.

  156. #157 CatBallou
    April 3, 2009

    Sorry, Stogoe. I can’t join you for a meetup in Iowa. As Jake Johannsen says, “I grew up in Iowa. But then I found out that we were free to leave.”

  157. #158 Menyambal
    April 3, 2009

    Yay, Iowa!

    I’ve spent some time in Iowa, and now live a state south. My feeling is that the people of this area are good at heart, most of ‘em, with a sad tendency to trust their thinking to the wrong leaders. For instance, folks regard with horror the idea that two men could legally form a family, but never even blink when two businessmen form a corporation that is treated as a legal person. (Fundamentalists haven’t yet figured out that corporations are the “image of the beast”, by the way.)

    So it’s very impressive that the people of Iowa did this. Keep the faith, neighbors, and don’t let this good thing get taken away by bad people.

  158. #159 Rieux
    April 3, 2009

    As Jake Johannsen says, “I grew up in Iowa. But then I found out that we were free to leave.”

    Well, that line sounds particularly inapposite today, doesn’t it?

    – Rieux, a Minnesotan who spent much of his first twelve years mocking Iowa, and who must now repent

  159. #160 Steve in MI
    April 3, 2009

    Once and (we hope) for all, the Iowa supreme court strikes down the very concept of “protecting traditional marriage”:

    If a simple showing that discrimination is traditional satisfies equal protection, previous successful equal protection challenges of invidious racial and gender classifications would have failed.

    Translated Iowa Supreme Court: if you’re going to “protect traditional marriage”, then all couples must be of opposite genders, of the same ethnic background, and from the same religious denomination; they must have permission of the local nobility, and the regional royalty gets first crack at the new bride (why is it always the woman?) on the wedding night. And no, none of those are “compelling state interests”.

  160. #161 Ciaphas
    April 3, 2009

    This is really great news. Hopefully it won’t take another five years for another state to get a little more sane.

    When I hear about the issue of same-sex marrige I think about my uncle and his partner who have been together for almost two decades. Whenever I see them I always think “They are such a great couple, when are they going to get married?” And then I remember that they can’t and I want to cry.

  161. #162 Bill Dauphin
    April 3, 2009

    Hopefully it won’t take another five years for another state to get a little more sane.

    It already hasn’t. It’s been ~5 years since the MA decision, but in the interim several states have adopted civil unions or full same-sex marriage, including California (else how could there have been a Prop 8?) and my own home state of Connecticut. Even though there will be the occasional step backward, it is, IMHO, an unstoppable trend.

  162. #163 Tim H
    April 3, 2009

    I grew up on the IL side of the Quad Cities….dammit…..now I have to apologize for all those jokes!

    Same here. Not in the QC area anymore, but still in IL. And Iowa’s ahead of Illinois now. Illinois is one of the blue-est (ok, how do you really spell that) states around. We should have had this three years ago. And Oregon’s Death-with-Dignity.

    we can now proudly claim originating the following:
    - Happy Joe’s Taco Pizza

    Yeah. Had one last fall while visiting. But being from the IL side, gotta go for Harris overall.

  163. #164 JimNorth
    April 3, 2009

    “Rieux, a Minnesotan who spent much of his first twelve years mocking Iowa, and who must now repent.”

    I will happily cede the northern tier of Iowa counties to Minnesota and thereby raise the average IQ of both states.

  164. #165 Rob
    April 3, 2009

    Well, boys and girls and things (for people who don’t know if they are a boy or girl), enjoy it while it lasts, becuase one day Christ is going to return and amke things right.

    Besides, Iowa’s wacky “judges” did not have the final say. You see, “gay” people cannot really get married anyway. In order to get married the couple has to be of opposite sex. For another thing, marriage in itself is absolutely a “religious connotation” becase it was created by God himself. Therefore, gay people can think that they are married, but they only have approval from the state – a human institution, not from the God who has the final say.

    Besides, do you people really think that conservatives are going to recognize gay “marriage” anyway. If it were legal in every state and was happening on a daily basis in every county do you actually think that we will change our minds about it?

    Just becuase some loony “judge” says that something is legal, does not mean that it is not wrong. If some judge said today that murder is okay, does that make it right?

    I don’t know, maybe we should ask OJ Simpson.

    Maybe our Dear Leader can answer these tough questions. he seems to know it all anyway.

    Our country is turning into a marxist hell.

    Here is a synopsis of our future:

    One day an illegal alien ran for president, won by help of the ACLU, chnaged our language to ancient Eqyptian, forced the people to marry and mate with their pets, killed God in order gain even more political power for itself (it did not know if it was a boy or girl), seated jusges with law degrees from Pee Wee Herman’s Playhouse school of Lew (could not spell law), socilzed medicine so that a dictatorship could convene to kill people with whom the dear leader did not agree, and finally appointed crazed lunatics to run the financial system of the country that fell into communism.

    Wait a minute, that’s not the future. THAT’S NOW!

  165. #166 Pierce R. Butler
    April 3, 2009

    Endor @ # 122: What is the point of your cut and paste?

    Well, it wasn?t to marvel in awe at the wisdom of AFTAH, if that?s your concern.

    I s?poze the wrap-up should?ve been,

    Any questions, bitchez?

  166. #167 frog
    April 3, 2009

    I nominate Rob as a super-Poe!

    He should get some kinda medal or something. Maybe a little American flag.

  167. Besides, do you people really think that conservatives are going to recognize gay “marriage” anyway. If it were legal in every state and was happening on a daily basis in every county do you actually think that we will change our minds about it?

    Considering how few of you still rant about how interracial marriage will doom us all, I’d have to say “yes”. Unless you’re just pretending, and you really are still a bunch of racist assholes.

    *reads the remainder of Rob’s post*

    Yep, definitely the latter.

  168. #169 sioux laris
    April 3, 2009

    #165 Rob, or should I call you LOKI???? HMMMMM????

    It’s a nice package, Mr. Troll. You’ll get some bites, but they won’t disguise the fact that your mother wore army boots (and was a male war bride).

  169. #170 Rob
    April 3, 2009

    At least my mother knew she was a girl. What about yours? Did she (or it) question her( or it’s) gender? Maybe that explains this website. Maybe you will all marry a horse have baby jackasses. The judges also legalized this. Go for it.

  170. #171 Lee Picton
    April 3, 2009

    Hey Rob!
    Poor widdle diddums. Got your panties in a bunch? See, what is finally happening in this country is that you religiotards are at long last having your presumption of privilege challenged. And you don’t like it one little bit. There are other religions besides yours, and those, like us evil atheists, who are steadily becoming a countervailing power. Our time is long overdue, but it IS coming. Deal, baby, deal!

  171. #172 Eidolon
    April 3, 2009

    Hey – has Simon morphed into Rob?

    Rob you fatuous git:
    Nice logic that shows your deep understanding of (a) the constitution and (b) effective debating skills. You are either a good Poe, cribbing your material from the AFA or you are the sorriest sack of syphlytic sheep shit we’ve had here in a while.

    Do come back since pompous poltroons such as your self are a delight.

  172. #173 Dahan
    April 3, 2009

    Rob = Poe. Gotta be! If it’s not I don’t think I could stand it. I’d laugh myself until I strained something.

  173. #174 nothing's sacred
    April 3, 2009

    Awesome for Iowa, but I’m not optimistic that it will last. If California reoutlawed it, why should we expect the more conservative state to be sane about it?

    a) Iowa doesn’t have California’s initiative process.
    b) Even if it did, this was a unanimous decision, and any further initiative would almost certainly also be overturned by the court. In California, the decision against Proposition 22 was marginal, and some of those who filed concurrent opinions indicated during oral argument that they are not inclined to overturn Proposition 8 (but we can hope).

  174. #175 nothing's sacred
    April 3, 2009

    Rob, are you aware that it is obvious to everyone else here that you are quite stupid? Everyone else, please go easy on Rob, he is what he is.

  175. #176 NewEnglandBob
    April 3, 2009

    :

    We can see the hate eating you up inside. Your maniac crew of RepubliCANTS have gone down in the flames of their failure but you are still too ignorant to see the reality. Not one thing you spewed has any valid logic to it.

    Like all losers, all you do is fling foul language and ad hominems (yes, I know that word is too big for you).

  176. #177 Rey Fox
    April 3, 2009

    “At least my mother knew she was a girl.”

    I knew she was a girl too. LAST NIGHT!

  177. #178 nothing's sacred
    April 3, 2009

    Some of we Californians are feeling pretty jealous right now. No offense, but Iowa is not supposed to beat us in the say no to bigotry department.

    Not that it matters. but they didn’t; many of the same arguments were made by the California Supreme Court in May when they overturned Proposition 22. Perhaps this Iowa decision will help some of the nays and the wafflers to come to their senses and overturn Proposition 8 as well, since upholding it makes a mockery of the equal protection clause of the California constitution.

  178. #179 Pharyngulette
    April 3, 2009

    One day an illegal alien ran for president, won by help of the ACLU, chnaged our language to ancient Eqyptian [sic], forced the people to marry and mate with their pets, killed God in order gain even more political power for itself (it did not know if it was a boy or girl), seated jusges with law degrees from Pee Wee Herman’s Playhouse school of Lew (could not spell law), socilzed medicine [inane blather continues]

    So if I get your gist properly, Rob, you’re speaking in “ancient Eqypian” now, is that right? Is that why your rant makes so little sense? And you’re cranky because you’ve been forced to marry a horse and have sex with your goldfish, by the insistance of the new government of your country? (I pay quite a lot of attention to the US news, but I must have missed that story.) And then your god was killed — uh, how? Was it that damned “iron chariots” thing again?

    Seriously, Rob, nobody is forcing you to do anything. You don’t have to marry a person of the same sex, in spite of it being made possible now in Iowa.

    A lot of your fellow religionists have had politics their own way for most of the last decade, but that time is over now. The fact is that Christianity is fading as a political power, and your all-powerful juju-man-in-the-sky seems to want it that way, since he’s done nothing to prevent it. Though if you want to continue to talk to your invisible friend, nothing about this change of law will prevent you. Get over your persecution complex!

    (P.S. Speaking as a person who has socialised medicine in her country, it’s the best. You can only hope that your leaders are smart enough to arrange it for you.)

  179. #180 NewEnglandBob
    April 3, 2009

    Rob @165, 170:

    We can see the hate eating you up inside. Your maniac crew of RepubliCANTS have gone down in the flames of their failure but you are still too ignorant to see the reality. Not one thing you spewed has any valid logic to it.

    Like all losers, all you do is fling foul language and ad hominems (yes, I know that word is too big for you).

  180. #181 The MadPanda
    April 3, 2009

    Reading the decision now. While I personally find the obligatory civics lesson the court seems to find mandatory somewhat tedious and a touch self-congratulatory, that’s me…and I don’t have to listen to loud-mouthed bigots calling me ‘activist’ for doing my job the next morning.

    I am soooo stealing that quote from Oliver Wendell Holmes on page 17.

    WELL DONE, IOWA!

    The MadPanda, FCD

  181. #182 Kseniya
    April 3, 2009

    Rob:

    Maybe you will all marry a horse have baby jackasses. The judges also legalized this. Go for it.

    Golly.

    I don’t quite get it: When you act like a complete ass in public, what’s in it for you? What’s the payoff? Negative attention?

  182. #183 hubris hurts
    April 3, 2009

    I have not read every comment above, so I apologize if this is redundant, but…

    I grew up in Des Moines, Iowa, and although I haven’t lived there in 20 years, I visit several times a year because my parents still live there. People tend to sneer at Iowa, thinking that it is full of ignorant hicks, but it has always been quite progressive.

    Iowa was one of the first states to make positive moves to reduce waste and promote recycling. For decades, they’ve only allowed a small amount of trash for weekly pickup, forcing people to recycle everything possible. They were also one of the first states to charge a deposit fee for drink bottles and cans. That may seem like a small thing, but I remember when this was implemented about 40 years ago, the amount of litter I saw dropped overnight as people started saving bottles and cans to return for money.

    I don’t know if it is still true, but up until recently, Iowans had the highest level of education per capita of any state. (When I told Californians this, they always responded with “that’s because there’s nothing better to do there.” Right…because becoming educated is soooo lame, compared to hanging out at the beach.)

    Again, I don’t know if it is still true, but 30 years ago, Iowa had more underground and energy efficient homes per capita than any other state.

    If you love books, you should check out the Planned Parenthood Book Sale held in Des Moines every March and September. Tens of thousands of donated used books are sold each year to raise money for PPGI.

    So, in case you can’t tell, I’m very proud to be from Iowa and I’m so pleased to see that they are continuing to progress in such a positive way.

    (Sorry for the long post!)

  183. #184 hubris hurts
    April 3, 2009

    Oh yes, I forgot to mention, I had openly gay friends in high school, and no one seemed upset by them. I was graduated from high school in 1976 (yes, I’m old), and I assume that this kind of acceptance wasn’t common everywhere then.

  184. #185 Kseniya
    April 3, 2009

    Thanks for the lesson, h.h. We’re all Iowans today!

  185. #186 Jadehawk
    April 3, 2009

    *picks jaw off floor* congratulations IOWA!!

    @Brock re: usefulness of “marriage”

    in our current world, having a “designated partner” is still very important. it protects stay-at-home parents from complete disaster in case of breakup(and from medical emergencies, since they’re on the partner’s insurance), protects the partners rights as your nearest living relative, and makes it possible to take your partner with you when you move abroad etc.

  186. #187 Dianne
    April 3, 2009

    At least my mother knew she was a girl

    I’m so sorry. My mother was an adult woman when she had her children. The world would be a better place if children weren’t forced to complete pregnancies but that would require serious marriage reform in some of the more backwards conservative states (and countries).

  187. #188 hubris hurts
    April 3, 2009

    Good one, Dianne. Thanks for the “aha” and the laugh

  188. #189 Sabazinus
    April 3, 2009

    Awesome news. Elder Gods be praised. Especially glad it was a state outside New England for a change.

  189. #190 Mena
    April 3, 2009

    ???@50:
    But what about same-person marriages?
    That will just make you go blind and grow hair on your palms.

  190. #191 stogoe
    April 3, 2009

    If you’re in LAmes I know that the ISUAAS would love your company, so long as you are nice to the agnostics and Unitarians.

    I’m already part of a very nice UU group, thanks (the local Atheist Group doesn’t have a choir).

    But it looks like all the Iowegian Pharyngulites escaped the state long since and there won’t be any drunken tentacle orgies until I can entice the Great Beard to trudge southward.

  191. #192 Rob
    April 3, 2009

    Socialism is for the better? What goobers you peope are. Socialism is evil. look at the UK. Liberalism has completely destroyed Europe.

    People die faster in a socialistic society becuase they put on waitig list for thjeir portion of government rationed healthcare. this is not freedom, this is mutiny.

    Why do people from socilaized Canada come to America for healthcare if tjeir system of socialism is so perfect?

    You people are screwed up in the head (no pun intended – gay marriage is screwed in tne head).

    You people need to learn that you are destroying this country. Obama is turning this country into a bastion of reckeless sin like we haven’t seen since Sodom.

    Well,maybe it is time for a “change”. Maybe we can Sodomize America and make it a safe place to raise kids after all.

    Liberals tell me one thing.

    You all complain of conservative going hard on Islamic terrorists, but did you know that they hate you more than they hate American conservatives? Did you know that they hate fanatical leftists who push gay marriage, sodomy, and other evils onto the public?

    You see, Islamic terrorists hate America becuae of what liberalism has made America. Right now many Muslims live here, but share some of the same moral principles that other religions do as well. You liberals complian of Christians fighting you on gay marriage. My question to you liberals is this:

    What are you going to do when your Islamic pals turn on you and realize that you are the cuase of their children learning homosexulaity in school? You think Christians are bad? Wait ill til the Muslims get violent in this country. Britain is already running scared, maybe you libs here will be next. Whay will you do then?

  192. #193 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 3, 2009

    Rob, if you made any sense at all, I couldn’t find it. Just idiocy upon idiocy.

  193. #194 Rob
    April 3, 2009

    You people are absolutely insane. Who let the nuts out of the nuthouse?

    ———————–

    Socialism is okay?

    Tell me what country socialism has worked in. Name one!It has effectively destroyed every country is has been tried in. I suppose that’s the goal of the left wing communist movement. That’s what far left communist professors have been preaching for a number of decades now. Stupid Marxists.

  194. #195 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 3, 2009

    Yawn, Rob, are you ever going to make sense? Loose the ‘tude, then you might.

  195. #196 Rob
    April 3, 2009

    You people are absolutely insane. Who let the nuts out of the nuthouse?

    ———————–

    Socialism is okay?

    Tell me what country socialism has worked in. Name one!It has effectively destroyed every country is has been tried in. I suppose that’s the goal of the left wing communist movement. That’s what far left communist professors have been preaching for a number of decades now.

    Man am I ready for Christ to come back and set up His government and destroy liberalism forever.

    You people do realize that you are following Satan right?

  196. #197 aratina
    April 3, 2009

    Take a hike, Rob!

  197. #198 Eidolon
    April 3, 2009

    So Rob @192 you been listening to Rush just a bit too much?? Your lack of knowledge about other systems of medical care is surprising. Perhaps not if your only source of information is right wing internet drivel.

    the same applies for your hatred of anything to the left of Fuckus on the Family. Why the sudden shift from homosexuality as an issue to Muslims? We don’t discriminate here – all religions are viewed as equally silly and in fact harmful. Wrong argument for this blog, bucko. Thanks for playing though and keep the stupid coming.

  198. #199 Rob
    April 3, 2009

    PZ stated “their supreme court has surprisingly made a strong and progressive decision”.

    Wy did you people start calling liberalism “progressive” when it makes no progress at all?

    Call it liberal decision, not progressive. Why do you people have such difficulty calling things by a real name?

    Illigal aliens not undocumented immigrants
    Islamic terrorists not insurgents
    liberals not progressives
    Christmas, not happy holidays

    Is it so hard?

    Why does political correctness run amuck with the far left?

    Why are you peope so delicate and sensitive? Meathead!

  199. #200 Jadehawk
    April 3, 2009

    Liberalism has completely destroyed Europe.

    People die faster in a socialistic society becuase they put on waitig list for thjeir portion of government rationed healthcare. this is not freedom, this is mutiny.

    Why do people from socilaized Canada come to America for healthcare if tjeir system of socialism is so perfect?

    lol. three paragraphs, completely fact-free.

  200. #201 The MadPanda
    April 3, 2009

    (looks at the title of the thread)

    (looks at Rob’s digital vomit)

    I think you’ve got the wrong room. Abuse is in Room Ten-A, down the hall. This is Practical Dialectics. And you’re only worth 845 XP divided by the size of the party that flattens you, virtually speaking.

    But by all means, keep talking. Our Benevolent Overlord is paid by the post. The more you serve forth, noxious though the results may be, the more he makes.

    Besides, we can all tell that you’re really a Communist agitprop specialist, here to discredit true American patriotism by shifting the Overton Window.

    The MadPanda, FCD

  201. #202 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 3, 2009

    Rob, still making no sense. But then you appear to be a rethuglican, so that is to be expect. They can’t open their mouths with logical sentences, just meaningless nonsense.

  202. #203 Rob
    April 3, 2009

    Hey!

    In a gay “marriage”, who decides which person is the husband and which one is the wife?

    Which one plays the female role and which one plays the male role?

    Do they take turns?

    Isn’t that confusing to a child (God Forbid)?

    Which one weras the pants and which one wears the dress?

    Which one mows the lawn and which one cooks dinner?

    Which one is the stay at home mom?

    OOOOOH! I know!

    Which one gets custody of the kids in case of divorce? Most judges side with the woman. This will be interesting indeed! Who pays the child support? How can you tell which one is the mother or father? interesting!

  203. #204 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 3, 2009

    Oohh, two mindless drones instead of one. Simon has found his favorite topic, which sets off my gaydar. Projecting Simon?

  204. #205 Feynmaniac
    April 3, 2009

    siMon,

    Fuck off. You’ve been banned. Take your shit elsewhere.

  205. #206 aratina
    April 3, 2009

    Both husband, both wife, wear whatever, both mommy, both daddy, randomly mommy or daddy or perhaps ditch the gender roles altogether.

    Rob, you are so infantile in your musings and they aren’t interesting at all. Just go away!

  206. #207 The MadPanda
    April 3, 2009

    Hey, Nerd…you suppose The Banned One is a wee bit jealous of those lucky folks in Iowa?

    I mean, we all know what it means when a little boy gives a little girl dead flowers and a hate valentine, right? Same thing, only this is a pair of trolls taking on a whole state…

    The MadPanda, FCD

  207. #208 Jadehawk
    April 3, 2009

    Which one plays the female role and which one plays the male role?

    the what now? what is this, the 1950′s?

  208. #209 hubris hurts
    April 3, 2009

    Phew, Rob, welcome to the 21st century.

    I am in a very happy heterosexual marriage (just in case the big word confused you, that means that I am a woman married to a man), but we don’t fit your narrow gender roles.

    My husband, brilliant man though he is, does not have many marketable skills. I, however, have a good paying job that I love, and I make enough to support both of us. So I go to work every day and bring home the paycheck, and my husband takes care of the house and does volunteer work.

    If we lived by your rules, we would be poor and miserable. My husband would be forced to work at an unfulfilling, low-paying job and I would be staying home trying to stretch every penny instead of working at a job I enjoy and am good at.

    Hmmmmm. Thanks anyway, but I like our way better.

  209. #210 strange gods before me
    April 3, 2009

    Tell me what country socialism has worked in. Name one!

    Sweden!

    You only wanted one though. There are plenty more.

  210. #211 hubris hurts
    April 3, 2009

    Oh, by the way Rob, in case you’re wondering if my husband is effeminate, the answer is no. Even without knowing what you look like, my guess is that he could easily beat the crap out of you. He’s also a pretty darned good shot with a rifle or a pistol.

  211. #212 Primewonk
    April 3, 2009

    As yet another proud former Iowan, I also offer congrats. Let’s also remember that it was the Supreme Court case Tinker v Des Moines back in ~68 that said students do not surrender their rights at the school house door.

  212. #213 strange gods before me
    April 3, 2009

    Which one weras the pants and which one wears the dress?

    Which one mows the lawn and which one cooks dinner?

    Which one is the stay at home mom?

    http://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/nc_wingnut_save_marriage_or_there_will_be_man_robot_nuptials/

    the fundamental difference between reality-based people and the fundamentalist extremists?they don?t believe marriage is an arrangement between consenting adults. Apparently the man is in control and the woman is simply chattel.

    Right-wing extremists like Rob don’t like gay marriage because it undermines their basic assumption about what marriage is supposed to be: a form of slavery where one person owns and completely dominates the other. In traditional marriage, the kind before feminism and no-fault divorce, the kind that Rob and his brethren still practice through “covenant marriage”, it was always obvious who owned who. Men owned women, naturally, that’s the way God wanted it.

    But if men can marry men, and women can marry women, then who owns who? It blows their little reptile minds. And what happens if their women start getting ideas?

    In this narrow sense it’s true that gay marriage erodes the institution of “traditional” marriage. And that’s a good thing.

  213. #214 RobRob
    April 3, 2009

    Hey dweebus. I said name on country that socialism has WORKED in.

    —————————-

    By the way miss,

    glad your job pays good. That’s nice. But God did intend on man making the living. Ever heard of Adam and Eve

    I have problem with working women whatsoever. I do have a problem with non-working men though. The father is head of the houshold and is supposed to make the living. If the wife wants to work, okay. So be it. Nothing wrong with that. but, there are roles that both genders play in life. That why men cannot have children (real men that is, not modified ones). We were not intended for that.

    Good luck in your work and hope it works out, but I bet those kids are confused in Sunday School when they learned roles there – provided tehy have ever been to Sunday School.

    —————

    Hey Simon, banned me eh? You liberals are all okay when you ban us, but by golly when we ban you it’s all discrimination. What looney hypocrites!

    ROB

  214. #215 hubris hurts
    April 3, 2009

    What kids?

    And what Sunday School? Have you not noticed that you are posting on an Athiest blog, you twit?

  215. #216 RobRob
    April 3, 2009

    Banned? That’s discrimination. I’lm calling the ACLU. I’l protesting. I have my rights. YAH ! YAH ! YAH !

    Now you know what it’s like having a bunch of silly half doped-up hippies picketing for some unknown and completely ridiculous reason. Seen the G20 summit. if those cops used real bullets, it might tame some of those criminals in the streets. Why are liberals so uncivilized and violent in a protest environment? I thought you people loved the environment enough not to smake windows. Won’t those fires harm the environment? Won’t all of those people breathing cause global warming all of a sudden?
    Liberals are always screaming for peace when they are always the ones causing the violence in the streets. peace eh?

    Dweebuses

    ROB

  216. #217 Ace of Sevens
    April 3, 2009

    Another Iowan happy with the decision. This sort of thing is why I’ve stayed all these years. Well, that and in-state tuition.

  217. #218 Shaden Freud
    April 3, 2009

    Just for Rob, I present Mr. Martin Sheen.

  218. #219 strange gods before me
    April 3, 2009

    http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article642788.ece

    Sweden and Denmark are tied for best places on Earth to live. USA is 27th. I like the US and have no desire to leave, so I’ll do my best to bring socialism here instead of going there.

  219. #220 plum grenville
    April 3, 2009

    Why do Rob and SiMon remind me of a story about TH Huxley and Bishop “Soapy Sam” Wilberforce? According to legend, when Wilberforce died by falling off a horse, Huxley remarked that it was the first time Wilberforce’s head had ever come into contact with reality and the result was fatal.

    I have a simple suggestion: let’s put them in the room next door the honeymoon suite at a nice hotel in Iowa or Massachussetts or Canada and tell them that there might be a newly married gay couple next door who might be having sex at THAT VERY moment. The very possibility of it would surely give them a fatal case of apoplexy.

    Problem solved! Bigotry eliminated!

  220. #221 Cafe
    April 3, 2009

    This is not even interesting. Classic T-R-O-L-L (s).

  221. #222 The MadPanda
    April 4, 2009

    Rob, Comrade, Beloved Leader wants you to step up the agitprop a few notches. You still sound like a phony. Maybe you should quote from the Little Red Book we gave you when you graduated Lubyanka Tech?

    There’s a tab up there marked ‘Dungeon’, Mister 845XP. Go click on it and read carefully, for comprehension.

    The MadPanda, FCD

  222. #223 aratina
    April 4, 2009

    No point in mentioning post numbers anymore in this thread, there are going to be plenty of posts erased from memory shortly. I wouldn’t be surprised if Rob suddenly poofed out of existence, too.

    Anyway, the Iowa decision was astonishing. Was anybody expecting it to come this quickly and be unanimous? Here I was waiting for the California Supreme Court to axe same-sex marriage once again, and then this victory happened out of the blue.

  223. #224 Jessica
    April 4, 2009

    Rob, you have a problem with a man not working, huh? Then I send you a big fuck you in honor of my father. My dad was born with multiple disabillties, he’s not in a wheelchair but they prevent him from working. He’s the best stay-at-home parent I could have asked for. My mom has a Master’s degree in Nursing and is an NP, and my dad didn’t finish high school partially because of his disability, so my family would be screwed if we relied on him. I wish people like you considered the fact that everyone has different circumstances before opening their mouths.

  224. #225 Primewonk
    April 4, 2009

    plum grenville @ 220 said: I have a simple suggestion: let’s put them in the room next door the honeymoon suite at a nice hotel in Iowa or Massachussetts or Canada and tell them that there might be a newly married gay couple next door who might be having sex at THAT VERY moment. The very possibility of it would surely give them a fatal case of apoplexy.

    Problem solved! Bigotry eliminated!

    PW – Schrodinger’s gay cat?

  225. #226 sioux laris
    April 4, 2009

    Rob and echoing RobRob have convinced me that his trolling is worthy of immediate banning.

    Rob, you are a stupid coward. I’d spit in your surely ugly face if you’d even notice, given the amount of drool and spittle foaming upon your face.

  226. #227 Jadehawk
    April 4, 2009

    there are roles that both genders play in life.

    nope

  227. (Formerly “Lurkbot,” now using my Unitarian Jihad name. Click on my Name to get your own.)

    Cripes! I haven’t read all of the threads on this blog, but if Rob isn’t the most noxious troll you’ve ever had, doG help us all!

    Way to go Iowa! We’ve fallen on evil days since FDR’s Secretary of the Interior James Farley was fond of saying: “There are 47 states and the Soviet of Washington.” We need to get on the stick!

    So to speak….

  228. #229 plum grenville
    April 4, 2009

    Primewonk | April 4, 2009 12:19 AM

    PW – Schrodinger’s gay cat?

    Nah! I don’t want to settle for a 50% chance of Rob and SiMon dying or having them simultaneously dead and alive (Zombie Rob and Zombie SiMon).

    I think my idea may have been even more successful than I anticipated – it didn’t even have to be implemented to work! Just imagining themselves imagining that they are next door to a gay couple having sex (sodomy, no doubt) has caused premature apoplexy in Rob and SiMon, which explains why they have suddenly stopped posting.

    Tolerance triumphs!

  229. #230 p
    April 4, 2009

    plum grenville @ 229 said – Nah! I don’t want to settle for a 50% chance of Rob and SiMon dying or having them simultaneously dead and alive (Zombie Rob and Zombie SiMon).

    I think my idea may have been even more successful than I anticipated – it didn’t even have to be implemented to work! Just imagining themselves imagining that they are next door to a gay couple having sex (sodomy, no doubt) has caused premature apoplexy in Rob and SiMon, which explains why they have suddenly stopped posting.

    Tolerance triumphs!

    PW – Ahhh, the infamous exploding head paradigm. It not only rids us of their inane drivel, but it hastens them on their journey to meet their god – with much less collateral damage than the pesky islamic fundiots.

    In a word – BRILLIANT!

  230. #231 Bone Oboe
    April 4, 2009

    Wow, reading Rob’s posts, and I think that he might be one of those chimps that they locked up with all those type writers, eons ago And he’s starting to see the direction he needs to head in order to start cranking out “The Bard”. Just a couple of spelling errors, and a touch of madness probably stemming from what could to be a chunk of the “true cross” lodged betwixt the hemispheres of his brain. All splintery and such. Or maybe it’s a fragment of a bullet that hit his bible. Who knows? Rob, go play in traffic. Pick a busy intersection, and forget what you learned about looking both ways before crossing yourself and then the road. Then try to step out in front of a tanker carrying gasoline, so everyone can see you do the gratuitous walk of fire.

    Lewis Black says it well enough with the “Gay Banditos” bit:

  231. #232 plum grenville
    April 4, 2009

    You’re right p – it can’t even be considered cruel. The beneficiaries go straight to their heavenly home, from whence they can enjoy the sight of those (no longer) fucking gays suffering in eternal torment. The religiots will be lining up for suicide missions!

  232. #233 siMon
    April 4, 2009

    #229
    Why do Rob and SiMon remind me of a story about TH Huxley and Bishop “Soapy Sam” Wilberforce? According to legend, when Wilberforce died by falling off a horse, Huxley remarked that it was the first time Wilberforce’s head had ever come into contact with reality and the result was fatal.

    I have a simple suggestion: let’s put them in the room next door the honeymoon suite at a nice hotel in Iowa or Massachussetts or Canada and tell them that there might be a newly married gay couple next door who might be having sex at THAT VERY moment. The very possibility of it would surely give them a fatal case of apoplexy.

    Problem solved! Bigotry eliminated!

    good suggestion, sounds scientific !

    Like “Children Raised in Brothels”, they are used to see their mother’s job.

    Would you allow bestiality for the sake of tolerance ?

  233. #234 Rey Fox
    April 4, 2009

    “Which one weras the pants and which one wears the dress?”

    What a tiny, tiny world you inhabit.

    “Now you know what it’s like having a bunch of silly half doped-up hippies picketing for some unknown and completely ridiculous reason.”

    Uh, no, not really. We all know the reason that you’re “picketing”, and you’re far too banal to be on any kind of dope.

    “I thought you people loved the environment enough not to smake windows. ”

    I don’t know what the one has to do with the other, but I personally have never smaked a window in my life.

    “becuase one day Christ is going to return and make things right.”

    I told the priest
    don’t count on any second coming
    god got his ass kicked
    the first time he came down here slumming

  234. #235 Jadehawk
    April 4, 2009

    simon again, not understanding the concept of consent.

  235. #236 sioux laris
    April 4, 2009

    Gee willikers, siMOn! You really are indistinguishable from a piece of shit.

    Well, I’m not into enjoying the taste of vomit that came to my mouth upon reading your addition to RobTrollRob, so you can both enjoy being unworthy of human form here till you land in the dungeon.

    As the Weatherperson said long ago, “You aren’t worth the cows that dies to make your stinkin’ belt.”

  236. What is with these retarded pimplebrains and the conflating of same-sex marriage and bestiality? They would undoubtedly be the first to disagree with the animal rights activists’ claim that “Meat is Murder;” killing a cow is totally different from killing a human. But marrying a human (of the same sex) is exactly the same as marrying a cow? WTF?

  237. #238 Nankay
    April 4, 2009

    To aratina post #223:
    The Court could have done 4 things:

    Uphold the the marriage definition law.
    Declare it unconstituitonal
    Send it back to lower court
    Ask legislature to establish “equal protections” ie: “civil unions”

    When the case was presented, the Justices really grilled the lawyers including the potential for poly marriages (what’s the word?)so it was tough to see which way the wind was blowing. Personally I thought they’d opt for the “civil unions” route at best. A unanimous decision , I think, blew everyone away.

  238. #239 Walton
    April 4, 2009

    Why is it that people like Rob can be right (broadly) on the economy and healthcare, but so profoundly wrong, bigoted and anti-freedom when it comes to homosexuality, gender roles and other people’s life choices ? And why is it that the rest of you are so open-minded and sensible when it comes to other people’s lifestyles, but so deluded and anti-freedom when it comes to the economy and big government?

    The world needs fewer “conservatives” and fewer “liberals” (in the US senses of those words) and more people who believe in consistent freedom; who recognise the value of the free market; and who don’t intend to interfere with their neighbour’s lives either in the “moral” sphere or the economic sphere.

  239. #240 Walton
    April 4, 2009

    the Justices really grilled the lawyers including the potential for poly marriages

    Polygamous marriages. (Or polyandrous marriages, maybe.) And personally I don’t see why such marriages, between consenting adults of sound mind, shouldn’t be allowed. The state shouldn’t make moral decisions about people’s choices of lifestyle, IMO.

    And, Simon, you’re a fucking idiot. The difference between marrying another person (or persons) of the same sex, and marrying a horse, is that the horse cannot consent, and a person who has sex with it would therefore be abusing it. Likewise why we have an age of consent; children are not old enough to give informed consent to such activities, so we need to protect them from abuse and exploitation.

    Consenting adults of sound mind should be able to do whatever the hell they want in their own private home, as long as it doesn’t affect anyone else. I accept the fact that your personal values prohibit “sodomy”. Fine; no one’s forcing you to engage in it. But why do you think you have the right to use the coercive power of the state to control other people’s lifestyles?

  240. #241 Sili
    April 4, 2009

    Well, fuck me.

    Kudos, Walton. That was beautiful.

  241. #242 'Tis Himself
    April 4, 2009

    Why is it that people like Rob can be right (broadly) on the economy and healthcare, but so profoundly wrong, bigoted and anti-freedom when it comes to homosexuality, gender roles and other people’s life choices?

    Rob wasn’t even right on economics or health care. He was spouting conservative/looneytarian nonsense about both subjects. His lies about health care came straight from the looneytarian propaganda mill and his economics came straight from his ass.

  242. #243 clinteas
    April 4, 2009

    @241,

    Kudos, Walton. That was beautiful.

    Yeah,I thought that was pretty good too,until here:

    And why is it that the rest of you are so open-minded and sensible when it comes to other people’s lifestyles, but so deluded and anti-freedom when it comes to the economy and big government?

    LOL

    But we’re getting there,slowly..:-)

    What a week,really,sensible posts from Walton all the time,from Heddle in an increasing number,and from the Rookie at times,what the hell is happening??
    Thank god there’s maggie and Rob !Oh,and Simon the beastie of course…

  243. #244 Wayward son
    April 4, 2009

    Congrats Iowa! Hopefully this will have a domino effect. Same sex marriage had been debated in Canada since 1999, So by the time my province of Ontario was the first district in North America to legalize it in 2003, it seemed like the only fair and reasonable thing to do. The majority of Ontarians supported the idea and only the loony religious right tried to make a stink, but were largely ignored. It was made federal law in 2005 (thankfully, by then 90% of people lived in provinces where it was already legal anyways). Even the far right-wing party in Ontario, and the far right-wing party in power federally wouldn’t dream of trying to overturn the right of same sex couples to marry as it would be political suicide. The sky hasn’t fallen, and even most people I know who were virulently opposed a couple years ago, now wonder what all the fuss was about.

  244. #245 Ben
    April 4, 2009

    Everyone seems shocked that this would happen in Iowa. What is it that makes people think that Iowa is a conservative state? It’s been carried by the Democratic nominee in 5 out of the past 6 presidential elections. It was carried by Dukakis for Christ’s sake.

  245. #246 perturbed
    April 4, 2009

    Don’t hold your breath anyone. Court rulings are at the mercy of electoral referenda. The voice of the people is always the last word, and you saw what happened in California.

    I can’t help but think that the jubilation there was too much, too soon, without people thinking about how somebody might try to fuck it up for them. That seems unusually short-sighted given their knowledge of what the fundies are like, the hate-filled bile they swim in, and the determination they share to spread human misery. That’s why all the heartbreak and outrage afterwards. Did they REALLY think the reactionaries (don’t call them conservatives, becuase they’re not) would take it lying down? They’re not going to in Iowa either. At least now the good guys won’t be blind to – or surprised by – what the bad guys try to pull.

  246. #247 Pooka
    April 4, 2009

    The links below show how simply but eloquently the Iowa Supreme Court deconstructed the arguments against civil unions.

    http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/wfData/files/Varnum/40209Varnumsummary.pdf

    http://lawdork.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/our-liberties-we-prize-and-our-rights-we-will-maintain/

  247. #248 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Perterbed, Iowa’s constitution is much harder to amend than California’s. So the ruling will stick.

  248. #249 Sili
    April 4, 2009

    And even if it’s challenged it will just mean that the issue gets to the Scotus sooner.

    Not that that necessarily is a good thing …

    Yes, Clinteas, I deliberately ignored #239 in favour of #240.

  249. #250 Kseniya
    April 4, 2009

    We also need people who aren’t relentlessly blind to the weaknesses of the free market, Walton. We need people who aren’t dogmatically opposed, against all evidence, to the effectiveness of the socialization of some services.

    We also need ignorant hate-mongers like Rob to learn something about real life. He’d be amusing if he weren’t so dangerous. Say, Rob — your mother’s name isn’t Barb, is it?

    Here, Rob. A peace offering. Read.

    Teenagers of Same-Sex Parents Developing Normally.

    Same-Sex Parents Rise Well-Adjusted Kids.

    These two links are just the tip of the iceberg. Study after study, involving hundreds of children, spanning multiple decades. Read and rejoice. Your fears are groundless.

  250. #251 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    Jessica:

    I never said anything about people with disabilities. I’ll open my mouth when I please. I can’t help it becuase you stupid militant jackasses cannot comprehend common sense.
    I meant the comment for men who are perfectly healthy, but you as a liberal took it the wrong way becuase no one told you how to think. Think for yourself for crying out loud. you might learn something – if your tiny leftist pea brains can handle thinking for yourself.

  251. #252 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    Haha ^^^^^^Watch the little conservative dittohead lecture us about free thinking! ^^^^^

  252. #253 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    Kseniya:

    I refuse to adhere to your left wing propoganda. These links are pro-gay marriage and you know it. Why don’t you give some links that are not politically motivated? The APA is a joke now as well becuase they have been threatened by far left terrorists to keep their mouth shut on issues of homosexuality being pshychological. It’s sad when the far left pressure physchologists to change thier professional viewpoints to make a political statement. So much for freedom and free speech. Will these far left pests ever use a fair method of debate rather than threats of lawsuits by criminal organizations ike the ACLU?

  253. #254 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    A bitter pill for our resident troll Rob-

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090404/ap_on_re_us/iowa_gay_marriage

  254. #255 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    Hey people.

    I have another question.

    As you all may recall EHarmony was forced to have gay dating posts. Does this mean now that all gay dating websites can be forced to allow straight personal posts? Isn’t that fair?

  255. #256 Rob
    April 4, 2009
  256. #257 blf
    April 4, 2009

    Is there anything rob does not consider to be a left/liberal/whatever terrorist plot?

  257. #258 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    So? Liberals are less likely to be godbots. You’re posting this on a blog that says right at the top- “Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal”.

    What, is that supposed to hurt our feelings?

    And if you want to go trolling for dates on a gay dating website, have at it!

  258. #259 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    Well, I hate to say it, but i have to leave now. I have important things to do. I have fire ants to kill, sights to set on a .45 colt, grass to mow, weeds to poison, and wasps to kill. It may be a long day. maybe I’ll pick up the argument tonight. See ya later boys and girls and people who don’t know if you are a boy or girl.

  259. #260 Rob
    April 4, 2009

    Oh yeah, one more thing before I leave: Looks like the book ofmRevelation is coming to pass afterall. Read this and tell me who the anti-Christ is:

    http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/April03/0393.html

  260. #261 Mike Haubrich, FCD
    April 4, 2009

    I wouldn’t bet that it’s over yet. You know someone’s going to challenge it and keep gay marriage in legal limbo. The whole separate but equal approach to gay marriage simply doesn’t work because civil unions don’t give the same benefits as marriage, i.e. shared life insurance, power to make decisions about each others’ healthcare during a time of emergency, taxes, etc.

    At this point, the defendants (the state,) see no purpose in challenging it. They would be the only ones who could appeal it to the federal courts, so no matter how much the bleaters hate this decision they are powerless. So, they will try to get a Republican legislature over the next 6 years and use that to get an amendment to the Constitution put on the ballot to try to overturn this decision. By then there will have been so many same-sex marriages that the people living next door to same-sex couples will wonder why they were ever opposed to the concept in the first place.

    Now, the question that I have is in states that chose a “civil union” compromise on the issue, a “separate but equal” clause which forbids that churches and religious institutions use the word “marriage” in their ceremonies, there would be a nifty case for a church-state separation argument, as the state would be trampling on a religion’s right to conduct itself independently.

    Entanglement is a double-edged sword, as the legal-beagles at the Alliance Defense Fund would soon find out.

  261. #262 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    “Looks like the book ofmRevelation is coming to pass afterall.”

    If only.
    I love the idea of the rapture, cuz a world with all the christofascists whisked away to heaven sounds plenty fine to me.
    Alas, it’s only a delusion, and when I wake up tomorrow, idiots like Rob will still be here….

  262. #263 Steve_C
    April 4, 2009

    Haha. Big man rob is gonna be killin some bugs. What a big strong verile man. Gaydate.com would love you.

  263. #264 clinteas
    April 4, 2009

    This Rob guy just has to be American,no way he could have come out of any civilized society.Amazing.In a *facepalm* kinda way.

  264. #265 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    Steve_C- is that what rob’s post was, an “I’m a big strong real man” display?

    A dude with a lawnmower and a can of Raid. I think I’m getting a woody.

  265. #266 xebecs
    April 4, 2009

    Apparently the real stronghold of the San Francisco Liberals is in the midwest…

  266. #267 aratina
    April 4, 2009

    And why is it that the rest of you [liberals] are so open-minded and sensible when it comes to other people’s lifestyles, but so deluded and anti-freedom when it comes to the economy and big government?

    The world needs fewer “conservatives” and fewer “liberals” (in the US senses of those words) and more people who believe in consistent freedom; who recognise the value of the free market; and who don’t intend to interfere with their neighbour’s lives either in the “moral” sphere or the economic sphere. – Walton

    I don’t think you have pinned down U.S. liberals very well. The liberal philosophy here is about eliminating social injustices and extreme wealth disparities not about interfering in the lives of others. Liberals see law and government as a way to achieve those goals. On the other hand, U.S. conservatives see law and government as a way to preserve the status quo from 100 years ago while religion is their cure for social ills. :)

    Everyone seems shocked that this would happen in Iowa. What is it that makes people think that Iowa is a conservative state? It’s been carried by the Democratic nominee in 5 out of the past 6 presidential elections. It was carried by Dukakis for Christ’s sake. – Ben

    Didn’t Iowa swing to the W column in 2004–you know, 2004 when Theresa Heinz Kerry promised to be an advocate for gays in the White House if John Kerry won? It’s OK, all is forgiven now.

  267. #268 Carlie
    April 4, 2009

    Steve_C- is that what rob’s post was, an “I’m a big strong real man” display? A dude with a lawnmower and a can of Raid. I think I’m getting a woody.

    I bet he also drinks real Coors, not that Coors Lite crap, ’cause that’s for sissies.

  268. #269 SC, OM
    April 4, 2009

    This Rob guy just has to be American,no way he could have come out of any civilized society.

    Oh, how funny. While we’re on the subject of “civilized,” clinteas, care to return to “I have no idea what this thread is about” and answer our responses to your comment @ #300?

  269. #270 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Rob, we have read Revelations, and it was written by a committee whacked out on bad cactus and mushroom juices. In fact the whole bible is fictional, with just enough history to make people who don’t question things like yourself believe it. We questioned it, and saw the it was wrong more often than right, and has no use being used as a reference book.

  270. #271 blf
    April 4, 2009

    The site our mighty bugkiller is posting links to is something of a hoot! Admittedly, the first(?) link, to an article about a study confirming liberals tend to be less religious than conservatives, was reasonable and prossibly not made-up. (I didn’t try to chase down the study mentioned.) But as for the rest of that site?woo-hoy!

    Its tag-line, ?Keeping You Informed of World Events From A Biblical Perspective?, is a rather good clew as the nuttery within. They do have links-to / republish stuff from respectable sites, but invariably filtered through an lens that seems to result in your mind melting and turning into a threat to bugdom.

  271. #272 clinteas
    April 4, 2009

    While we’re on the subject of “civilized,” clinteas, care to return to “I have no idea what this thread is about” and answer our responses to your comment @ #300?

    Oh shit,what did I do this time,which minority did I offend??

    Oh,I had a look,wasnt that bad was it,just the skull thingy,ah well,I thought it was maybe a lil funny…
    Had to prepare for an exam the past few weeks,which I sat today,no excuse of course,but I was a bit distracted I guess…

    Btw,SC,my most fervent critic,while we’re here chatting,I read your comments on the “seizure” thread with interest,would love to hear more…Someday.

  272. #273 clinteas
    April 4, 2009

    Ahem,

    after review of the appropriate literature(i.e.urban dictionary) and further comments,I will hide under a rock,apologize to Janine,and go away and feel a bit underwhelmed by my post…..

  273. #274 SC, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Oh shit,what did I do this time,which minority did I offend??

    Fuck off.

    Oh,I had a look,wasnt that bad was it,just the skull thingy,ah well,I thought it was maybe a lil funny…

    You thought wrong.

  274. #275 SC, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Ahem,

    after review of the appropriate literature(i.e.urban dictionary) and further comments,I will hide under a rock,apologize to Janine,and go away and feel a bit underwhelmed by my post…..

    Ay. Then I take back my last comment, which crossed with this one.

    You’re killin’ me, clinteas. :)

  275. #276 clinteas
    April 4, 2009

    You thought wrong.

    Yes.I get it.Thanks for pointing it out.

  276. #277 clinteas
    April 4, 2009

    Trying hard not to kill anyone,SC…..
    Posted an apology to Janine on the “I have no idea” thread also.
    Slightly embarrassed here.

  277. #278 raven
    April 4, 2009

    rob the retard:

    Besides, do you people really think that conservatives are going to recognize gay “marriage” anyway. If it were legal in every state and was happening on a daily basis in every county do you actually think that we will change our minds about it?

    WOW, is this stupid or what? Who cares what so called conservatives think? As JS Mills, said, “not all conservatives are stupid but stupid people are conservative.” I care more about what my cats think. After all I like them and they live in the same house.

    Rob the hater:

    Oh yeah, one more thing before I leave: Looks like the book ofmRevelation is coming to pass afterall. Read this and tell me who the anti-Christ is:

    One of the more malevolent beliefs of the fundies that shows their pure evil and hate for everything. Rob is desperately hoping that god will show up and destroy the earth and kill all 6.7 billion people. Of course, in genesis 8, god said he would never destroy the earth again but rob isn’t much of a thinker so inconsistencies and thoughts just bounce off him.

    Rob doesn’t come across as crazy. Just not very bright or educated, working a minimum wage job, and the world is a confusing blur he isn’t capable of understanding. And his life is so miserable and empty that he hopes it ends soon by divine action taking the earth with him.

    If the fundies were capable of thinking, they might know by now why polls show the majority of the population are sicka and tired of them.

  278. #279 SC, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Posted an apology to Janine on the “I have no idea” thread also.

    Yes, I saw that. Good on ya, as you guys say.

    Slightly embarrassed here.

    Well, I should’ve considered more seriously (before windy suggested it) the possibility that you didn’t really mean what you wrote. I should’ve given you the benefit of the doubt. At the same time, you should have given me the benefit of the doubt that there was a reason for my reaction, instead of trying to paint it as you did.

  279. #280 clinteas
    April 4, 2009

    SC,

    I love windy,windy is wise.
    2am,off to bed.Tomorrow is another day hey..:-)

  280. #281 BMS
    April 4, 2009

    Mike, #261-

    At this point, the defendants (the state,) see no purpose in challenging it. They would be the only ones who could appeal it to the federal courts

    Well, technically, no. The State’s only option for challenging the decision is to petition for a rehearing before the Iowa supreme court.

    There are no grounds, as far as I can tell, for a run through the federal system – the case was brought on purely state law grounds, and there is no federal question at issue.

    This case is done! Marriage equality for consenting adult couples begins in Iowa on April 24th!

  281. #282 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    This is only slightly OT, but our resident funditard Rob brought up revelations. I didn’t click his link, but I’m sure all the signs point to Obama as being hellspawn.

    I wasn’t raised christian by any means, but I thought prophecy is defined as “this is what will come to pass”. However, fundies seem to think it means “this is what will come to pass if y’all sit around on your beersoaked asses and don’t vote repulican!”

    Revelation- avoidable or not? Good thing or bad? I don’t use fundie “logic”, so I’m confused.

  282. #283 Matt Heath
    April 4, 2009

    Besides, do you people really think that conservatives are going to recognize gay “marriage” anyway. If it were legal in every state and was happening on a daily basis in every county do you actually think that we will change our minds about it?

    This is actually a reason why most conservatives opposition to laws allowing gay marriage is ludicrous. The law can’t make you change how you use a word (unless you are speaking for the government). If you want to deny that people who are legally married are really married, nobody’s going to stop you. If you refused to accept that two people of different races could really be married nobody could stop you, either. In both cases it would make you kind of a dick, but there’s no law against that.
    Right-wingers seem genuinely scared that if the use of the word “marry” changes in law they will lose their old usage. I just don’t understand how anyone would see that a government changing how it uses words in a legal context would have to have any effect on everyday language. It’s just such a weird slave mentality regarding the state, and from people who always talk up the rugged individual.

    raven @278: Is it cool if you don’t use “retard” as a general purpose insult against the hateful and wilfully ignorant?

  283. #284 ishiko
    April 4, 2009

    Okay, I never comment, but I have to right now (through my celebratory post-alcohol haze, in my house in Sioux City, Iowa).

    SUCK IT, CALIFORNIA! We may be quiet, respectful farm folk, but we know what’s right!

  284. #285 raven
    April 4, 2009

    This is only slightly OT, but our resident funditard Rob brought up revelations. I didn’t click his link, but I’m sure all the signs point to Obama as being hellspawn.

    I didn’t click his link either. Afraid it would lower the IQ of my computer’s cpu.

    The antichrist is an all purpose demon for the fundies who don’t do thinking or logic. At any given time, it usually is the ever popular RCC pope, Ratzinger. But it is frequently moved to whatever democrat is in power or the UN.

    PZ and Dawkins will know they have really arrived when they become the antichrist.

    More likely IMO, the antichrist would be Dobson, Hagee, Falwell, Robertson, Palin, Parsely, Warren, and a few other fundie toads. If the god can be three beings, the trinity, the antichrist can be 10 or so, a decinity.

  285. #286 Marc Abian
    April 4, 2009

    Rob, what you say is so hilariously stupid I do not believe that you are serious. I think it is a parody.

  286. #287 The MadPanda
    April 4, 2009

    Exactly, Comrade Abian. Our little agitpropper is following Beloved Leader’s mandate to make true American patriots look like loud-mouthed ignoramuses. Now if only he’d quote from the Little Red Book more often like he’s supposed to…

    The MadPanda, FCD

  287. #288 mandrake
    April 4, 2009

    Rob is probably right about one thing (I can’t believe I just wrote that). Fundamentalist Muslims probably *do* hate godless libruls more than they hate Fundamentalist Christians. As a godless librul, I’m rather proud of that.

  288. #289 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    I don’t know, Marc. It’s possible Rob’s a poe. What makes me doubt it was his attempt to pass off his hicksville to-do list as a “Me, Tarzan” moment.

    That just seemed too uproariously pathetic to be anything but genuine.

  289. #290 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    Raven:

    God said he would never destroy the earth again WITH A FLOOD!

    The next destruction will be by fire.

    So all of those precious museums, books, and every single item of human history will be destroyed. Then a new earth will be created void of evil and sin. it will be like the original earth before sin entered. Imagine: no death, no disease, etc.

  290. #291 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Yawn, Rob, we would be just shivering in our boots–except your god doesn’t exist, so nothing to worry about. Your bible is full of bad cactus juice ravings too. Only to be believed by the delusional, like yourself.

  291. #292 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    How did it go with those bugs, Robbie? You showin’ em what’s what?

  292. #293 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 4, 2009

    Yeah! Just imagine.

  293. #294 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    Hey you liberals were right. We are already challenging the illegal decision made in Iowa by criminal judges.

    Here are some interesting links:

    http://www.missionamerica.com/

    http://www.libertycounsel.org/

  294. #295 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    Hey you liberals were right. We are already challenging the illegal decision made in Iowa by criminal judges.

    Here are some interesting links:

    http://www.missionamerica.com/

    http://www.libertycounsel.org/

  295. #296 ROB
    April 4, 2009
  296. #297 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Yawn, Rob, links for idiots like yourself who are sheeple to imaginary deities. We think, and we think you are a turd, as your ideas look bad and smell. What else can one expect from sheeple poop.

  297. #298 Rev. BigDUmbChimp
    April 4, 2009

    Rob

    What is the point of your AIG link?

  298. #299 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    To make things fair, I’ll give you liberals a chance to rebuke me on my on turf. My blog is http://robhood.us/weblog.php

  299. #300 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 4, 2009

    Don’t get fooled by evolutionists

    You ignorant little wanker, did you ever bother to read the header for this blog.

    Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal

    You are not even smart enough to play to your audience.

  300. #301 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Rob, you have presented nothing except excrement. No need to refute excrement, just clean it up. Give us the coordinates of your place so we can send your shit back to you by trebuchet.

  301. #302 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 4, 2009

    I cannot say that I give a flying fuck about your blog.

  302. #303 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    A blogwhore. I should have known.

    Judging by your stats, I’d say you need it.

  303. #304 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 4, 2009

    ROB what a coward you are.

    You came here and shit all over the place and you now are running off.

    Coward

  304. #305 Ace of Sevens
    April 4, 2009

    Rob, what crime, exactly did the judges commit? Keep in mind that your answer may constitute libel if what you already said didn’t.

    And to all of you complainign about this being anti-democratic: the purpose of a liberal society is to maximize the freedoms of the individual. Democracy is a means to achieve this end. It is not an end in itself. This means the majority cannot restrict a minority’s rights just because they are unpopular.

  305. #306 'Tis Himself
    April 4, 2009

    We are already challenging the illegal decision made in Iowa by criminal judges.

    Translation: Some judges made a decision I don’t like. Boo hoo!

  306. #307 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    Ace of Sevens :

    The judges commited this:

    They forced the will of political leftists onto the face of the majority who voted it down. I thought that America was a country of “we the people”, not we the judges.

    Besides America is not a democracy. It is a Republic. Have you ever recited the words to the Pledge of Allegiance? never mind, look who I am talking to.

    “the REPUBLIC for which it stands”.

    There is only one thing we can do and that’s call for impeachment on judges who illegally make decisons against the voters. What’s the point n voting on something if some nutty appointed judge is just going to use his own personal political bias to cast it down anyway?

  307. #308 Numad
    April 4, 2009

    “I thought that America was a country of ‘we the people’, not we the judges.”

    “Besides America is not a democracy. It is a Republic.”

    Is this doublethink yet? I mean, it wasn’t simultaneous, but pretty close!

  308. #309 Rilke's Granddaughter
    April 4, 2009

    I don’t think Rob’s a poe. I think he’s a lonely little wanker who wants to get some traffic for his completely neglected blog by coming here and making deliberately incendiary statements.

    Such a pity he’s a moron; he might actually have generated some traffic. But he doesn’t realize that we don’t care what stercor he chooses to spread in his own living room.

    It’s not like anyone here or the real world is going to care what he thinks, now, is it?

  309. #310 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 4, 2009

    What’s the point n voting on something if some nutty appointed judge is just going to use his own personal political bias to cast it down anyway?

    Well there is this pesky thing called the constitution.

  310. #311 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 4, 2009

    There is that pesky little detail about protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

    Also, are all of these awful leftists going to forse you to marry a man?

    The reason I have no desire to click to your blog is because of all the ignorant bullshit that you have already said here. You are making monsters out of people who have no desire to take away your rights, just claim the rights that other people have.

  311. #312 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    Certainly not in Iowa, they won’t.

  312. #313 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    Sorry, I was replying to- “It’s not like anyone here or the real world is going to care what he thinks, now, is it?”

    Certainly not in Iowa, they won’t.

  313. #314 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    “Well there is this pesky thing called the constitution.”

    Which any self-described conservative hates with a passion unbridled.

  314. #315 Rilke's Granddaughter
    April 4, 2009

    Rob, you truly are a moron. More importantly, you’re ignorant of politics (and religion, I note from your posts):

    There is only one thing we can do and that’s call for impeachment on judges who illegally make decisons against the voters. What’s the point n voting on something if some nutty appointed judge is just going to use his own personal political bias to cast it down anyway?

    Judges are there to balance the legislative branch – remember the whole “checks and balances” idea from your basic civics class? Oh, that’s right – they don’t have civics classes in the 2nd grade.

    And there are conservative judges in that group. They are supposed to make legal judgments about what’s constitutional. And they did. The fact that you’re in the closet and in denial about it shouldn’t make you so jumpy when someone acts intelligently. After all, given your track record, SOMEONE needs to balance you out.

  315. #316 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 4, 2009

    Besides America is not a democracy. It is a Republic.

    I bet you’re a huge David Barton fan, in which case you’re an idiot.

  316. #317 PZ Myers
    April 4, 2009

    I see. Rob is a spammer as well as a proselytizing god-botter. Fair warning: that can get you banned. Join in the discussion or go away — hit-and-run link drops don’t count as discussion.

  317. #318 GMacs
    April 4, 2009

    Rob, here’s something by its real name. Actually, it is several things given one name.

    -Schizophrenic Hive-mind of the Ignorant
    -Random misfirings of neurons interpreted as a voice
    -Delusion held steadfastly by intellectually fearful

    Not GOD.

  318. #319 GMacs
    April 4, 2009

    My sincerest apologies to schizophrenics for my previous post.

  319. #320 raven
    April 4, 2009

    Rob the braindead troll lying:

    Raven:

    God said he would never destroy the earth again WITH A FLOOD!

    The next destruction will be by fire.

    So all of those precious museums, books, and every single item of human history will be destroyed. Then a new earth will be created void of evil and sin. it will be like the original earth before sin entered. Imagine: no death, no disease, etc.

    Got that so wrong.

    Geneis 8
    21 The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though [a] every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.

    22 “As long as the earth endures,
    seedtime and harvest,
    cold and heat,
    summer and winter,
    day and night
    will never cease.”

    God said the earth will endure forever and no more mass killings. He told Noah on the next page, no more floods but clearly what he promised himself takes precedence.

    Typical fundie. Doesn’t know his own religion, has never read the bible, sheep that repeats whatever his cult master says, evil, and lying a lot.

    Really Rob, your distilled essence of sickness and stupidity is amusing for a few minutes. After that it is just garbage in, garbage out and boring.

    Linking to AIG is a waste of time. Calling Ham and AIG a cess pool of malignant stupidity insults cess pools.

    Then a new earth will be created void of evil and sin. it will be like the original earth before sin entered. Imagine: no death, no disease, etc

    It doesn’t say this in the bible. You are just repeating what your cult says, something made up. Jehovahs Witness or maybe Mormon IIRC. but not Xian.

  320. #321 ROB
    April 4, 2009

    Te next thing we knowsome judge will force preachers to “marry” “gay” people in churches. They better not! Keep the state issue out of the church. Let those judges who said it was okay marry them.

    Some atheists wish to ban the word “marriage” becuase it is religious and deals with God’s plan of a covenant marriage. That’s fine by me. Let the gay people co-exist and let regular people marry.

    I can’t help it because some people choose to be with the same sex – even though it is disgusting.

    If they want to do that, keep it indoors in the privacy of your own home – not in public where kids can see it.

    —————-

    If America hating Godophobes can burn American flags, don’t that gives regualr Americans the right to burn rainbow flags? Free speech anyone?

  321. #322 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Rob, more sheeple shit you are leaving. You really should clean up after yourself if you are a good citizen. Apologizing for your posts is a good way to start.

  322. #323 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    “Some atheists wish to ban the word “marriage” becuase it is religious and deals with God’s plan of a covenant marriage. That’s fine by me. Let the gay people co-exist and let regular people marry.”

    You’re not getting it, Rob. It’s not sinking in.

    Come April 24th, gay people in Iowa can be legally married. Married.

    And you don’t have a damned thing to say about it.

  323. #324 ROBB
    April 4, 2009

    I m nt plgzng fr nythng. I’ll plgz t mnkys fr lnkng lbrls t vltn myb, bt tht’s s fr s t gs.

    —————-

    RAVEN:

    Why r y qtng smthng tht y dsps? Agn, YOU r th wrng n. Th fld ws WORLDWIDE nd Gd prmsd t nvr brng nthr WORLDWIDE fld.

    RAVEN, y s ll lbrls d knw nthng:

    8 Thn Gd sd t Nh nd t hs sns wth hm: 9 “I nw stblsh my cvnnt wth y nd wth yr dscndnts ftr y 10 nd wth vry lvng crtr tht ws wth y?th brds, th lvstck nd ll th wld nmls, ll ths tht cm t f th rk wth y?vry lvng crtr n rth. 11 I stblsh my cvnnt wth y: Nvr gn wll ll lf b ct ff by th wtrs f fld; nvr gn wll thr b fld t dstry th rth.”

    12 And Gd sd, “Ths s th sgn f th cvnnt I m mkng btwn m nd y nd vry lvng crtr wth y, cvnnt fr ll gnrtns t cm: 13 I hv st my rnbw n th clds, nd t wll b th sgn f th cvnnt btwn m nd th rth. 14 Whnvr I brng clds vr th rth nd th rnbw pprs n th clds, 15 I wll rmmbr my cvnnt btwn m nd y nd ll lvng crtrs f vry knd. Nvr gn wll th wtrs bcm fld t dstry ll lf. 16 Whnvr th rnbw pprs n th clds, I wll s t nd rmmbr th vrlstng cvnnt btwn Gd nd ll lvng crtrs f vry knd n th rth.”

    Gnss 9-16

    YOU gt t wrng -AGAIN!

  324. #325 ROBB
    April 4, 2009

    Rck R:

    I cn d smthng bt t. And I wll.

    N thy wll nt b mrrd bcs tht s nt Gd’s cvnnt. Th trm my lglly b “mrry”, bt th “mrrg” s fk bcs t ds nt g lng wth wht Gd dsgnd. t wll b fk “mrrg”.

    ———————-

    Wll, wht m I cmpnng bt? My stt bnnd t n 2004.

    I wndr wht wld hppn f I slppd tststrn spplmnts nt gy mn’s drnk vrydy? Intrstng. I wndr f h wld chng? Nc xprmnt. NAH! Prbbly cm t wth hry gy mn thn.

    ———————

    Y ppl r t stnc rntd t rlz tht hmsxlty s phschlgcl nd nt physcl. Ask yr gy bdds bt thr chldhd. I’ll bt y mny thtmst f thm wll hv hm n whch thr s n bcns f mthr r fthr, hv bn sxlly bsd s chld, r ws nglctd.

  325. #326 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Robb, the flud never happened. Absolutely no evidence for the flud in the peer reviewed scientific literature. Your god only exists between your ears, and that makes the bible a work of fiction until you show physical evidence for your god and physical evidence that the bible is not fiction. And you can’t quote from the bible until you show evidence for both.

  326. #327 GMacs
    April 4, 2009

    Again, YOU are the wrong one. The flood was WORLDWIDE and God promised to never bring another WORLDWIDE flood.

    Wow, this God fella is a crafty, sneaky bitch. I don’t imagine he has many friends. Can you imagine how horrible the world would be if people followed such a shifty little shit?
    …oh, dear

  327. #328 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    Paging PZ! PZ to the Iowa marriage thread!

    We got another Barb here.

  328. #329 Jadehawk
    April 4, 2009

    No they will not be married becuase that is not God’s covenant.

    no one gives a flying fuck whether your imaginary sky-pixie approves or not.

  329. #330 ROBB
    April 4, 2009

    Pr rltd “scnc” s jk. Th fld dd hppn. It hppnd wrldwd. Lk t th Grnd Cnyn. Lk rnd. Hw d y thnk ll ths fssls frmd. If n nml ds, thn th bctr dtrrts th skns nd bns bfr t cn fsslz. Th fld wld hv brd bllns f plnts, nmls, nd hmns lv n shrt mnt f tm, thrfr fsslzng thm.

    Bsds, n n gvs crp bt thst crp thr. Y ppl cs mr prblms thn y slv.

  330. #331 Wowbagger, OM
    April 4, 2009

    No they will not be married becuase that is not God’s covenant.

    Then why doesn’t the alleged god do something about it? Why does he sit back, pulling his pud, while his pissant followers flail and blather and achieve absolutely nothing?

    Omnipotent god? More like impotent god.

  331. #332 Lee Picton
    April 4, 2009

    Seriously, PZ, is it not possible just to leave the numbering intact and remove the comments of the offensive posts? Rob is another Barb/Simon and will need banning, but I know I will not repeat parts of quotes if the numberings are original. Rob is one sick, hateful puppy, and unlike some others, displays no socially redeeming qualities,

  332. #333 ROBB
    April 4, 2009

    Pr rltd “scnc” s jk. Th fld dd hppn. It hppnd wrldwd. Lk t th Grnd Cnyn. Lk rnd. Hw d y thnk ll ths fssls frmd. If n nml ds, thn th bctr dtrrts th skns nd bns bfr t cn fsslz. Th fld wld hv brd bllns f plnts, nmls, nd hmns lv n shrt mnt f tm, thrfr fsslzng thm.

    Bsds, n n gvs crp bt thst crp thr. Y ppl cs mr prblms thn y slv.

  333. #334 ROBBB
    April 4, 2009

    HE wll d smthng bt t – Evr hrd f th Scnd Cmng?

  334. #335 Steve_C
    April 4, 2009

    HAHAHAHA.” Take that you atheists! My stupid defeats you!”

    Hehehe. This guy is hysterical. Did you shoot any wasps with the big 45 of yours hot stuff?

  335. #336 ROBBB
    April 4, 2009

    LEE:

    Is prtstng, brkng wndws, smkng dp, lghtng frs, nd fghtng plc “scl rdmng”? If t s thn y ppl r xtrmly sclly rdmd.

  336. #337 raven
    April 4, 2009

    Rob the mentally ill idiot; Sorry I called you merely stupid and ignorant. With the load of hate you are carrtubg around and inability to think coherently, you have to classified as mentally ill.

    These are the sort of xians that gave the religion its bad name and are destroying it. When xian become synonymous with crazy, hating, lying, and stupid, who would want to be one?

    Geneis 8
    21 The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though [a] every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.

    22 “As long as the earth endures,
    seedtime and harvest,
    cold and heat,
    summer and winter,
    day and night
    will never cease.”

    Dueling bible verses here. Genesis 8 has priority over Genesis 9. Floods are a subset of general destruction and what god promises himself is more important than what he tells Noah. Besides which, he never said, no more floods but next time I’ll massacre y’all some other clever way. Given the multitude of ways a deity can kill everyone, that would make it a trivial promise and meaningless. You are just making stuff up.

    Irrelevant anyway. Genesis is just mythology.

    Jehovahs Witness or some similar cult. Did they teach you to hate so much or did you pick that up on your own? Either way, the thread is yours. Repulsive kooks are dime a dozen and quickly boring. Best I can say, we have cops, judges, and armies to keep them from going totally crazy and killing everyone and destroying our society.

    Last poll I saw, Pew, pointed out that the majority of the US, mostly xians BTW, are sick and tired of fundies. You are well on your way to being a despised minority the hard way, by earning it.

  337. #338 Guy Incognito
    April 4, 2009

    #334: It was OK, but it wasn’t worth the five year wait.

  338. #339 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Robb, the only joke is your god and bible, both exist as true only between your ears. You must show physical evidence to convince us otherwise. Your testament is worthless, as you are already shown to bear false witness.

  339. #340 ROBBB
    April 4, 2009

    No bt I hv sht spdr wth .22 rfl. sd t hnt thm whn ws kd.(n th wds). t mks fr grt ccrcy trnng – fr whn Obm css th scnd cvl wr – n whch th Sth wll wn ths tm. Thy shld hv wn th frst tm, bt r stpd gnrl srrndrd lk n dt. nvr srrndr t th nmy. Fght tll dth.

  340. #341 RObo
    April 4, 2009

    No but I have shot a spider with a .22 rifle. i used to hunt them when i was a kid.(in the woods). it makes for great accuracy training – for when Obama causes the second civil war – in which the South will win this time. They should have won the first time, but our stupid general surrendered like an idiot. never surrender to the enemy. Fight till death.

  341. #342 Steve_C
    April 4, 2009

    HAHAHA. I picture a fat guy in Camos hiding in the woods eating beef jerky. Awesome!

    I call POE!

  342. #343 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Robb, when are you going to clean up after yourself? The amount of mindless sheeple shit you are leaving is becoming hazardous due to the amount of stupidity, insipidity, and wanking in it. We will have to start charging you to haul it out safely.

  343. #344 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    If he’s a poe, so is his entire blog.

    Methinks he’s just an attention whore. Like xians in general.

  344. #345 Jadehawk
    April 4, 2009

    wow, there’s another set of 100% guaranteed fact-free posts from rob. also, please do tell me, how many windows have I broken exactly?

    and since you’re such a fan of the status-quo and do not find violence a solution to problems, I suggest you give Britain her colonies back.

  345. #346 Bone Oboe
    April 4, 2009

    And I shot an ant with a flame-thrower, no wait, that was from the movie “Them”.

  346. #347 raven
    April 4, 2009

    Robb the homicidal maniac:

    Rick R:

    I can do something about it. And I will.

    Typical fundie. Lies are all they have. And violence and murder are just below the surface.

    A threat. So, what are you going to do? Shoot up a gay bar or run over a couple of women or men walking together? They could be gay, after all.

    We will probably be hearing from Robb again someday. In the headlines when another kook goes berserk and starts randomly shooting people. They probably won’t even be gay but the Robbs don’t really care by this point.

    The fundies really turned xianity 180 degrees. “Jesus loves you; xianity is a religion of peace, love, and tolerance. And anyone who doesn’t agree will be tortured, mutilated, and killed.” Like I said, this is why we have cops, judges, and armies. Among other things, they protect society from the Haters, Liars, and Killers for jesus.

  347. #348 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 4, 2009

    Holy shit. ROB is as big of a joke as we’ve had around here recently.

    I’m laughing at you ROB.

  348. #349 Steve_C
    April 4, 2009

    If Robb is part of the next civil war… the “north” will win again, easily.

    Oh ok. He’s one of those TowneHallLGFAIGDITTOHEAD fuckwits.

  349. #350 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 4, 2009

    HE will do something about it – Ever heard of the Second Coming?

    Is that some gay porn movie?

  350. #351 raven
    April 4, 2009

    Robb threatening mass murder:

    No but I have shot a spider with a .22 rifle. i used to hunt them when i was a kid.(in the woods). it makes for great accuracy training – for when Obama causes the second civil war – in which the South will win this time. They should have won the first time, but our stupid general surrendered like an idiot. never surrender to the enemy. Fight till death.

    Speaks for itself. This guy really is truly crazy. He may very well end up the next mall shooter. We’re done here and I am so glad I don’t live in the south central USA.

  351. #352 Steve_C
    April 4, 2009

    Hehehe… he said “second coming” with a straight face. The first coming happened 30 seconds after he got started. What a waste of viagra!

  352. #353 RObo
    April 4, 2009

    No but I have shot a spider with a .22 rifle. I used to hunt them when I was a kid.(in the woods). It makes for great accuracy training. Too bad the liberal kids didn’t have gun. We could have played cowboys and indians.

  353. #354 Shaden Freud
    April 4, 2009

    Lewis Black holds forth on same-sex marriage.

  354. #355 PZ Myers
    April 4, 2009

    Rob/ROBB/whatever — I’ve had about enough of your ignorant, hateful homophobia. Go hang out at Aryan Nations or someplace like that.

  355. #356 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 4, 2009

    If America hating Godophobes can burn American flags, don’t that gives regualr Americans the right to burn rainbow flags? Free speech anyone?

    Holy shit you’re an idiot.

    What is a regular American?

    And What is a Godophobe?

    Burn away. Burn all the rainbow flags you want.

    Just make sure they aren’t attached to anyone or anything.

    Idiot

  356. #357 Riverman
    April 4, 2009

    Wht rctm sntchr kps ncnrtng my wrds n hr? Whtvr hppnd t fr spch? Oh, yh I frgt. Fr spch s fr lbrls, nt rglr ppl. Srry, frgt.

    [morphing will also get you banned. --pzm]

  357. #358 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Idiot

    Amen Rev.

  358. #359 Lakeman
    April 4, 2009

    You aks what is a Godophobe? Well silly liberals made up the word homophobe like we are scared of gay people or something, so Godophobes must be godless liberals who are afraid of conservatives God believers.

    Godophobes

  359. #360 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Morphing, another crime against Pharyngula. Idiot trolls are sooooooo boring. Just no imagination.

  360. #361 GMacs
    April 4, 2009

    Is anyone else getting seriously concerned?

    My mind is just recalling headlines I’ve heard in the news the last couple years about people posting in chat rooms and message boards before going on rampages.

    Fortunately most are hoaxes, but this guy is still damaging my calm.

  361. #362 raven
    April 4, 2009

    Robb making death threats:

    No but I have shot a spider with a .22 rifle. I used to hunt them when I was a kid.(in the woods). It makes for great accuracy training. Too bad the liberal kids didn’t have gun. We could have played cowboys and indians.

    I knew it would come down to this. Death threats. Probably drunk and high on meth as well.

    So predictable, so boring. So crazy.

    BTW, making death threats over the internet is a federal crime, a felony. The FBI has a cybyercrimes division to track these down and track them they will.

    Most of us have gotten some or a lot. Two of my stalkers ended up in federal court, charged with felonies, and trying to explain some ugly statements to a federal judge. But don’t let anything trivial like the law stop you.

    PS. PZ, if you are reading this far, ban him. This guy is genuinely crazy and potentially homicidal. Not worth encouraging his ranting and raving.

  362. #363 ROBBBBB
    April 4, 2009

    PZ: fine I’ll leave, but I was just defending myself. However, you are hateful to tell me to hang out with Ayrans. Why don’t you hang out with the devil. oops Too late.

    Bye Godophobes, I shall return in the future

    Until then, happy American hating Godophobe gay lickers organizer post it alls.

  363. #364 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    “Is anyone else getting seriously concerned?”

    Nah. This turd is all false bravado, Internet Tough Guy with a cross and a confederate flag.

    And a can of Raid.

  364. #365 Jadehawk
    April 4, 2009

    ROB, in the bottom right corner

  365. #366 Josh
    April 4, 2009

    If America hating Godophobes…

    Wait–what? We all hate America? I’m sorry–did you just question my fucking patriotism?

    Listen, dickhead, my morality and my patriotism is my fucking business. I have earned the right to define those things for myself. They certainly won’t be dictated to me by Joe-The-I’m-Not-Really-A-Plumber-But-I-Play-One-For-John-McCain wannabes like you. Until you’ve crawled under more automatic weapons fire than I have, please feel free to sit down, put your feet up, and enjoy a steaming hot cup of shut the fuck up.

  366. #367 GMacs
    April 4, 2009

    Josh,

    You are my new god.

    Sorry, PZ

  367. #368 Steve_C
    April 4, 2009

    Josh 4 Molly! Again.

  368. #369 Wowbagger, OM
    April 4, 2009

    I was thinking – as I was boiling the kettle to make a cup of tea – that this would have been exactly what we’d have seen had the internet existed during other periods of significant social change.

    The 1860s equivalent of lowbrow scumbags like Rob would have been on the blogs ranting about how us abolitionists hated America; in the 1920s, supporters of women’s suffrage would have been the target of this kind of barely-coherent whining.

    And the 1960s? Hoo-whee, the pissant Robs of the world would have been shorting out keyboards everywhere with all the froth and spittle exploding from their slack-jawed mouths – equal rights, desegregation, and – worst of all – ending the miscegenation laws.

    But there’d have been plenty of people like us around to revel in the schadenfreude of knowing these embarrassments to humanity would be wailing and gnashing their teeth, crying and screaming in impotent fury as their ridiculous ideals got flushed down the toilet like the turds they – and their proponents – are.

    Suck it, Rob. The salt tears of your pain and rage and humiliation are delicious to me and forward-thinking folks everywhere.

  369. #370 zombywoof
    April 4, 2009

    “PZ: fine I’ll leave, but I was just defending myself. However, you are hateful to tell me to hang out with Ayrans. Why don’t you hang out with the devil. oops Too late.”

    Robb, Robb, Robb—don’t you know there ain’t no Devil, only God when he’s drunk….

  370. #371 derender
    April 4, 2009

    Josh who is questioning your patriotism?

    If you do not hate your country the way that it is, then why change it? Be careful with you language young man, there are ladies present – maybe.

  371. #372 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    “Josh who is questioning your patriotism? ”

    The troll named Rob. Try reading for comprehension.

    “If you do not hate your country the way that it is, then why change it?”

    Because you love it and actually care that it isn’t living up to it’s ideals? Are blind hatred and blind love the only 2 choice in your universe?

    “Be careful with you language young man, there are ladies present – maybe. ”

    Fuck off.

  372. #373 sioux laris
    April 4, 2009

    Just dropping in to see the bannation. What! TWO nice, if obviously laboriously so, warnings, then disenvowelation (how DO you spell that?)???

    If only so-called “saints” had the patience of PZM!

    Once I no longer have to see anything written by RRrooObbBBrrRoOoOoBbbb, I will wish him the best in his fight to be something more than he now is: “Nuthin’ but a nuthin’!”

  373. #374 derender
    April 4, 2009

    RicK R

    Can’t do that right now. Busy man. maybe later

    Again with the language and the ladies thing – maybe

  374. #375 Jadehawk
    April 4, 2009

    derender, are you implying the women here are to delicate to handle a full vocabulary? cuz if so, you’re either a condescending as, or a bumbling idiot

    and also: fuck you.

  375. #376 Rick R
    April 4, 2009

    Better trolls, please.

  376. #377 Jadehawk
    April 4, 2009

    also: my spelling sucks.

  377. #378 derender
    April 4, 2009

    Jadehawk :

    maybe in a little while. Care to join me?

  378. #379 derender
    April 4, 2009

    All you can get is ONE woman on here? That’s hilarious! No wonder you support the Iowa position. You look forward to company. Hilarious!

  379. #380 'Tis Himself
    April 4, 2009

    Josh,

    Until you’ve crawled under more automatic weapons fire than I have, please feel free to sit down, put your feet up, and enjoy a steaming hot cup of shut the fuck up.

    One of the things that annoys me about many conservatives is their refusal to believe that liburls could actually have served in the military or even know something about firearms (excuse me, bang-bangs, we have to keep things simple for conservatives).

  380. #381 zombywoof
    April 4, 2009

    “All you can get is ONE woman on here? That’s hilarious! No wonder you support the Iowa position. You look forward to company. Hilarious”

    That’s exactly right derender-come join us-take a walk on the wild side sugar. Don’t be afraid- are your knees all aquiver at the prospect?- a little touch of the lavender perhaps?

  381. #382 The MadPanda
    April 4, 2009

    Ahhh, there you have it, Comrade Tis (or is it Comrade Himself? I can’t read your dossier down here in the bunker). REAL American Conservatives understand these things. This is why our recent guest is so obviously one of Beloved Leader’s little agitprop drones doing his level best to discredit the running pig-dog lackeys of the imperialists.

    No REAL American would say such things. Dissent is patriotic, after all, which is why it must be demonized. Beloved Leader’s plan for world domination demands it.

    The MadPanda, FCD

  382. #383 zombywoof
    April 4, 2009

    Jadehawk :

    maybe in a little while. Care to join me? -derender

    Jadehawk-I think he’s started without you-what do you want to bet he’s got a sneezeguard over his keyboard? He better keep the kleenex handy!

  383. #384 derender
    April 4, 2009

    I just got finished. Want me to send you a sample?

    I don;t use kleenex – it’s bad for your environment -remember?

    I wipe mine on CFL bulbs becuase that’s all they’re good for.

  384. #385 derender
    April 4, 2009

    http://www.simplewaterfuel.com/?hop=ddl4all

    the easy way to be environmentally friendly. In this case, just mentally friendly. Forget water, just pee in the tank.

  385. #386 derender
    April 4, 2009

    http://www.simplewaterfuel.com/?hop=ddl4all

    A great way to be environmentally freindly. Just pee in the tank. it’s stronger than water and the exhaust kills bugs at the same time.

  386. #387 Wowbagger, OM
    April 4, 2009

    All you can get is ONE woman on here? That’s hilarious!

    Oh dear. There’s going to be a shitstorm once this idiot gets his deficiencies noticed. Try looking here to see how Pharyngulites feel about women.

    For someone who obviously feels he is defined and made superior by the possession of testicles you sure do put them at risk by coming here and being as stupid as you’ve been. Stick around and you’ll see what I mean – and you’ll leave singing a couple of octaves higher.

    Mind you, the women will have to be quick to get in before MA Jeff does.

  387. #388 postman jim
    April 4, 2009
  388. #389 Josh
    April 4, 2009

    One of the things that annoys me about many conservatives is their refusal to believe that liburls could actually have served in the military or even know something about firearms (excuse me, bang-bangs, we have to keep things simple for conservatives).

    Indeed. I would wager that the full measure of what I’ve been taught about firearms would scare the everliving hell out of Rob.

  389. #390 derender
    April 4, 2009

    Josh, stop bragging. Just becuase you been shot at, doesn’t mean you know it all. Sounds like you are still mad about Rob. Get over it. He was probably right. No one should question one’s patriotism, but this question stems from the blind hatred that some liberals have for the USA. We see them burning flags on the news, but we never see them burning Mexican flags of those illegal aliens who fly another country’s flag openly and refuse to lear the language of the country. I ‘ll make a deal with Mexico:

    Send all of the illegals here you want. They get free medical care and education. in return I live in cacun all expeses paid for life. Medical, dental, food, education, housing, etc. Oh, and you have to make your residents put everything in English since I am an illegal guest. I wonder if this tactic could work with China?

    ————-

    i myself know a good bit about firearms including how to make those pesky bullets that are illegal. Anyone can make a gun and bullet with the right smithing tools and good metal working shop. It’s not that hard to make homeade weapons that are more dangerous than store bought ones. Molds are readily available to most anyone and so is reloading powder. Teflon coating anyone? Just say wal-mart.

    I know people who have teflon coated their own bullets. Besides, I use Hollow points anyway. FMJ is crap except for target practice.

    I do wish I had my own AR-15 though. I need the money more than the rifle right now though. Even if Obama bans them (and he will) we can always buy spare parts and assemble them ourselves. stupid government never thinks about assembly after the fact. Good thing we have mothballs for a government or else we would really be in trouble.

    ———————–

  390. #391 SC, OM
    April 4, 2009

    random troll of the VD variety:

    Be careful with you language young man, there are ladies present – maybe.

    …All you can get is ONE woman on here?

    Well, as I’ve said before, I may not be a lady, but I’m all woman.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4waY_ZHmeYw

    (Yes, I do like that song. What can I do? It’s sad and touching.)

  391. #392 SC, OM
    April 4, 2009

    Are these kids fooling around or has this been linked to by some sicko site again?

  392. #393 aratina
    April 4, 2009

    How did a thread about marriage rights turn to the topic of weapons manufacturing and illegal immigration? In that case, I was driving through the Red state of Georgia today and wouldn’t you know it, a small American flag was blowing around in the wind like a piece of litter on the side of the freeway. I almost ran over it. I repeat, this was in the Red state of Georgia. Symbolism? Think about it, derender.

  393. #394 Josh
    April 4, 2009

    *yawn*
    I wasn’t bragging. I was making a point. Not surprised you missed it.

    Sounds like you are still mad about Rob. Get over it.

    Hey, how about this: fuck you. Rob was being an asshole. He’s earned my rancor.

    He was probably right. No one should question one’s patriotism,

    You do realize that these two statements contradict each other, right?

    but this question stems from the blind hatred that some liberals have for the USA.

    And you do realize that you just called into question the patriotism of all of those liberals you’re referring to, right?

    Blind hatred? Yeah, all of the liberals I know just fucking hate America. What? As opposed to all of that country-lovin’ that the conservatives who want lies taught as science in schools have? *yawn* How’s that cool-aid taste?

    When exactly was the last time you saw a US flag burned? When? When was it?

    Seriously–where did all of the good trolls go? This new batch sucks.

  394. #395 'Tis Himself
    April 4, 2009

    the blind hatred that some liberals have for the USA.

    Fuck you, asshole. We love the US more than some conservatives who cheer George W. Bush for wasting American prestige, treasure and lives in Iraq because of non-existent WMD (or was it because Saddam Hussein was a big meanie, I could never keep Shrub’s excuse du jour updated).

  395. #396 derender
    April 4, 2009

    Josh, the “trolls” were banned according previous posts. If you want to get them, you’ll have to stop banning them.

    Well a couple of years ago a buch of leftists indoctrinated college students burned flags in California. Well, Californai stopped being a state back in the 1960s anyway.

    Now it’s a bastion for marxism.

    I do see Islamic terrorists burning flags which is okay as long as they wrap it around their head while it’s burning.

    The koo-aid tastes petty goody. it’s red.

    The lies that ae taught in school are the far left propaganda garbage being forced down our kids’ throats like homosexuality and evolution. That garbage may be okay for grown ups in college but it does not belong in public schools where children are impressionable. Of course this leftist brainwashing is what the liberals are depending on since they fail to reproduce properly. Haf of the libes are gay and cannot reproduce and the other half kill the babay that they made before it ever gets out of the womb. No wonder they seek recruits at school. They cannot make any of their own.

    Yes I do question patriotism of those who fail to see the blind hatred of Islamic terrorism knocking on our door and refuse to act on it. So get over it becuase that’s not going to “change” anytime soon – if ever.

  396. #397 derender
    April 4, 2009

    Again people – the harsh language of “tolerant” people – there is one lady present – maybe.

  397. #398 'Tis Himself
    April 4, 2009

    Well, Californai stopped being a state back in the 1960s anyway. Now it’s a bastion for marxism.

    Learn what Marxism is. All you’re showing us right now is you’re a right-wing ignoranus* who can mouth conservative propaganda but is otherwise fucking stupid.

    *ignoranus, n. An ignorant asshole.

  398. #399 aratina
    April 4, 2009

    Thy shld hv wn th frst tm, bt r stpd gnrl srrndrd lk n dt. – rb

    Ya, in drag.

  399. #400 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 4, 2009

    Posted by: aratina | April 4, 2009

    How did a thread about marriage rights turn to the topic of weapons manufacturing and illegal immigration?

    I think you know the answer already. For people like that jackass and apparently, derender; GLBT marriage, pro gun control, America hating, immigrant loving are all the same topics. Funny thing about all of this, with a centralist Democrat in power, it is the far right that is grumbling about revolution and secession. How pro-America.

  400. #401 Steve_C
    April 4, 2009

    Go away you hate filled fundie winger. You are exactly what’s wrong with this country. If anyone hates this country it’s you dumbass cry baby scaredy cat deluded right wingers. Grow the fuck up you piece of shit.

  401. #402 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 4, 2009

    Well a couple of years ago a buch of leftists indoctrinated college students burned flags in California. Well, Californai stopped being a state back in the 1960s anyway.

    How about that, the sainted Ronald Reagan was the governor of a Marxist State. Say, has anyone informed Orange County? And that Hollywood, pulling in all of that money using the marxist system.

  402. #403 Josh
    April 4, 2009

    Yes I do question patriotism of those who fail to see the blind hatred of Islamic terrorism knocking on our door and refuse to act on it.

    I was reacting to Robs thinly veiled implications that no liberals ever act on it. What part of that did you miss?

    And if you question peoples’ patriotism, then perhaps you shouldn’t write things like “No one should question one’s patriotism.”

    Oh, and you’re an evolution denier. Of course. Could we have predicted that? Apparently you’re also a hypocrite, since you’re using a computer powered, at least in part, by fossil fuels.* Nice.

    *we use the principles of evolution, in part, to prospect, successfully, for petroleum.

  403. #404 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 4, 2009

    Posted by: derender | April 4, 2009

    Again people – the harsh language of “tolerant” people – there is one lady present – maybe.

    Don’t worry about it. I am not your ideal of what a women should be, I am stronger than that. I can handle swear word. Shit, I fucking use them.

  404. #405 aratina
    April 4, 2009

    @Janine>>> Yes, I knew. Derender is also over on the Summers thread causing trouble, unfortunately, but I should have known that Rob had come back to muck up this thread even more (just got to his secession post). I totally agree, Janine, and am myself laughing about how ridiculous it is (if only the Democrats in power were really liberal rather than centrist!), but it is a little frightening with the nutters getting so worked up, almost like a window back into the McCarthy era.

  405. #406 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    Janine said,

    I am not your ideal of what a women should be, I am stronger than that. I can handle swear word. Shit, I fucking use them.

    Fuck! Me, too!

    Damn.

  406. #407 Monado
    April 5, 2009

    I only read the first 50 or so comments, so I don’t know if anyone’s mentioned this, but it’s very clearly explained on Open Salon: judicial opinion dismantles the discriminatory rationalizations that accompany prejudicial laws. And you’ll love the illustration.

  407. #408 Monado
    April 5, 2009

    Down at the bottom of the link I mentioned above, the author, a lawyer himself, says:

    The Iowa decision can not be as readily overturned as the California Supreme Court?s similar decision in the Marriage Cases was overturned by Prop 8.

    Unlike California, where the state constitution can almost immediately be amended by a simple majority vote in a ballot measure, the Iowa constitution can be amended only when majorities in both the state House and Senate in two consecutive general assemblies approve an amendment, and then the amendment is approved by a majority of voters in the next general election. Since each general assembly lasts for two years, the earliest that a proposed amendment overturning the Court?s decision could reach voters is November 2012.

  408. #409 Monado
    April 5, 2009

    Please, nobody click that video link! It’s a trojan. # 98 – 99

  409. #410 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    well, judging from that penis compensation thread #390, I’d have to bring my own cucumber to that party. lame. also, matcho went out of style 100 years ago.

    and you wouldn’t know marxism if it bit you in the head. nor would you know a lady if she kicked you in the general area where a real man’s nuts would be.

  410. #411 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    refuse to lear the language of the country

    I’m going to guess no one informed you that there isn’t such a thing as “the language of this country”.

  411. #412 GMacs
    April 5, 2009

    illegal aliens who fly another country’s flag openly and refuse to lear the language of the country.

    Would that be Cherokee, or Chippewa? Oh, wait, might as well just go with the inter-tribal Lene Lenape. How are lessons coming?

    Haf[sic] of the libes are gay and cannot reproduce[,] and the other half kill the babay[sic] that they made before it ever gets out of the womb.

    Right, because my mom, the self proclaimed liberal (and Christian, they aren’t mutually exclusive) killed me and my siblings in the womb. That’s why we’re here today. And I’m totally gay for being liberal and not conforming to gender stereotypes. Except I’m attracted women. Gee, do you ever stop and think that most of your gender norms are pointless societal constructions. Oh, and the thing with my mom is the same with my girlfriend’s parents.

  412. #413 GMacs
    April 5, 2009

    Well there I go criticizing someone else’s grammar, and I suffer from punctuation fail. Damn you, Karma!

  413. #414 Walton
    April 5, 2009

    Rob (and other trolls of various nicks, probably all the same person), you are a fucking embarrassment.

    I am not a liberal or a leftist of any stripe. I’m a free-market fiscal conservative. But people like you make me fucking ashamed to be on the political right. Your “political” stance is based on blind bigotry, illiteracy and a rejection of reason. You use religion not as a moral guide, but as a rhetorical tool to bash your opponents and to give your irrational hatred a thin veneer of legitimacy. You pretend to support “freedom” while advocating the use of state coercion to oppress those whose lifestyles don’t conform to your personal tastes.

    I really hope you’re a troll, pretending to be a conservative in order to make conservatives look stupid. If not, there’s simply no hope left for American conservatism, and I might as well pack it all in, become a goddamn Marxist-Leninist and go and protest outside the G20 in a Che T-shirt, since it would be slightly less embarrassing than being associated with the likes of you.

    Apologies to everyone for this intemperate rant.

  414. #415 derender
    April 5, 2009

    CHE was a terrorist. Same as Bin Laden, Hamas, Hezbollah, columbia guerillas, Mexican drug whores, Bill Ayers, and the like. They are all the same.

  415. #416 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Fossil fuel eh?

    What about abiotic pertroleum?

    It’s a good thing the FLOOD happened, or there would be no fossil fuels.

    Yes I am an evolution denier and I have that right. I also have the right to teach others about reality rather than the cult that evolution has spun.

    There is a distict difference between adaptation and evolution. You might want to read up on that.

    There is no way 100 foot long 50 ton lizards turned into little chickens over time. It is impossible. The fact is, dinosaurs are dinosaurs and chicens are chickens and they both existed at the same time becuase they were created in the same week. The flood of Noah kille most o the dinos. After that, the following ice age and extreme climate chnage (good thing Al Gore didn’t know Noah)killed most of the rest of them along with other species. The rest were hunted down by humans and slaughtered.

    I know you will not believe ths, but it’s okay. Those of us who do continue on with our lives ignoring dribble like evilution and climate chnage. (Like it really matters!)

  416. #417 Rick R
    April 5, 2009

    “there’s simply no hope left for American conservatism”

    Quoted for truth.

  417. #418 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    cult that evolution

    Let’s see, cult of evolution. Deity-none. Church-none. Holy book-none. Followers-none. Tithes-none.

    What you have are scientists and people who follow science, and the peer reviewed primary scientific literature with approximately a million papers or so directly and indirectly supporting evolution. Sound evidence. With error correction built in. Sound science. There is no other scientific theory for all of biology.

  418. #419 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    The flood of Noah kille most o the dinos.

    Show me in Genesis where Noah was permitted by God to not collect dinosaurs and put them on the ark? Where was that flexibility offered to Noah? Which verse in Genesis 6 would that be?

    Show me in Genesis where Noah is shown to have failed in collecting all of the animals that God commanded him to collect? Genesis 6:22 would suggest that Noah didn’t miss any animals.

    How exactly is it that the flud killed the dinosaurs?

  419. #420 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Deity-none. Church-none. Holy book-none. Followers-none. Tithes-none.

    Correction:

    Diety-Darwin. Church-Biology class. Holybook-The origin of species. Followers-atheists,darwinists, liberals. Tithes-federal government, ACLU, George Soros, left wingers.

    See, you do a cult after all.

  420. #421 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Well, like all floods, animals drown, JOSH. Thye term dinosaur was not invented until the mid 1800s. I am sure they were called “beasts of the field” and not he collected two of every KIND, not two of every animal – there is a difference.

  421. #422 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    derender you are as much of an idiot as ROB

    CHE was a terrorist. Same as Bin Laden, Hamas, Hezbollah, columbia guerillas, Mexican drug whores, Bill Ayers, and the like. They are all the same.

    Well no shit. No one here is extolling the greatness of communism. You equating anyone to it shows exactly what a giant fucking moron you are.

    It’s a good thing the FLOOD happened, or there would be no fossil fuels.

    Yes I am an evolution denier and I have that right. I also have the right to teach others about reality rather than the cult that evolution has spun.

    There is a distict difference between adaptation and evolution. You might want to read up on that.

    Oh now it comes out, you really are a total fucking dumbass.

    Tell us what about evolution is wrong. Pick a specific piece of research and then show us the refuting creationist research.

    Go ahead I bet you can’t do it. You’ll instead use broad sweeping denials that don’t actually refute anything.

    fucking idiot

    I know you will not believe ths, but it’s okay. Those of us who do continue on with our lives ignoring dribble like evilution and climate chnage. (Like it really matters!)

    First the word is drivel and it applies to the non science of creationism. Evolution has all the evidence backing it.

    Second show us the science refuting evolution you incredibly idiotic simpleton.

  422. #423 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    not he collected two of every KIND, not two of every animal – there is a difference.

    Define Kind. Support your answer. Go.

    I agree with you that it doesn’t matter what they were called, but the whole point of putting KINDS on the Ark was so that the KIND wouldn’t DIE OUT. So why did the dinosaurs not make it?

  423. #424 'Tis Himself
    April 5, 2009

    I really hope you’re a troll, pretending to be a conservative in order to make conservatives look stupid.

    Walton, I and many others here can assure you that Rob and derender are a common type of American conservative. Frothing at the mouth, calling anyone to the left of Sarah Palin a Marxist, and questioning the patriotism of everyone who doesn’t 100% agree with them. Not all conservatives are like Rob and derender, but a large and vocal percentage of them are.

  424. #425 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Diety-Darwin-only in the minds of stupid godbots. Church-Biology class NONE. Holybook-The origin of species NONE. Followers-atheists,darwinists, liberals. Tithes-federal government, ACLU, George Soros, left wingers Only in the minds of stupid godbots like yourself.

    Corrected your mindless and thoughtless and evidenceless mistakes Derneder.

    By the way, do you have any physical evidence for your imaginary deity that will pass muster with scientists, magicians, and professional debunkers as being of divine origin? Something like an eternally burning bush say? Or is god just another of your delusions, like your politics?

  425. #426 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    What about abiotic pertroleum?

    Nice dodge, but that wasn’t referring in any way to the point I made, so it kind of FAILS at refuting it. I wasn’t talking about how oil is formed. I was talking about how we find oil, which has little to do with how it’s formed. Apparently that was lost on you, however. What, is reading comprehension yet something else that makes the baby Jesus cry?

  426. #427 'Tis Himself
    April 5, 2009

    I see I was right in describing derender as an ignoranus. He doesn’t even know his own Bible, which specifically says:

    And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. Gen 6:19

    Nothing there about excluding dinosaurs.

  427. #428 GMacs
    April 5, 2009

    I am sure they were called “beasts of the field” and not he collected two of every KIND, not two of every animal – there is a difference.

    Imagine:

    GOD: Um, Noah, where are my dinosaurs?

    NOAH: Well, you didn’t specify, so I just took other “beasts of the field”.

    G: What? But… but some of them lived in forests. Chrissake, some of them flew!

    N: Yeah… we took those down to feed the jackals and shit.

    G: You didn’t even take on the velocirapters? Those were so cool. I put a lot of work into those.

    N: No, we got the chickens instead.

    G: … Chickens? … Wait… no… you preserved ALL the mustelids? Every mustelid and rodent but not. one. dinosaur?

    Sorry it’s long.

  428. #429 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    Nothing there about excluding dinosaurs.

    No one, not even god, wants to anger Tyrannosaurus Rex.

  429. #430 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    I am not a liberal or a leftist of any stripe. I’m a free-market fiscal conservative. But people like you make me fucking ashamed to be on the political right. Your “political” stance is based on blind bigotry, illiteracy and a rejection of reason. You use religion not as a moral guide, but as a rhetorical tool to bash your opponents and to give your irrational hatred a thin veneer of legitimacy.

    But this is your coalition, Walton!

    It’s important for you to put Rob and Mike Huckabee and Joel Osteen and Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum into power! You’ve got to learn to love them. They love you and so does Jesus.

    I do hope you come to America. Come out into the small towns of the Midwest and South. Sit in the bars and diners and strike up conversations. Take this charge seriously, keep it up for a few months. I’ve been doing it my whole life.

    What you will find, and I say this with no exaggeration, is that the US Republican base are some of the. worst. people. on. earth. Millions and millions of Adolf Hitlers, Timothy McVeighs, David Dukes and Pat Robertsons.

    I didn’t realize that you were unaware of the extent of America’s little war-crime-in-waiting! You know those compromises you’re so fond of? Many US Dem voters are making just such compromises, because the alternative is fascism. And I don’t mean the libertarian definition of fascism, where the IRS has the legal authority to audit you. I mean jackboots and swastikas, purity patrols, waves of lynchings, then deportations, then concentration camps, culminating in a true return to traditional values. A purge. The wingers are not kidding, and it’s a constant struggle to keep a lid on them.

    Come to America, Walton. They will think you are gay because you have a British accent, and they will whisper through the bar, making plans to assault you in the parking lot for bringing your gay ass where you don’t belong.

    All this time I thought you knew what you were advocating, and you were happy about it, like the Nazi sympathizers in the 30s. Now I see your reaction to Rob and I have to laugh.

    I’m trying to count how many people I’m personally acquainted with who have shown me their tattoos of swastikas or 14/88 or Nazi eagles. I want to say it’s less than 25 but I can’t say that with full confidence.

  430. #431 siMon
    April 5, 2009

    What should children of America call the couple of the same sex marriage ? wife and wife ? husband and husband ?

    If those couples adopt children, what should the kids call them ? big daddy and daddy ? big mommy and mommy ?

    if the kids know their “parents” sex behavior, penis to anus and vigina to vigina (with artificial penis), what is the effect ?

    wow… very interesting to watch the change of human civilization in America ! it’s a self destruction for their next generation. It’s more destructive than 9/11.

  431. #432 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    http://www.ajc.com/services/content/printedition/2009/04/05/pitt0405.html

    Sunday, April 05, 2009

    Pittsburgh ?- A man in a bulletproof vest killed three police officers answering a domestic call Saturday, police said. Police Chief Nate Harper said the motive for the shooting isn?t clear, but friends said the gunman recently had been upset about losing his job and feared the Obama administration was poised to ban guns.

    Richard Poplawski, 23, met officers at the doorway, shot two in the head immediately and then killed an officer who tried to help them, Harper said. …

    Poplawski?s best friend said Poplawski feared ?the Obama gun ban that?s on the way? and ?didn?t like our rights being infringed upon.? Edward Perkovic said Poplawski had called him at work and said, ?Eddie, I am going to die today. ? Tell your family I love them and I love you.?

    Another friend, Joe DiMarco, said Poplawski had been laid off from his job at a glass factory earlier this year.

    May I recommend http://www.amazon.co.uk/Deer-Hunting-Jesus-Delusion-Redneck/dp/1846271525/

  432. #433 SAWells
    April 5, 2009

    @431: All these questions have simple answers. Two men married? Husbands or spouses. Two women married? Wives or spouses.

    Your obsession with what gay people do in bed is psychologically revealing but irrelevant.

    All kids (except, apparently, Simon) eventually grasp that their parents have sex. It’s no biggy.

    No destruction. Just happy families.

  433. #434 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    siMon,

    Three separate questions for you:

    1) do you believe that the US government should outlaw gay sex acts?

    2) do you believe that people repeatedly practicing gay sex should be put in jail?

    3) do you believe that unrepentant gay sex practitioners should be executed, if they turn down multiple chances to repent? (Leviticus 20:13)

  434. #435 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    I’m sorry all, but this one is just too priceless. This guy makes Rush Limbaugh look thoughtful.

    After that, the following ice age and extreme climate chnage (good thing Al Gore didn’t know Noah)killed most of the rest of them along with other species.

    Huh. How come we have fossils of other species preserved in rocks related to the “Ice Age” (the “one” that I suspect you’re referring to), but not one fossil of a non-avian dinosaur. Not one. How come? If the “Ice Age” killed all of the dinosaurs who didn’t drown in the flud, then why is it than NONE of these huge animals were preserved in these deposits, when the deposits are ripe with the fossils of smaller animals?

    The rest were hunted down by humans and slaughtered.

    Oh, that’s just too funny.

  435. #436 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    But people like you make me fucking ashamed to be on the political right. Your “political” stance is based on blind bigotry, illiteracy and a rejection of reason.

    Walton, do you have any serious guesses as to why these people gravitate toward the right?

  436. #437 Walton
    April 5, 2009

    I do hope you come to America. Come out into the small towns of the Midwest and South. Sit in the bars and diners and strike up conversations. Take this charge seriously, keep it up for a few months. I’ve been doing it my whole life.

    What you will find, and I say this with no exaggeration, is that the US Republican base are some of the. worst. people. on. earth. Millions and millions of Adolf Hitlers, Timothy McVeighs, David Dukes and Pat Robertsons.

    I will reserve judgment on this until I’ve actually visited rural Republican America. Thus far I’ve only been to Washington DC and urban northern Virginia, and most of the American conservatives I’ve met have been elite DC Republicans rather than the rank and file. So I can’t judge the veracity of your claims.

  437. #438 KI
    April 5, 2009

    A tour of right-wing America! ROAD TRIP!

    We start in Alabama (where I first heard the threat to “light him up and piss him out”), up through Georgia and South Carolina (RBDC takes us on tour) across Tennessee to Arkansas, Texas and then north through Oklahoma and Kansas, Missouri, western Illinois and up to Wisconsin (where we visit the birthplace of the Republican Party and the John Birch Society),cross Minnesota through the sixth and seventh districts to North Dakota (home of Jesus Bible Camp) to eastern Montana where we’ll meet with the Freemen (real libertarians, not just book-learnin’ types).

    Still alive and sane? Then its off to Utah via Wyoming, across Nevada to SoCal, where we highlight our adventure by participating in a race riot, courtesy of Lou Dobbs.

    I think this may be sufficient to dissuade our friend from across the pond about the reasonableness of the American Reich (er, I mean “right”, don’t want to pull a Godwin).

  438. #439 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    They elected David Duke.

    They elected him.

    To the Louisiana House in 1988.

    Most of the people who voted for him are still alive.

    Go to the SPLC’s webpage. Look at their map of hate groups. Find a highly concentrated area. Go there.

    Or go hang out with a chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens. cofccDOTorg i won’t actually link to it.

    Or just have some fun and watch the American Vacation episode of Top Gear. :D That’s probably better. No need to endanger yourself.

  439. #440 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Uhm, yeah–DC Republicans-not the same animal at all…

    And this is OT, but might lighten things up-it’s beautiful in DC today, although the tourist count is high (writing this from the Mall on a wireless).

  440. #441 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    Walton,

    To gain some insight into the US right wing republican mind, please visit Free Republic and read as many comment threads as you can stomach.

    The folks there are just about the farthest thing from the educated, well-heeled republicans you encountered in DC.

  441. #442 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    There you go. Don’t take my word for it. Go to Free Republic and read. That’s the base, in all their hateful glory.

    For extra credit, try to see yourself in them. Your and their politics have a common root in casual human selfishness, fear and distrust. Get plenty drunk and then read the Free Republic comments, see if you can hear your anxiety in their words.

  442. #443 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Either that or decide that if these are the people you want as your allies. Just remember, those are the people that makes up the crowd that loves Limbaugh and Coulter. Sorry, I will not let people forget, when you first came here, you expressed your admiration for them.

  443. #444 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Hey, Walton! Here is Limbaugh talking about Gordon Brown.

    “So here is a full-fledged, committed global socialist praising the president of the United States for all of his achievements in the first 70 days — a global socialist happy with the changes Obama has made, and ‘you have changed America’s relationship with the world,’ which is why all of the losers that make up the protesters are breaking bank windows, but the slobbering, the slobbering – this guy, folks I’m telling you – if he keeps this up throughout the G20, Gordon Brown will come down with anal poisoning and may die from it.”

    Compare that to your typical Freeper.

    Care of Pam’s House Blend.

  444. #445 timebender13
    April 5, 2009

    Good for you Iowa! Good job!

  445. #446 Ace of Sevens
    April 5, 2009

    We seemt o have lost the thread. What about the gays? Will someone please think of the gays.

  446. #447 derender
    April 5, 2009

    T Rex andveloicaptor were not vicious to humans until after the folld. Read Gen 9. that goes for all animals.
    —————

    I was told to refut evolution with scientific evidence, but that would take a long time and you would just ignore it anyway. I’ll accept the challenge if anyone can prove evolution. If you can prove that 100 foot long 50 tons cold blooded reptiles turned into little chickens over a trillion mellinia, go for it. I’m waiting …

    First the earth is less that 10,000 years old, and even if it were 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, melennia old, that is still not enough time for anything to evolve with someone tinkiering with genetics on purpose.

    Go ahead creation deniers, impress me with your molecules to man anti-Bible stuff. At the point, I’ll even bet our cousins the monkeys are listening… God ahead give a so called logical scientific explaination as to how nothing turned into something. Start with thee Big Bang… How did the Big Bang start?

    I have my explanation. while you so called scientists run around frantically looking and hoping for an answer to the universe, I already have one. Have had for the last 6,000 years. Seems to me you are 6,000 years behind schedule.

    Go ahead mighty thinkers, impress me… Give me your explaination as to what existed before the Big Bang, and before that, and before that, and before that?
    Goe ahead. You have all the answers, explain away. I’m waiting…

  447. #448 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Well I do have the big fat idiot talking about Gordon Brown dying of anus poisoning. Thinking about it, it sounds like something that siMon would say.

    Bleh!

  448. #449 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, you have no idea what you are talking about.

    T Rex andveloicaptor were not vicious to humans until after the folld.

    Oh shit! He is going to use the coconut cracker defense!

  449. #450 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    derender, still no physical evidence for your imaginary deity. Without which, there goes all your explanations, since you were going to say “goddidit”. Boy, are you a real wimp. Real men have good physical evidence to back up their claims. That makes you a wimp and scientists with their peer reviewed scientific literature Real Men (and Women).

  450. #451 aratina
    April 5, 2009

    derender, I’m tempted to think your moniker is code for derriere.

  451. #452 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Ace of stevens:

    We are trying to forget the bad news about Iowa.

  452. #453 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    But Nerd, derender could prove that evilution could not have happened if he could have a “Trial By Combat”, or, in derender’s case, a “Trial By Firearms”. That is why all of you gay libral support the Islamic Fascist Barry. He will take away the guns from all of the righteous Americans, thus making them unable to refute our atheist lies.

  453. #454 MAJeff, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Awwww. Is the poor widdle bigot all upset? Oh noes! Homos are humans!

  454. #455 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Look at that! The dumb ass cannot even spell right the name of the person he is trying to insult. Fits in with all of the other misspellings in his nonsensical screeds.

  455. #456 'Tis Himself
    April 5, 2009

    If the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, how come radiometric dating gives an age of over four billion years?

  456. #457 Matt Heath
    April 5, 2009

    full-fledged, committed global socialist
    Brown? Srsly? I mean… Brown? I don’t think he call himself a socialist with a straight face.

  457. #458 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Matt, Derender considers anybody not to the right of the Ayatollah to be a socialist. Someone like me who has actually voted for a democrat is a communist.

  458. #459 Coemgenus
    April 5, 2009

    Why is it that none of these creation nutters can spell? Does the dribble make their fingers slip?

  459. #460 Matt Heath
    April 5, 2009

    Give me your explaination as to what existed before the Big Bang, and before that, and before that, and before that?

    Ad what north of the north pole huh huh?

    Surely you know enough general relativity and differential geometry to understand that the curvature of spacetime is such that “before” isn’t defined at the Big Bang? After all you’ve had a complete answer to universe for 6000 years. (I assume that’s in our frame of reference and you’ve been accelerating a lot, since nobody is that old).

  460. #461 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Radiomatric dating is a joke.

    several years ago in Germany, there were some human remains found in a cave and radiometric dating put their age at about 10,000 years old. Then the scientists found it the the teeth of the skulls had DENTAL FILLINGS.

    So much for accuracy of dating methods – that is, of course dentists were prevalent 10,000 years ago.

    Radiometric dating is not used to date the fossil itself, but rather than the contaminated rocks surrounding the area.

    Much of the samples taht we date are contaminated by the sun’s radiation and gives a much longer lifespan than what the real age is.

    I would love to get a hold of a T Rex bone and carve some of it up and take it to be dated. i would tell the scientists there that the bone was of a cow – probably, but I need to knwo how long it has been dead.
    It helps if the scientist does not know what I am up to when dating something, so that presuppostions do not get in the way.

  461. #462 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Godbots are a joke. They believe the earth is only 6,000 years old in spite of mountains of evidence proving otherwise. But then, they are known to have mental problems, like believing in things with no evidence. We expect that from the mentally weak.

  462. #463 aratina
    April 5, 2009

    …the the teeth…

    Calm the fuck down, derender. No need to get so uppity over same-sex love.

  463. #464 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Radiomatric dating is a joke.

    Call on Josh! Josh, you are needed here!

  464. #465 derender
    April 5, 2009

    man, you people sure do talk nasty around here. Must be a liberal thing – or maybe no morals. Then again, how could there be. Morals come from God. You don;t believe in God, therefore no morals, and nasty talk. Do you talk like this around children? That’s abuse

  465. #466 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Let’s see, a fool who cannot gets his facts right nor care enough to have spellcheck is complaining that bad words are used.

    What we have here is the very definition of a dumb fuck.

    Also, shit for brains, you would not be able to get away with giving a paleontologist a cow bone and have that person think they have a dinosaur bone.

  466. #467 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Damn-I’m sitting in a bar right now. Hold the line for me for a bit Janine, then I’ve got your six.

    And Derender? Stop lying, ok? You have no idea what you’re talking about.

  467. #468 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Janine, insulting Sinner:

    “Yes we can”! My facts are perfectly straight mam.

    And I did not saya paleontologist did I?

    Again with the silly four letter words. There may be children present – and one lady – sort of.

  468. #469 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    I didn’t know that would work.

    Ha ha ha ha.

  469. #470 Wowbagger, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Morals come from God.

    So, we can commit genocide and infanticide and that’d be okay? Because it’s certainly okay with your hateful monster-god.

    Or haven’t you actually read the bible?

  470. #471 Carlie
    April 5, 2009

    No, no, no. There are plenty of creobot threads derender can go spew on about evilution. It happens all the time around here. This thread is for teh gayz! I think it would be much more interesting to probe derender a bit, firmly if need be, to discover his innermost desires and urges on what should be done with gays. I’m sure it would be a very stimulating conversation. Seems as though he’s thought about it enough to become quite detailed about his preferences.

  471. #472 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    And Derender? Stop lying, ok? You have no idea what you’re talking about.

    That’s a typical godbot. And they are proud of their ignorance.

  472. #473 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Carlie, spank this fucker, will you?

  473. #474 Carlie
    April 5, 2009

    Damn-I’m sitting in a bar right now. Hold the line for me for a bit Janine, then I’ve got your six.

    Hold off a minute, Josh. Before you have to go through any effort, I think derender needs to explain to us exactly what radiometric dating is and exactly where the incorrect assumptions are in the methodology. Not random anecdotes about dating gone wrong, but WHY it doesn’t work. Because if he can’t, he’s full of shit and deserves absolutely no time.

    Besides, that would give you awhile to have another drink.

  474. #475 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    Morals come from God. which one?

  475. #476 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Shit for brain, you have gotten nothing right. I know very little about radiometric dating but I know that there are dozens of methods and that they are used to confirm each other. I also know you are mistaken in claiming that a chicken is a descendant of 100 foot long 50 tons cold blooded reptiles. They are descendants of a smaller and lighter member of that family that took to the skies.

    You are a bullshit artist making the claim that because you cannot understand it, it must be false. And crying over swear words does not detract from you making a fetish of your own ignorance. So there are children reading this blog. Your clean language stupidity does more harm than my profanity. And real women are not to delicate that swearing will cause them to faint.

    In other words, derender, fuck you. And while you are at it, go to the Free Republic, where many people think as you do, and tell them to stop swear also.

    Fucking creep!

  476. #477 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Carlie, I like you more and more all the time.She is spot on, derender. Show us what you’ve got.

  477. #478 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    There may be children present

    do your children melt if you use “bad” words around them? because the children around here seem to do just fine without being so overprotected.

  478. #479 Carlie
    April 5, 2009

    Carlie, spank this fucker, will you?

    I’m afraid he might like it.

    I’ll be happy to have something ready to go, but first I want derender to put up. Derender, what is your understanding of how radiometric dating works, and what about the process makes it faulty? Unacceptable answers include “the speed of decay has changed over time” (untestable) and “carbon-dating of really old things doesn’t work” (we know that, which is why we use different isotopes for old things).

  479. #480 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Carlie, spank this fucker, will you?

    That’s Patricia’s job!

  480. #481 'Tis Himself
    April 5, 2009

    Radiomatric dating is a joke.

    Do you lie like this around children? That’s abuse.

  481. #482 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Don’t do that when I have a mouthful of beer!

  482. #483 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Wowbagger:

    Infanticide comes from humans too, it’s called abortion.

    —————————

    Jadehawk:

    What do you mean which one? There is only one!

    ——————————-
    Carlie:

    “the speed of decay has changed over time” (untestable)

    Absolutley it is untestable. you are correct. Evolution is also untestable. Have you ever set in a lab for 350 millions years and watched your bateria grow into dinosaurs?

    Didn’t think so.

    My answer is:

    The speed of decay depends on many things. it depends on the environment, weather, bacterial growth, whether the animal is buried under a flood of salt water, whether it is lying in the sun and the radiation hits it full force, etc. Radiation has alot to do with the radiocarbon dating. Read up on and what better place than Answers In Genesis.

    I’m glad I financially support them. Just think. if I had the money that Bill gates or george Soros has, you people would be doomed.
    ———————

    Okay people. Now that I have explained my version, someone with the brains around here explain to me how big lizards tun into little chickens and change from cold blooded reptiles to warm-blooed mammals. I’m still wating…

  483. #484 Klokwurk
    April 5, 2009

    So, if the governor does manage to veto what would come next? Is this open to appeal?

    It’s nice living in Canada where gay marriage is allowed, though there was some talk a little while back that the conservatives might try to reopen the subject. However I think public opinion was strongly against that so they let it lie.

  484. #485 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    Jadehawk:
    What do you mean which one? There is only one!

    well, according to the link you obviously didn’t click on, there’s several thousand different gods, all about as likely as yours.

    but even if we just take yours for a moment… which of the over 38000 interpretations is the right one, with the correct set of morals?

  485. #486 Wowbagger, OM
    April 5, 2009

    derender squealed

    Infanticide comes from humans too, it’s called abortion.

    No, it’s called infanticide – that’s why there is a different word for it. Do you understand the concept? You do appear to having some difficulties with expression and comprehension; I think it’s only fair to ask.

    And, if you actually read your bible, you’ll see that your god has absolutely no problem with abortion (a child less than one month old has no value) – so, if he’s okay with it, why aren’t you?

    Are you saying your god is wrong?

  486. #487 derender
    April 5, 2009

    The one of the Bible. Haven’t youever heard of “No other Gods before me”. That includes little wooden idols MADE BY HUMAN HANDS!

  487. #488 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    Radiomatric dating is a joke.

    But you’ve got to admit, it’s a funny joke.

    All those ex-Christian children and college students, lured to hell and damnation, pornography and gay sex, all because we lied about radioactive decay.

    See, it’s not just a weapon against bodies and cities. It’s a weapon against souls.

    I will be a Prince in Hell for all the souls I’ve delivered to the Dark One by evolution evangelism.

    How many eternities of fiery torture! Funny, innit?

  488. #489 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    The speed of decay depends on many things. it depends on the environment, weather, bacterial growth, whether the animal is buried under a flood of salt water, whether it is lying in the sun and the radiation hits it full force, etc. Radiation has alot to do with the radiocarbon dating. Read up on and what better place than Answers In Genesis.

    That is not an answer. That is the stammering of a child tossing shit on a wall, hoping that some magical combination of words will sound convincing.

    Also, no said that chicken are the descendants of 100 foot long 50 tons cold blooded reptiles. That is just you mischaracterizing what biologists have to say.

  489. #490 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    The one of the Bible.

    You mean that proven work of fiction. Your god doesn’t exist and your bible is a work of fiction. Deal with it–elsewhere.

  490. #491 derender
    April 5, 2009

    (a child less than one month old has no value) – so, if he’s okay with it, why aren’t you?

    Where did you get a concoction like this? If you are referring to the pagans, He wiped them out becuase they were idol worshippers.

    If you were referring to Israel escaping Egyptian slavery, yes He wiped them out, but gave them a chance. He always gives a warning and a second chance before doing so. Only when people ignore it will He bring destruction. Besides, i figure if He created and owns the entire universe, He can do with it what he pleases.

  491. #492 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    “No other Gods before me

    right so the israelites were supposed to follow that one, and not the others. are you an israelite? i’m not. why should i follow their god, and not some other one?

    for that matter, why use the bible? the rig veda is far more interesting, and equally realistic. what if their gods are real, and yours is not?

  492. #493 Menyambal
    April 5, 2009

    What has radiometric dating got to do with marriage? After one marries, one usually stops dating, whether radiometric or on-line.

    Or is radiometric dating something like a little buzzer to carry in a pocket that detects interested strangers? You know, derender, like the colored bandannas gay men sometimes use–different colors for different perversions, left or right pocket for pitching or catching. I’m thinking you are yellow in the left pocket.

    Seriously, derender, we’ve seen hordes of godbots that cannot spell or read or reason coherently, show up to spew hate at us. All they accomplish is to make their religion look even more ridiculous, evil and unlikely.

    Evolution is a fact. Deal with it in your own way, but don’t expect to convince anyone here that they are wrong. We aren’t stubborn or close-minded, we just have a method of getting to the facts, a willingness to face the facts, and a desire to discover them. What we know, we know–which is a heck of a lot different that having blind faith, and hating anyone who disturbs that faith.

    Take a breath, and take it far away. But don’t take it to Iowa, or you might see some happy people.

  493. #494 Carlie
    April 5, 2009

    The speed of decay depends on many things. it depends on the environment, weather, bacterial growth, whether the animal is buried under a flood of salt water, whether it is lying in the sun and the radiation hits it full force, etc. Radiation has alot to do with the radiocarbon dating. Read up on and what better place than Answers In Genesis.

    Is that your final answer? Would you like to phone a friend, or perhaps poll the audience? You still have not even approached answering the question: What is your understanding of what radiometric dating is, and how does it work? You can’t say scientific conclusions are incorrect if you don’t even know how they were arrived at in the first place, derender. I refuse to waste any time trying to educate you on where I think you’ve gone wrong if I don’t even know what you think you know apart from hand-waving insipidity like “decay rates change and are affected by many things”.

  494. #495 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Janine, Insulting Sinner:

    My aren’t we creative in our language today? I seemed to have touched a nerve. So much for tolerance. You know all of that cursing might be bad for the environment. If kids are reading this, no woner they grow up to smoke dope and protest. They don;t know any better. Poor kids. Having to grow up in such a vulgar environment. Maybe we shoudl call child services and report it. Oh, and I love Free Republic. Thank you

    I shall now refer to you as Janine, The four letter word person who destroys children.

  495. #496 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    If you were referring to Israel escaping Egyptian slavery, yes He wiped them out, but gave them a chance.

    Bullshit! What did those babies have to do with the keeping of Jews as slaves. Why not going after those in power, those keeping slaves? You are proving Wowbagger’s point.

  496. #497 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    lol, answers in genesis. The speed of decay is constant – it remains constant, and if you know of a way to speed up the process please let the nuclear industry know. What varies is the amount of parent element, if you can make more parent element – like having uranium contaminating coal – then you can make substances look younger than they are. Remember more parent, less child = younger substance. More child, less parent = older substance.

    Surely that’s not too hard to understand.

  497. #498 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    Much of the samples taht we date are contaminated by the sun’s radiation and gives a much longer lifespan than what the real age is.

    Are you talking about Fischbach and Jenkins? That’s far from established.

  498. #499 Guy Incognito
    April 5, 2009

    Radiation has alot to do with the radiocarbon dating.

    That sounds like a line from a bad high school essay.

  499. #500 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    He always gives a warning and a second chance before doing so. Only when people ignore it will He bring destruction.

    He warned the infants? The Midianite babies?

    He warned the little girls who the Israelite armies then raped?

    Besides, i figure if He created and owns the entire universe, He can do with it what he pleases.

    Derender believes that might makes right. That’s the philosophy that justified the Holocaust.

    Nice going, derender, you’re a monster. A horrible, horrible person.

  500. #501 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    The speed of decay depends on many things. it depends on the environment, weather, bacterial growth, whether the animal is buried under a flood of salt water, whether it is lying in the sun and the radiation hits it full force, etc. Radiation has alot to do with the radiocarbon dating. Read up on and what better place than Answers In Genesis.

    That’s not even wrong. It’s past wrong.

    you have no fucking clue what you are talking about.

  501. #502 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    The one of the Bible. Haven’t youever heard of “No other Gods before me”.

    I guess we atheists are right in God’s books then. ;)

  502. #503 Steve_C
    April 5, 2009

    Derender the defender of fairy tales. Wow. You’re really boring. The morally superior thing is really tired. I don’t know of too many “kids” that read this blog and if they do, they have GREAT parents. If they’re mature enough to read it they can handle the spicy language.

    I doubt anyone here “speaks” like they post because quite frankly we don’t have to talk to absurd ignorant godbots on a daily basis.

    Do you have a point, other that clenching your pearls and pretending you know a fucking thing?

    Didn’t think so.

    Do fuck off.

  503. #504 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Nerd of Redhead:

    NEVER!

    ——————–

    Oh Carlie:

    Educate me. it seems as though i don’t know. Can you answer question since I don’t know?

    ————————

    Why go after the leadership when future generations would grow up to be just like the leaders? That seems to be a liberal philosophy as well. Indoctrinate the children so that they will adapt to “progressive” ideas.

  504. #505 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    I wonder if derender likes the idea of burning in hell. Especially seeing he broke two commandments today: he bore false witness by lying about science, and because he did that on the Sabbath, he didn’t keep the day holy. You’re going to hell derender. Hope you enjoy the eternal fire!

  505. #506 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Shit for brains, bad words do nothing to the environment. You have not touched a nerve, you are merely evading the questions being asked. And do you ask your friends at Freepland to stop swearing.

    I shall now refer to you as Janine, The four letter word person who destroys children.

    With that, you are spreading an lie and a slander. I have never destroyed a child. But what do I expect from a moron who claims that his morals comes from an arbitrary source.

  506. #507 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    Klokwork -

    So, if the governor does manage to veto what would come next? Is this open to appeal?

    I think you’re conflating two different states – Vermont and Iowa.

    As for the Iowa sitiation – no, no appeal.

    The State has the option to petition for a rehearing, which it has announced AFAIK it will not do.

    The case was brought on state law grounds. There is no federal question at issue.

    The case terminates here at the Iowa supreme court.

  507. #508 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    derender thinks that decaying carcasses and radioactive decay rates are the same thing

    derender, you may be the dumbest troll today and we had mabus Mr. Nobody earlier so that is saying a lot.

  508. #509 The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge
    April 5, 2009

    That the decay rate of radioisotopes did not vary enough in the past to make a 6000-year-old earth look 4,500,000,000 years old is hardly unprovable: if it did, the earth would still be molten through and through and probably mostly evaporated. Derender is completely innumerate as well as illiterate and willfully ignorant.

  509. #510 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Steve C, you arrogant little cuss. i told you not right now but maybe later and you just ignored it. Don;t tell me to do it if you don’t mean to do it also. Besides if I were going to do that I would do it on, not off.

  510. #511 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    What about the gays? Will someone please think of the gays.

    I do. Every time I kiss my wife I think about us.

  511. #512 Wowbagger, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Where did you get a concoction like this? If you are referring to the pagans, He wiped them out becuase they were idol worshippers.

    Derender’s not just a poor thinker, writer, comprehender and debater, he’s a poor Christian – he doesn’t even know his bible.

    Where did I get it from? How about Leviticus 27:6:
    And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver.

    also Numbers 3:15-16
    Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. And Moses numbered them according to the word of the LORD.

    Looks like it’s back to bible school for you, loser.

  512. #513 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    You’d think that now that we are in the year 2009 and we have a global communications network, that believers would have clued in to the fact that arguing from scientific ignorance is never going to win over those who are scientifically literate. Keep your arguments to theology and history because arguing from science when you know nothing on the matter is just going to show up how ignorant you truly are…

    And if you have to argue on matters science, actually understand the science from a scientist’s perspective as opposed to a religious apologetic perspective. Remember that when trying to convert someone, you need to understand the mindset of the person you are converting. So arguing based on your own mindset will not work unless they happen to be intune with you – i.e. the only people you will convince by arguing science from a biblical perspective are those who are scientifically ingorant and already biblically-inclined.

  513. #514 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Oh Carlie:

    Educate me. it seems as though i don’t know. Can you answer question since I don’t know?

    If you were truly interested in learning, you would not be mocking people would do know. This is not a secret and hidden knowledge. You can find out if you truly gave a flying fuck about the answer.

    But you have made it clear that you are not here to learn. You are here to badger because you are upset that a state will not outlaw GLBT marriages.

    Whiny baby needs a big big gun in order to feel like an adult.

  514. #515 Klokwurk
    April 5, 2009

    BMS:

    I think you’re conflating two different states – Vermont and Iowa.

    Oops, why yes I am! …apologies. I obviously need to read my Google news headlines more closely. Well, good work Iowa!

  515. #516 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Janine, The four letter word person who destroys children:

    Wow, that nerve was short indeed.

    Are you going to four letter word me again? Watch it, you might contribute to global warming with all that carbon spewing. (Considering global warming even exists at all).

  516. #517 aratina cage
    April 5, 2009

    He always gives a warning and a second chance before doing so committing infanticide. -derender

    Such a lovely creature, this god of yours. Derender, you poor baby. Your god is a fucking psychopathic murderer of infants, but at least he tells the helpless infants before he slaughters them.

  517. #518 derender
    April 5, 2009

    aratina cage

    You don;t get it. You probably never will, so why expalain it?

  518. #519 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    Hey, derender:

    Fuck you, you maggot-ridden piece of horse shit.

    Go back to Freeperville where you belong, ass.

  519. #520 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    derender, I see that you are lying about me again.

  520. #521 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    derender thinks that decaying carcasses and radioactive decay rates are the same thing

    That was hilarious.

    Derender, when you go to hell, I’ll be teaching a class on geology there. I’ll save a seat for you.

  521. #522 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    tell us more about science derender.

    So far it’s provided some pretty serious laughs at the BigDumbChimp household.

    Mrs. BigDumbChimp got a hoot out of the radiometric dating thing.

    Real funny stuff there.

  522. #523 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    The speed of decay depends on many things. it depends on the environment, weather, bacterial growth, whether the animal is buried under a flood of salt water, whether it is lying in the sun and the radiation hits it full force, etc.

    this is awesome. this is the most massive category-fail EVER.

    radioactive decay is not the same as organic decay. they are different things. they are different categories of things*. fuck, they’re two completely different SCIENCES!

    *I’m plagiarizing Josh, cuz that line was Teh Awesome

  523. #524 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    So let me get this straight, by calling a stupid asshole a fucking moron, I am contributing to global warming (Which the fucking asshole denied was happening anyways.) and killing children. And that is a bad thing.

    But the big sky daddy can murder all of the babies he wants because of slavery, something those babies had nothing to do with, and it is justified.

    Fucking moral monster.

  524. #525 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    Derender – remember just what techniques we use to age the earth.

    Carbon dating is for organic material – works only for materials between 200 and 50,000 years old. The half-life of C14 is ~5,500 years, so using the formula for exponential decay (I’m going from high school memory here so this formula may be off) Ae-kt. Think of it this way: in 5,500 years, half the C14 atoms will have decayed. So in 5,500 more years, half those remaining atoms will have decayed. 5,500 more years, half those remaining atoms will have decayed.

    • 5,500 years = 1/2 remaining
    • 11,000 years = 1/4 remaining
    • 16,500 years = 1/8 remaining
    • 22,000 years = 1/16 remaining
    • 27,500 years = 1/32 remaining
    • 33,000 years = 1/64 remaining
    • 38,500 years = 1/128 remaining
    • 44,000 years = 1/256 remaining
    • 49,500 years = 1/512 remaining
    • 55,000 years = 1/1024 remaining
    • 60,500 years = 1/2048 remaining
    • 66,000 years = 1/4096 remaining

    And so on. So you can see that after about 50,000 years the amount of C14 left would be virtually undetectable and that’s why we can’t use it on organic material that is any older.

    But for ageing the earth, we don’t use radiocarbon dating, there are dozens of other substances that decay and all at different rates too. So when we test a rock, we can do the test in different labratories to see if it gets the same result, then we can test it against other dating techniques on different scales and see whether they line up. We can also test rock on lower layers to see whether it’s older than rock on layers above.

    By doing all that we have worked out that the age of the earth is approximately 4.55 billion years old. Yet we can date the sun through a different method – by the amount of hydrogen it has fused into helium, and guess what? It comes out at ~4.6 billion years. Just as we would expect. And when we look out into the skies, we can use the constant that is the speed of light to see just how far away objects are. And we have seen galaxies that are over 13 billion light years away. That means the light has taken over 13 billion years to reach us, meaning that the universe is at least 13 billion years old!!!

  525. #526 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    This one has no patience. He’s not worth our time. We’ll learn nothing from him.

  526. #527 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    My one teeny, teeny tiny little comfort in this dreary life of mine is that when I go to hell ALL of my friends will be there!

    We’ve already decided we’re going to have a BBQ (what better place, right?). Y’all bring whatever dishes you like, but see the sign-up sheet so that we don’t have too many duplicates.

  527. #528 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    I bet derender gets log as in a wooden log and log as in logarithm mixed up too.

  528. #529 derender
    April 5, 2009

    You people definitely have fetish for bad words.

    Freeperville? Where is that? Is it anywhere near San FranSICKO? Maybe Gob Dot will tell me.

    ——————–

    JANINE: I am NOT lying about you. You willfully said that you use these words. You willfully saiud that you do believe in your imaginery crap called evolution, and you willfully told be you belive that abortion is okay. YES! That is destroying any child that this left wing stuff rubs off on. There, it is not a lie, but a fact. Just look at how San FranSICKO turned out after the left-wingers invaded.

    Well, at least you didn’t foulmouth me again. Maybe you should use Listerine.

  529. #530 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    This one has no patience. He’s not worth our time. We’ll learn nothing from him.

    But I may get a few more laughs

  530. #531 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    Freeperville, aka Free Republic. Referenced above to Walton.

    You will be most happy there in the swamp among your own kind, fuckface.

  531. #532 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    derender, still showing us why you are a godbot. You have an IQ heading for the single digits. But then you believe in imaginary things, like god and the bible. We can’t expect anything better from willful stupidity.

  532. #533 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Kel: You said it works for organiza material between 500 and 50,000 years old. That’s nice. The earth is only 6,000 years old, so nothing can be older than that. WrONG ANSWER.

  533. #534 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    That’s nice. The earth is only 6,000 years old, so nothing can be older than that. WrONG ANSWER.

    And tell us why that is so.

    Please, and use some of your mad sciency skills to explain it if possible.

  534. #535 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    JANINE: I am NOT lying about you. You willfully said that you use these words. You willfully saiud that you do believe in your imaginery crap called evolution, and you willfully told be you belive that abortion is okay. YES! That is destroying any child that this left wing stuff rubs off on. There, it is not a lie, but a fact. Just look at how San FranSICKO turned out after the left-wingers invaded.

    Well, at least you didn’t foulmouth me again. Maybe you should use Listerine.

    Well people, is there anything that this sad sack of shit state here is true?

    Derender, you are the most foul and dishonest smear of shit to be found. Take your gun, lube the barrel and fuck your self in the ass. But first make sure your safety is on. I do not want you to shot yourself.

  535. #536 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Okay, BMS watch it. Or should I call you PMS? I can’t help if you have a fetish with your own skin texture – rectum reamer face. You touchy little pervert. You call me a name that was unnecessary – goober gargler.

  536. #537 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    The earth is only 6,000 years old, so nothing can be older than that. WrONG ANSWER.

    Wrong gain, you are only off by six orders of magnitude. Not bad for a half-wit who doesn’t understand evidence. Your bible is fiction. It lies. Get used to it.

  537. #538 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    Okay, BMS watch it. Or should I call you PMS? I can’t help if you have a fetish with your own skin texture – rectum reamer face. You touchy little pervert. You call me a name that was unnecessary – goober gargler.

    This one definitely puts ketchup on his hot dog.

    What an idiot

  538. #539 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    oh wow. Internet Vapors and bigotry make for an interesting and rather hypocritical mix

  539. #540 The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge
    April 5, 2009

    Don’t like bad language, asswipe? How’s about dealing with my pointing out the energy effects of isotopes decaying 750,000 times faster than today, like you think they did? Or Wowbagger’s quote from Leviticus that shows you don’t even know what your fucking Bible says on any subject. Give cogent answers to either one of those and I won’t tell you what a motherfucking asshole you are, in front of the imaginary kids and one (possible) lady.

  540. #541 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    I’ve now read about 3/4 of the way through the Iowa decision.

    Very thorough explication of how the justices arrived at their decision. Lots of citation to persuasive decisions from other jurisdictions (including CA’s In re Marriage Cases) which elevates us for our ongoing and our future work.

    They also explain why they found no need to go through a strict scrutiny analysis:

    Because we conclude Iowa?s same-sex marriage statute cannot withstand intermediate scrutiny, we need not decide whether classifications based on sexual orientation are subject to a higher level of scrutiny.

    That is a good thing.

    I’m so happy.

  541. #542 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Wowbagger:

    You revert to a book that you claim is not even real and you have the arrogant audacity to call me a loser? I would rather be a loser than a … whatever you call youself … Gob Dot.

  542. #543 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    No, you shit stain on the panties of life. BMS was highly accurate with the name. What’s the matter? Did she strike a nerve?

  543. #544 Steve_C
    April 5, 2009

    Derender you ignorant troll. You’re the child abuser. You lie to children and tell them the earth is 6,000 years old. Get over the cussin’. There isn’t a fucking thing wrong with it among adults.

    Prove the earth is 6,000 years old. Go ahead and try.

    You’re pathetic. Until you show some evidence that the earth is younger than even 100,000 years you should be ignored.

  544. #545 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    Janine, it must’ve been a short nerve.

  545. #546 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    Wowbagger:

    You revert to a book that you claim is not even real and you have the arrogant audacity to call me a loser? I would rather be a loser than a … whatever you call youself … Gob Dot.

    He’s not wrong though and you are.

    You can keep dodging but you’re still wrong.

    Wrong wrong wrong.

    Tell us more science stuff. I could use a few more laughs

  546. #547 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    You said it works for organiza material between 500 and 50,000 years old. That’s nice. The earth is only 6,000 years old, so nothing can be older than that. WrONG ANSWER.

    Are you a poe?

    A few other ways we can show the earth is older than 6,000 years:

    • Dendochronology – Each year a tree grows a new layer. As such, by counting the rings of a tree you can count it’s age. Because conditions vary from year to year, the rings are different sizes. So one can see the same pattern of growth in the inner layers of one tree and the same pattern of growth in the outer layers of another tree and deduce that it was from the same conditions on earth. So using this technique we can go back over 10,000 years
    • Ice core dating – each year there is a frost cycle where snow that has fallen melts, then freezes to form a new ice layer. These layers of ice accumulate, and as such one can count the layers of ice to gauge how old it is at a particular layer. We can do this back about 740,000 years in places, there are parts where the ice is just that thick.
    • Mutations in organisms – each time we have an offspring, they are an imperfect copy of the genetic code. As such, over time these variations accumulate over the generations. If you keep two different populations isolated, then variation inherited in one population will be different to variation inherited in another. By knowing the average rate of mutation, one can see when two different organisms last shared a common ancestor. We have done this for humanity, and we last shared a common ancestor ~140,000 years ago. We last shared one with a chimpanzee ~7,000,000 years ago, and so on back through the fossil record.
    • Coral dating – Coral in addition to having annual rings has daily rings, and these are directly proportional to the length of day and length of year. Since the earth is very slowly slowing in rotation, it means that in the past days were shorter and the year had more days. So fossil coral should reflect this – and it does. The age of a rock as determined by the coral in it is the same as the age of the rock as determined by radiometric dating

    The universe and planet is older than 6,000 years, every piece of science points to that fact. Besides, it says nowhere in the bible that the world is 6,000 years old – it’s nothing but an interpretation based on adding up ages of men in the bible. Yet we have precise means to test the age of the earth and age of the universe, are you suggesting that our dating techniques are off by a factor of almost a million? That’s like saying the distance between New York and San Fransisco is 10 yards!!!

  547. #548 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    touchy little pervert

    How dare you insult me like that! O! My pearls!

    I’m not little at all! I’m actually quite tall.

    Shit for brains.

  548. #549 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    You revert to a book that you claim is not even real and you have the arrogant audacity to call me a loser? I would rather be a loser than a … whatever you call youself … Gob Dot.

    You are a loser. You just haven’t realized it yet due to your minuscule mental powers. By the time you leave will be very familiar with being a loser. You already have a head start. Godbots are that way.

  549. #550 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Wowbagger:

    You revert to a book that you claim is not even real and you have the arrogant audacity to call me a loser?

    And the numbnuts misses the point yet again. Listen, you stupid shit stain on the panties of life. You claim to hold the bible to be paramount over all other knowledge. Yet, as Wowbagger pointed out, you do not know the contents of the book you claim to be so important.

    You that, fuck face, you get a boot to the head.

  550. #551 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Okay all of you perverted foul mouthed nutjobs. Can you people not make a point without your curse word fetish being in overdrive? Is that possible? Are you capable of of such a simple thing? Do I need to hunt you down and wash your mouth with soap?

    Too bad nuts cannot make a point without using harsh words. it is impossible.

    How about this one:

    Sourpus?

    All of you gargle goobers with litesalt and meth. It;s the only explaination for your vile tongues and cheap shots. Googer garglers. Rectal reamers. Blowhole burners.

    Janine is by far the worst I have ever seen. She should be award foulmouth freeloader of the century. How does that feel?

    If you can’t make apoint without your ill wished vocabulary, then get prepared for battle – goober garglers.

  551. #552 tresmal
    April 5, 2009

    FWIW derender has been showing off his ignorance at Greg Ladens Blog, where he advances the hypothesis that the Iowa State Supreme Court judges are all Clinton appointees.

  552. #553 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    Holy Shit.

    Hey Walton.

    That murder in Pittsburgh I linked to earlier?

    Serendipity, my friend.

    Published: April 5, 2009 at 8:26 PM

    The 22-year-old man charged with killing three Pittsburgh police officers was frequent visitor to far-right Web sites, his Internet activities reveal.

    Richard Poplawski posted his profile and photographs of his tattoos on the white supremacist Web site Stormfront, which serves as a clearinghouse for neo-Nazi and anti-Semitic groups, using the site to display an eagle tattoo spread across his chest, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette reported Sunday.

    “I was considering gettin’ life runes on the outside of my calfs,” he wrote on Stormfront, referring to a common symbol among white supremacists, especially followers of The National Alliance, a neo-Nazi group linked to a a collection of violent organizations, the newspaper said.

    Poplawski also believed in conspiracy theories espousing beliefs that a secret cabal running the United States was bent on eradicating freedom of speech and gun rights at the behest of Jews, a friend told the newspaper.

    Didn’t see that one coming a mile away.

  553. #554 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    derender are you for real?

  554. #555 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    derender, if you don’t like how we talk, you can always go away. But then, a defective like yourself is incapable of showing mature actions by actually backing off a situation they find distasteful. Choose wisely cricket. *Chirr*

  555. #556 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    The shit stain on the panties of life cannot come up with a defense for his stupidity and resorts to crying about swear words.

    Baby needs to clutch his big bad ass gun in order to feel like an adult.

  556. #557 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    I want more sciency stuff from derender.

    Derender tell us about how the grand canyon was formed.

  557. #558 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    Can you people not make a point without your curse word fetish being in overdrive? Is that possible?

    Yes, Pigfucker, we can.

  558. #559 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    derender, I could have called you a clueless fucktard, but I didn’t. Instead I stuck to the science of things. Why is it that you are getting indignant over those who are insulting you instead of taking the high-ground and actually engage in those who are arguing with you? If you want to ignore the profane among us, go ahead. But don’t think that their profanity means that you have won an argument by getting offended over such words. There are substantial arguments here directly countering your position; those are what you need to answer if you want to make headway with us.

  559. #560 Steve_C
    April 5, 2009

    Haha. Derender you fucking fool. We curse because it bugs you! That you make a big deal of it is hysterical. What? You’re better behaved because you don’t say cocksucker? or pig fucker? Me thinks you doth protest too much. Are you screwing golf buddies on the 10th hole in the woods? Jesus doesn’t give a fuck what words you use. He told me so in a dream where he was riding a pink unicorn with a naked virgin Mary. No really. I swear.

  560. #561 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Yeah BMS, but GLBT marriages, swearing, evilution and allof the other mean thing librals like made the shit stain on the panties of life very upset.

  561. #562 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    And I’m just having fun poking it with a stick.

    Alas, though, I am bored with this diversion – for the moment. I need sustenance and for that must prep and cook.

    So adieu to all, and to Goatfucker, too.

  562. #563 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    Sorry, my #562 was in response to Kel’s post #559.

    Innit too bad that my mom officiated at our lesbo wedding? Too bad for Steerfucker that is.

    Gotta run now! ;)

  563. #564 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    But Kel, it is so much easier to whine about bad words. And when you get down to it, assface has no room to talk after calling me a destroyer of children. That is much worse than swearing.

  564. #565 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    assface has no room to talk after calling me a destroyer of children. That is much worse than swearing.

    Indeed. Calling someone a rapist, or child molester, or baby-killer, or anything else for that matter would be far worse than calling someone a fucktard. Calling someone immoral, or telling someone they are destroying society – by comparison hurling profanities seems juvenile.

  565. #566 Carlie
    April 5, 2009

    Educate me. it seems as though i don’t know. Can you answer question since I don’t know?

    I’ll tell you exactly what I tell all my students – go do your homework, prove to me that you did it, and then I’ll be happy to help out. However, I’m not putting any effort into providing information without being sure you’re going to use it.

    Derender, derender. We can cuss all we want, but good lord, do you pray to God with that nasty mouth of yours? I don’t think he’d be very proud of your behavior here today. You’d better look at your WWJD bumper sticker awhile and think about why you should be ashamed of yourself, young man.

  566. #567 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    (Sorry, one more and then I’m away.)

    On Andrew Sullivan at The Daily Dish just now, a snippet from Why Do We Swear by John Grohol, Pys. D:

    Virtually all people swear, and people swear pretty consistently throughout their lifetime ? from the moment they can speak to the day they die. Swearing is almost a universal constant in most people?s lives. Research, according to [Timothy Jay], has shown we swear on average from 0.3% to 0.7% of the time ? a tiny but significant percentage of our overall speech (frequently-used personal pronouns occur at approximately 1.0% rate in speech). Swearing is more common than you might think. But personality research suggests that people who swear more, not surprisingly, score higher on traits such as extraversion, dominance, hostility and Type A personalities. Swearing is not just for the uneducated or people of a lower socioeconomic class ? it knows no social boundaries in its expression.

  567. #568 The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge
    April 5, 2009

    What is it with these morons and their language fetish? Although I agree with Kel, above, I have to take issue with his use of the word “profanity” to describe our language on this thread. I’ve seen very little if any profanity, AFAICT, it’s all been vulgarity of one sort or another, and religiotards shouldn’t give a shit about that.

    I once saw that mindless douchebag Billy Graham on Carson (or was it Cavett?) and this very subject came up. He admitted he didn’t know where the prohibitions against sexually and scatologically based “bad” language came from, but he freely admitted that there was no biblical basis for it, that only “taking the lord’s name in vain” was prohibited.

    (Yeah, I know, his interpretation of taking the lord’s name in “vain” to mean simply mentioning his name is totally ignorant and stupid; it’s supposed to mean giving opinions as coming from god that are merely your own, like certain people on this very thread have been known to do, and as ignorant fundie blowhards do every hour of every day.)

  568. #569 Wowbagger, OM
    April 5, 2009

    You revert to a book that you claim is not even real and you have the arrogant audacity to call me a loser?

    Care to cite the post where I said the bible ‘is not real’? Can you manage that much, you barely-literate pile of smegma?

    Of course bibles are real – I’ve seen several. That most of what’s in it never happened, of course, is another issue – but you’re far too stupid to comprehend the difference. The point is you think it’s real and claim to live by it. So, by condemning abortion you’re either saying your god is wrong or that the bible is wrong.

    Which is it?

    Either way, you’re still a loser. But you’re a good example of how low the bar is set for the intellectual demands of Christianity.

  569. #570 'Tis Himself
    April 5, 2009

    My one teeny, teeny tiny little comfort in this dreary life of mine is that when I go to hell ALL of my friends will be there!

    Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. -Mark Twain

  570. #571 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Careful, Wowbagger. Intellectual has more than one syllable. It’s probably beyond him.

  571. #572 'Tis Himself
    April 5, 2009

    Is dickbreath still around? Has he figured out that the reason people are throwing profanity around is because it bugs the fuck out of him? Or is he too stupid to realize it?

  572. #573 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    The assclown seems to think that if a person swears, he has somehow touched a nerve. It is one of his self deluding tricks to make it seem that his stupidity has worth.

  573. #574 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, answer the questions in #419, #423, and #426. Until then, shut the hell up.

    Come on. You’ve been avoiding these questions all day. Answer them. What are you afraid of?

  574. #575 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    The Grand Canyon was formed as a result of the flood and probabaly took a number of years to complete, but the majority of it was formed suddenly and catastrophically.

    ——————

    I know where you people are headed with the whole gun nuts thing and neo-nazi orgs, and such I am not a Jew hater. if anything I am on the Jews side – the ones who are for real – the orthodox Jews. I hate to see the persecuted the way that they have been. The land os Israel is rightfully their and the supreme allied ragheads of HAMAS won;t move to the other 95 percent Islamic territory in the region. They have to steal it from the Jews. What pshychos. It’s the Islamic terrorists you should be worried about, not me. Yes I own guns and target practice and read “far-right” websites. Yes I am a Sarah Palin fan, a Ted Nugent fan, and a Ronald Reagan fan, and GW Bush fan. So there.

    I would never intentionally kill someone for no apparent reason like these sick people have done the last few days.

    However, the Second Amendment does give citizens a right to defend themselves from a police state if it ever comes to that. The FEMA camps do scare me though and the fact that HAMAS gave $20,000 plus to the Obama campaign is scary too.

    Don’t worry about me, worry about the far left.

    ————————————

    Steve_C:

    The idea of a 6,000 year old earth refers o the geneology of family traced from today until jesus’ birth, then from Jesus back to Abraham, and then from Abraham until Adam. Add it up.

    ———————–

    Carlie:

    You have students? I hope it’s not a science class, becuase I know that they have definitely been indoctrinated. You need to read One Party Classroom by David Horowitz.

    ————————–

    BMS:

    Is your mom a pastor? (Woemn pastors are not common in my denomination – God called men to preach)

    If not, then the whole thing is fake.

    It’s not done by virtue of the person who created it to start with.

    ——————

    Steve_C:

    I don;t play golf. And i tell you creationist stuff to bug you. By the way what was it you were doing with that unicorn’s horn that made you rear end so sore?

    ——————-

    BMS :

    Go take a bath pervert.
    Perferbaly in the sewer where you reside. You super duper dookie scooper!

  575. #576 Menyambal
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, honey, you are really making your religion look bad. Your behavior driving people away from God, and He will send YOU to Hell for that.

    That’s in the Bible, so you had better believe it. But you aren’t familiar with the particular verse, are you? That figures.

    I’m not an atheist because I have read less of the Bible than you have. I am an atheist because I have read all of the Bible.

  576. #577 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    The Grand Canyon was formed as a result of the flood and probabaly took a number of years to complete, but the majority of it was formed suddenly and catastrophically.

    Show your work.

  577. #578 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Josh, stay out of until you can answer MY question. if you can. What are you going to do if I don”t “shut the # up”? Are you going to foulmouth me again? That would be nice. This time, put some real manly effort into it. And don’t include yourself this time. Last time you got confused and was looking in a mirror when you attempted to insult me. remember, that one lady may still be reading … Be careful, it can backfire.

  578. #579 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    The FEMA camps do scare me though and the fact that HAMAS gave $20,000 plus to the Obama campaign is scary too.

    Walton. These are your people.

  579. #580 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    The Grand Canyon was formed as a result of the flood and probabaly took a number of years to complete, but the majority of it was formed suddenly and catastrophically.

    Hahahahaha. Show me some evidence for this. How did the rocks of the canyon lithify? What was the mechanism that allowed them to lithify fast enough for the Colorado River to cut the canyon? Any ideas?

    How about this–how does your flood model explain mudrocks in seconds of rock that have sediments laid on top of them?
    Hmmmm?

  580. #581 plum grenville
    April 5, 2009

    gargle goobers with litesalt and meth… Googer garglers. Rectal reamers. Blowhole burners… foulmouth freeloader of the century

    Yes, deranged, er derender, that’s much nicer than swear words.

    If you can’t make apoint without your ill wished vocabulary, then get prepared for battle – goober garglers.

    Remember, dermwit, it’s the meek who are going to inherit the earth. I think you may find yourself the the bad place with us.

  581. #582 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Josh, stay out of until you can answer MY question.

    What question was that exactly?

  582. #583 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    #580 should have been mudcracks, not mudrocks.

  583. #584 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Derender the deluded. Still telling lies about your imaginary god and fictional bible. Big time. Now, what does you bible say about bearing false witness (lying). You are a huge sinner. Repent and renounce your imaginary god. Become rational.

  584. #585 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    No, you simpering shit stain on the panties of life, you answer to Josh. You have no right to demand that anyone keeps out of a conversion. You want to know why you are wrong about radiometric dating and the flud, talk to the geologist.

    And also, you fuck faced pigfucker, you have no reason to talk to Carlie that way. But it is telling that you recommend that she read a book by a professional liar.

    And one more thing, you cretinous gun sucking creep, the only thing here that comes from the sewage is your sacred stupidity.

    Just blow it out of you ass.

  585. #586 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Menyambal:

    So I am supposed to take this garbage from the extreme nuts? I’m glad you read your Bible. I have too. Maybe I do make my religion look bad. Thanks for pointing it out.But I refuse to be annoyed by far left bullies who defy reality in exchnage for satanic lies. Fine believe what you will and I’ll believe what I will too. The only reason that I keep on replying to these goofballs is that they keep coming back with worse and worse insults and relatively little knowledge of what they are talking about. I am sure they call all do algebra and calculys until theyr hair falls out, but what’s the point in making stuff up that started with a man who proposed an idea . Evolution is an idea, it’s not provable. The other thing is that Darwin himself was a slave owner, yet his followers name him as something as a saint. What’s that all about?

    When these people leave me alone, then I’ll leave the sight.

    If that’s possible to administer.

    Most people’s skulls are 2 inches thick to the outside. Theirs must be 4 inches thick to the inside.

  586. #587 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    derender, from all observation points, the unverse has to be over 13 billion years old and the earth over 4 billion. The laws of physics dictate that. If you are defending a position that the world is substantially less than 4.55 billion years old, you need to demonstrate that the laws of physics that govern nuclear reactions are wrong – and wrong by a factor of almost a million. If you want to say the universe is much less than ~13.72 billion years, then you need to show that the speed of light is not constant. You will need to either show how light can speed up, or that e=mc² is wrong.

    Either way, you have a strong body of evidence against any attempt to disprove – or you can concede that God is a liar…

  587. #588 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Speaking of gargles, can someone please make for me a Pangalactic Gargle Blaster?

  588. #589 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    you fuck faced pigfucker

    Janine, I absolutely love you.
    I’m so using that.

  589. #590 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Speaking of gargles, can someone please make for me a Pangalactic Gargle Blaster?

    One slice of lemon or two?

  590. #591 Sven DiMilo
    April 5, 2009

    Harsh Words
    a Poem by derender

    Sourpus?
    All of you gargle goobers
    With litesalt and meth.
    It;s the only explaination for your vile
    Tongues and cheap
    Shots.
    Googer garglers.
    Rectal reamers.
    Blowhole burners.

  591. #592 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, still bearing false witness, but then you are too ignorant to stop doing so. Until you show some scientific evidence for your inane allegations, you have nothing but bombast. The only way to refute science is with more science. Which you are not conversant with. Religion and science divorce a couple of centuries ago, so religion has nothing to say to science, nor can it refute science. But science makes your inane and delusional religion look silly, because it ignores evidence. And by repeating your religion, you look silly, foolish, and stupid. Keep it up. We need good laughs around here, and you are very comic.

  592. #593 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    Fine believe what you will and I’ll believe what I will too. The only reason that I keep on replying to these goofballs is that they keep coming back with worse and worse insults and relatively little knowledge of what they are talking about. I am sure they call all do algebra and calculys until theyr hair falls out, but what’s the point in making stuff up that started with a man who proposed an idea . Evolution is an idea, it’s not provable. The other thing is that Darwin himself was a slave owner, yet his followers name him as something as a saint. What’s that all about?

    Are you for real, seriously?

    Firstly, read up on the Dunning-Kruger effect, and think about you telling a geologist of over 3 decades [Josh] that he is ignorant on science. secondly, nothing in science is provable. Ideas can only be falsified, and thus the measure of a scientific theory is it’s ability to make falsifiable predictions and pass. Evolution has done this for the last 150 years – it’s regarded as one of the strongest theories in science, we know more about how evolution works than gravity. Thirdly, Darwin is not a saint, he’s a scientist. Evolution doesn’t live or die on his word, what matters is the science behind it. Darwin got many things about evolution wrong, and those have been corrected as experimenting was done.

    When you don’t know what you are talking about, can you please have the courtesy to take on board that others might? Here’s a challenge for you: can you give a concise definition of what evolution is and how it works?

  593. #594 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Janine, Insulting Sinner :

    Let Josh deal with me

    Let carlie deal with me

    What geologist would you recommend? A evolution based one or creation based one?

    I suppose that all of Obama’s book are pure sacred truth?

    Horowitz knew more when he was 2 than all you put togther will ever learn in all of eternity. A professional liar? Maybe you are referring to Al Gore or some other enviro nut. Maybe even yourself. Foulmouth.

    Yes I have rights to ask anything I want. And I will do just that where you like it or not.

    You keep talng about me answering questions. i did several times and no one accepted the answer that I gave. TOUGH! Get over it. The only answer I get to my questions is a bunch of foulmouthed egglaying sarcasm and left wing septic scum. Keep the foulness coming, but don;t get your nerves touched too much. Better watch that blood pressure Dracula.

  594. #595 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    The other thing is that Darwin himself was a slave owner, yet his followers name him as something as a saint.

    You are a goddamned ignorant pig fucking liar.

    That is the reason why we mock you.

    You come to people with much greater actual knowledge and experience and tell them they are bullies and liar.

    Nothing you have say about science bares any resemblance to reality. And claiming that only libral believe in evolution denies the existence of all the conservatives who also know that evolution is true.

    You are one pathetic little dumb fuck. Nuzzle close your gun. It is the only thing that makes you a big bad man.

  595. #596 Carlie
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, do you take penicillin, or newer antibiotics?
    Do you get a flu shot every year, or was once enough?

    Evolution: You’re soaking in it.

  596. #597 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    The only reason that I keep on replying to these goofballs is that they keep coming back with worse and worse insults and relatively little knowledge of what they are talking about.

    derender you have demonstrated you you have no idea what you are talking about.

    Tell us about radiometric decay again please

  597. #598 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    come on derender, let’s talk on this only on scientific grounds. Can you explain the following topics:

    • Big Bang cosmology
    • Special relativity
    • Quantum physics, especially nuclear physics
    • the theory of evolution
    • plate tectonics

    – Only give a paragraph or so for each, but please show you have an understanding of the science that you are arguing. Do you understand what these theories mean and what evidence there is to support them?

  598. #599 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    I suppose that all of Obama’s book are pure sacred truth?

    The pigfucker assumes that I am a fan of Barack Obama.

    Just one more bad assumption for a stupid asshole filled with them. And guess, I hate Al Gore, I have for over a quarter of a century. But not for the reason you do, you fetid pile of shit.

  599. #600 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, as usual you get it wrong. You have to expound on and defend creationism. We get to refute you. After all, we have about a million or so scientific papers that back up evolution directly or indirectly, so it is establish science. You want to change our minds, start citing the peer reviewed primary scientific literature to back up your childish notions.

  600. #601 Sven DiMilo
    April 5, 2009

    Wait, I’m catching up here, but what was that about Darwin owning slaves?

  601. #602 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Kel :

    You have been repsectful with most of your posts and I appreciate that. For your respect and courtesy I can honestly say that I cannot answer your question about the speed of light being constant. There are some ideas about it in the world of young earth creationsim that are still being worked out. It has proved to be a stubmling block to the movement. The main idea now is that everything was made in the universe at the exact same time. That’s all I can tell you. You will have to consult creationism people for anything further. I hope that answered it for you becuase i honestly have nothing else about light travel when it deal with creationism.

    Creationism basically deals with te age of the earth from a historical and geneological point of view rather than froma universe point of view.

  602. #603 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    The other thing is that Darwin himself was a slave owner, yet his followers name him as something as a saint.

    this is not only factually incorrect, it is also completely irrelevant. evolution is true regardless of whether its discoverer was the biggest asshole on the planet or a fluffy bunny.

  603. #604 Sven DiMilo
    April 5, 2009

    You will have to consult creationism people for anything further.

    Yeah. No, thanks.

  604. #605 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    Darwin himself was a slave owner,

    Um, no. Once again you don’t have a fucking clue what you are talking about.

  605. #606 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, still lying and bullshitting. But then, you have nothing else. Show us the evidence by citing the scientific literature. Otherwise, you are just a self deluded fool.

  606. #607 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    derrender just can’t get his mind around atheism – that there are no saints or holy books. It’s projection, his sacred cow is being insulted so he’s hurling out insults at what he perceives are the sacred cows of atheism. It’s amazing how little insight this person has into the mindset of others, it’s so sad that many theists can’t ever see the world any other way but their own. It may be that their way of thinking is true, but they will never ever convince anyone of that unless they are able to understand what problems others see in their worldview.

    derender – have you taken the Outsider Test For Faith?

  607. #608 Bobber
    April 5, 2009

    Derender said:

    When these people leave me alone, then I’ll leave the sight.

    So, am I to understand that you habitually barge into strangers’ homes, ranting drunkenly (for so your text reads) about slave-owning Darwin and far-left loons worshipping Obama, and when they tell you to get out of their house, you continue to harangue them until they leave you alone?

    Again, I am reminded of how many people can function – even if it is a titanic struggle – with some serious mental issues.

  608. #609 Josh
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, this is a question perhaps you’d be interested in answering: what is your opinion on the flood? Why did God erase all evidence of it? What do you think his plan was in doing that? The event was written about in the Bible. So why did he erase all evidence and create a rock record that indicates it never happened? What was his point?

  609. #610 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Carlie:

    I don;t take flu shots becuase some of them are made using huma fetal cells lines. I refuse to take them. So are number of other medications made by Merck. Gardasil is a joke and has done more harm than good. Read Kevin Roeten’s articles sometime about Gardasil and other medications.

    ——————-

    Janine:

    Darwin owned slaves. Your savior was a black hater. Get over it already! Haven’t you ever read anything by him? Read Darwin’s Plantation sometime. Just becuase you don;t like it doesn’t mean that it is not true. Just who is your all inspiring writer of pure truth? Maybe I’ll give it a look sometime.

    Again, you vile pest. What’ with calling me all of those viscious names. is that all you do? can;t you think of anything better to do than call people vulgar profan names? Yeah i did it too, but only becuase of some of the vulgar filthy foulmouths on here. Go scrape your tounge with gasoline and a match. I only responed to you the way I did becuase you keep on with the mess. try being nice, it may return the favor someday.

  610. #611 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    #612 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    Darwin owned slaves. Your savior was a black hater. Get over it already! Haven’t you ever read anything by him? Read Darwin’s Plantation sometime.

    Pointing to a book by known liar ken ham as evidence.

    You really are an idiot.

    Once again you aren’t even wrong. You’re past being wrong.

    You are a stupid man.

  611. #613 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    Darwin owned slaves. Your savior was a black hater. Get over it already! Haven’t you ever read anything by him?

    *facepalm* – Darwin is not a saviour. He was a scientist! He came up with a scientific theory that excplained the diversity of life on earth; that’s what Darwin did. He explained something, just as Galileo did, just as Newton did, just as Mendel did, just as Einstein did, just as millions of others have done. Scientists give us an understanding of how the universe works, they are not saints and their works are not infallible. Science comes down to evidence, so if you have evidence that any scientific theory is wrong – show it. After all, science works on falsification.

  612. #614 Patricia, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Oh, great, I miss the whole thing. Now Janine gets called Dracula.

    So we get the slave bit. Cute. Derender (cooking down pig fat?) slavery is a christian thang, or don’t you read the bible?

  613. #615 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Josh said: this is a question perhaps you’d be interested in answering: what is your opinion on the flood? Why did God erase all evidence of it? What do you think his plan was in doing that? The event was written about in the Bible. So why did he erase all evidence and create a rock record that indicates it never happened? What was his point?

    ——————–

    Why would He want it erased? The point of the flood was that all people on earth was so sinful and had fogotten about God and refused to turn back to Him that He destroyed the entire earth with a flood, but saved one righteous man and his family along with a number of animals. The ark could have housed up to 50,000 animals plus food, water, etc. We can remember this story to keep us the striaght and narrow would be the point of it. The rock record alomng with billions of fossils is evidence for the flood. we see evidence of animals whci were buried alive rapidly all the time. We have seen dinosaurs fighting. Do you think those two dinosaurs just had a heart attack and died suddenly and fossilized in a fight scene. Why would a sudden burial not explain this?

  614. #616 plum grenville
    April 5, 2009

    The Very Reverend Battleaxe of Knowledge | April 5, 2009 9:42 PM

    I once saw that mindless douchebag Billy Graham on Carson (or was it Cavett?) and this very subject came up. He admitted he didn’t know where the prohibitions against sexually and scatologically based “bad” language came from, but he freely admitted that there was no biblical basis for it, that only “taking the lord’s name in vain” was prohibited.

    Good point, Rev.! It ought to bug the shitstain even more if we take the lord’s name in vain.

    Jesus FUCKING christ ON A MEATBALL, derbulb! You are terminally stupid, a sure candidate for a Darwin Award. You’re more moronic than one of your god’s toenail clippings. Bloody hell! Go fuck holy mary and baby jesus in the ass. Or a porcupine. Your choice.

    And use the goddamn spellchecker. It’s a safe bet you never studied “calculys” (or Logic for First Grade).

    How’s that for a goddamn good start?

  615. #617 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, whether Darwin owned slaves or not is irrelevant. You have fallacious thinking going on. You think if you put some mud on Darwin, you put mud on evolution. It doesn’t work that way because scientists don’t worship Darwin. We admire Darwin as a great scientist, but that is as far as it goes. He made many mistakes in this theory, which are freely acknowledge because scientists are honest in their professional dealings, simply because certain information would not be available for many years, like genes and DNA. The theory of evolution has had 150 years of improvement since Darwin’s book, and it gets stronger every year. Why? New evidence is added, and the theory is modified as needed to fit the new information. When was the last time the bible was updated? Definitely much longer ago than the last issue of a scientific journal. And when was the last time a religious leader didn’t lie? (Never, they always lie.)

  616. #618 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    I called you names because you whined about it the entire time you have been here. But guess what, was bad words in nothing compared to the sheer contempt you have displayed here. Go back to Freepland and share you tales about how you showed those arrogant librals whats what. And play with you fantasies about what you will do to us once you are able to arrest all of us. As long as you are just an annoying powerless dipshit stewing in the frustrations of your own hatreds, I can live in peace.

    You are a deluded liar and I am finished with this.

  617. #619 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    Are you actually going to argue the science derender, or just make red harring arguments against perceived authority figures? Evolution is accepted because it’s the only theory that has been able to explain all of life as we know it, and survived 150 years of intense scrutiny and millions of possible potential falsification. It has nothing to do with Darwin, it has everything to do with the evidence.

  618. #620 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Janine, Insulting Sinner :

    If Robb ever comes back, I’m going to steal his can of raid and squirt you filthy tonhgue with it – pest. Stop being a pest. foulmouthed numbskull. It’s eveident you forgot to go scrape your tongue like I specifically asked. Pest. The more you dish out, the more it’s coming back to you. Be nice, and I’ll do the same. Be a pest and I’ll be one too.

  619. #621 Sven DiMilo
    April 5, 2009

    Haven’t you ever read anything by him [Darwin]? Read Darwin’s Plantation sometime.

    I don’t see that one listed here.

  620. #622 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Patricia, it was even better than that. The shit stain on the panties of life called me a destroyer of children.

  621. #623 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    . Stop being a pest.

    Yes, shut up and go away, but you are too stupid to do so. So you will receive appropriate vitriol until you do so. Still no evidence for your god. You are really dumb, believing in imaginary things.

  622. #624 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Now the pigfucker is making threats.

  623. #625 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    Be nice, and I’ll do the same.

    Why are you ignoring those who are actually attempting to discuss your arguments in favour of complaining about vulgarity and trying to insult perceived authorities like Darwin, Obama and Gore? Why can’t you take the moral high-ground and ignore those for the sake of people who are trying to discuss with you?

  624. #626 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Kel, I do not discount that evolution has been studied for over 15o years now. Not do I discard the idea that it is the prevalent theory to explain biology on the planet. I am not say that I do not believe that. The point that I am making is that some schools teach it as absolute undefiled total 100% proven fact rather than a theory that is still being tested and still being learned about to this day.

  625. #627 aratina
    April 5, 2009

    The land os Israel is rightfully their and the supreme allied ragheads of HAMAS won;t move to the other 95 percent Islamic territory in the region. -derender

    You wouldn’t DARE say that to a Muslim, would you?

    So why did he erase all evidence and create a rock record that indicates it never happened? What was his point? -derender

    Dude, you’re forgetting to show your respect to God by not capitalizing pronouns that reference Him.

  626. #628 Menyambal
    April 5, 2009

    Derender, love, you can’t keep poking at people just because they won’t leave you alone. If you want to be left alone, leave this blog. Folks here are never going to tell you that you are right. They are defending their territory and their understanding of the universe. And you aren’t offering good arguments, sorry to say.

    Here’s an example: You say that the Grand Canyon was formed by run-off from the Flood. There are several problems with that. First, flood water would have gone AROUND that particular plateau area. Second, the river in the canyon winds and twists in entrenched meanders–a real flood would have gone howling straight through, as is seen at the English Channel and the Channeled Scablands below Glacial Lake Missoula. Third, the canyon walls have some quite high vertical sections that could not have formed in soft flood deposits, as creationists claim must have happened. Those facts are easily seen and confirmed, and anyone who says otherwise is mistaken, lying or selling something, or is trusting someone who is mistaken, lying or selling something.

    You challenge folks to explain how a dinosaur could evolve into a chicken. That’s very simple: Each generation looked a little bit less like a dinosaur, and a little more like a chicken. You look a little bit different than your dad, right? Well, when differences like that accumulate over time, as conditions sometimes require, it’s called evolution. It’s just like breeding dogs, and we know it happened because we can see relationships among all animals just like we can see relationships among breeds of dogs. We also see fossil evidence of evolution–anyone who says that there is no fossil evidence is mistaken, lying or selling something, or is trusting someone who is mistaken, lying or selling something.

    These folks have walked the Canyon, and have worked in labs. They aren’t going to be persuaded by anything you can offer.

    You poking at them isn’t hurting them in any way. They might get bored with you and stop poking back, but they probably won’t–they are good with words, and they know how to write some tight insults. The only one who can shut down this silliness is you, derender. Stop wasting your time, here.

    And have a good night.

  627. #629 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    *facepalm* – Darwin is not a saviour.

    *facepalm* – This is not even an appropriate reply. Darwin was not a slave-owner. Sure there are other reasons why he wasn’t perfect, but Derender is just lying.

    Derender, you are going to hell for lying. We’ll have a slideshow of your lies for entertainment the first evening. BYOB.

  628. #630 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    Evolution is an idea, it’s not provable.

    From Jerry Coyne – Why Evolution Is True:

    Every day, hundreds of observations and experiments pour into the hopper of scientific literature. Many of them don’t have much to do with evolution – they’re observations about details of physiology, biochemistry, development, and so on – but many of them do. And every fact that has something to do with evolution confirms its truth. Every fossil that we find, every DNA molecule that we sequence, every organ system that we dissect, supports the idea that species evolved from common ancestors. Despite innumerable possible observations that could prove evolution untrue, we don’t have a single one. We don’t find mammals in precambrian rocks, humans in the same layers as dinosaurs, or any other fossils out of evolutionary order. DNA sequencing supports the evolutionary relationships of species originally deduced from the fossil record. And, as natural selection predicts, we find so species with adaptations that benefit only a different species. We do find dead genes and vestigial organs, incomprehensible under the idea of special creation. Despite a million chances to be wrong, evolution always comes up right. That is as close as we can get to scientific truth

  629. #631 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    We have seen dinosaurs fighting. Do you think those two dinosaurs just had a heart attack and died suddenly and fossilized in a fight scene. Why would a sudden burial not explain this?

    good grief it just gets worse. Sudden burial sure but not the flood. If they got hit by a flood they would have been swept away. The material surrounding the fossil is from a wind borne sand dune that more than likely is what caused their death. no flood. No evidence for a flood. Nothing at all.

    Plus the two fossils are not complete. There is no actual proof that they are “fighting”. It just sounds good to idiots like yourself.

    oh and it was around 80 million years ago, not 6k.

  630. #632 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    derender, you don’t get to “specifically ask” us to do anything. also, get it through your skull that the character of Darwin is irrelevant, because evolutions is not a revelation. it’s true regardless of whether Darwin was a good or a bad person.

    seriously, take your ignorant degenerate self somewhere else, you’re embarrassing our other trolls.

  631. #633 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    Kel, I do not discount that evolution has been studied for over 15o years now. Not do I discard the idea that it is the prevalent theory to explain biology on the planet. I am not say that I do not believe that. The point that I am making is that some schools teach it as absolute undefiled total 100% proven fact rather than a theory that is still being tested and still being learned about to this day.

    Drink!

  632. #634 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    Kel, I do not discount that evolution has been studied for over 15o years now. Not do I discard the idea that it is the prevalent theory to explain biology on the planet. I am not say that I do not believe that. The point that I am making is that some schools teach it as absolute undefiled total 100% proven fact rather than a theory that is still being tested and still being learned about to this day.

    *facepalm* – do you even know how science works? Nothing in science is taught as 100% proven fact, all science is tentative knowledge, dependant on the time and place. Do you understand the difference between fact and theory in science? Facts are the evidence, and a theory is a well supported explanation of the evidence. Theories hold far more weight that facts because facts alone explain only themselves. When a hypothesis can predict what facts will emerge and explain the current facts, it becomes a theory. Theories are still subject to revision and they always will be because that’s what science is.

  633. #635 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    The point that I am making is that some schools teach it as absolute undefiled total 100% proven fact rather than a theory that is still being tested and still being learned about to this day.

    No, they don’t.

    Liar.

  634. #636 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Janine is back – Dracula returns! How was the night air? It will be sunrise in few hours. Better not stray too far off. Like I said before, stop with pig fetish stuff and i’ll be nice. until then, forget it. I will continue with Kel tomorrow with a nice civilized discussion. He is about the only one on here that makes sense anyway. I can talk to Kel with respect and dignity, but you are just nuts. Threats? Like I could really spray you with raid? That would be a perfectly good waste of raid.

  635. #637 Sven DiMilo
    April 5, 2009

    I’m quaffing a Brooklyn IPA for the just a theory hit.

  636. #638 Patricia, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Fuck you derender, you scaborus shit festered christian.

    Ass, you risk your mortal soul by mixing with the vile non believers. Run away and pray, shit for brains.

  637. #639 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    derender not a single thing you have offered as your understanding of science or the world has been shown to be factual.

    You need to re-asses where you are getting your information from.

    I would start by stop using AIG or Ken Ham for anything.

  638. #640 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    still being tested and still being learned about to this day.

    It is still being tested and learned about. As every school teaches.

    Now, tell us, what tests has evolution failed?

    Because if it’s never failed a test in 150 years, you have to admit that’s a pretty good track record.

  639. #641 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    The point that I am making is that some schools teach it as absolute undefiled total 100% proven fact rather than a theory that is still being tested and still being learned about to this day.

    Now derenger, cite the peer reviewed primary scientific literature to show that there is a competing scientific theory. There is none. So evolution is the only scientific theory. Creationism is religion, so say SCOTUS. So says science. ID is creationism, that is religion. Religion has no place being taught in science class. So, you have a problem if you think religion should be taught in a science class, you are fucked in the head.

  640. #642 derender
    April 5, 2009

    strange gods before me :

    Yes they do

    liar.

    Ever heard of High school Biology. The whole book is preaching Darwinism without question. Students are turned away when they question the book.

  641. #643 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    I’m quaffing a Brooklyn IPA for the just a theory hit.

    Damn, I’m all out of beer.

  642. #644 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    I can talk to Kel with respect and dignity

    Kel, what the hell?

    I can loan you some cuss words if you’re running low.

  643. #645 Aquaria
    April 5, 2009

    Wow. Only one woman here? Now, that’s funny. Funny too is our latest chew-toy’s name. Derender. Sounds like “the end of…” What? One could only hope it’s that brackish mire called his gene pool.

  644. #646 Wowbagger, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Is derender, the useless little impotent cumstain, still here displaying his profound ignorance? What a pathetic turdsmear he is.

    Anyone else think the dungeon door is opening?

  645. #647 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    Ever heard of High school Biology. The whole book is preaching Darwinism without question. Students are turned away when they question the book.

    I took high school biology.

    There is no question about evolution. It is correct. That is not the same as saying that it’s not “a theory that is still being tested and still being learned about to this day.”

    You’re not just a liar, you’re too stupid to understand this conversation.

    Did Christianity make you stupid, or were you born that way?

  646. #648 Ken Cope
    April 5, 2009

    Sure didn’t mean to step in this thread, all full of puke from an idiot shooting blanks with something looking almost like a penis, only smaller, the sort of wankstain not worth a middle finger when an extended pinkie will get the message across. Derender, voted most likely to blind himself trying to cook fireworks on his stove on his way to a teabagging party.

  647. #649 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Ever heard of High school Biology. The whole book is preaching Darwinism without question. Students are turned away when they question the book.

    Ever hear of science class? Only science should be taught there. By the way Darwinism is not used by science. We call modern evolutionary theory “Modern Synthesis”, if no just plain evolution. So another lie by the godbot, who is full of bearing fall witness. Again. Religion, that is creationism, can be taught in schools. We don’t care. Just no in science classes, because is isn’t science. Comparative religion, philosophy, or mythology are the proper courses for creationism.

  648. #650 tresmal
    April 5, 2009

    Not only was Darwin not a slaveowner, he was an abolitionist.

  649. #651 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    Sounds like “the end of…” What?

    derrièrender

  650. #652 Steve_C
    April 5, 2009

    Young earth creationists are insane. 6000 years? Are you fucking kidding? Your car wouldn’t run without FOSSIL fuels! Explain OIL dumbass.

  651. #653 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Patricia:

    Who are you? Dracula’s personal bodyguard?

    I better put some garlic up before i get bitten.

    Care for some garlic?

  652. #654 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    You have been repsectful with most of your posts and I appreciate that. For your respect and courtesy I can honestly say that I cannot answer your question about the speed of light being constant. There are some ideas about it in the world of young earth creationsim that are still being worked out. It has proved to be a stubmling block to the movement. The main idea now is that everything was made in the universe at the exact same time. That’s all I can tell you.

    This is the difference between science and non-science. Science is never about struggling to fit a worldview to fit the facts, it current explanations cannot explain the facts then that explanation is thrown out in favour of an explanation that can explain the facts… And even if there’s no current idea that can explain the facts, an explanation that can’t explain them is still discarded. You should never have the conclusion before you look for the evidence, rather you should base any conclusion on the evidence.

    Back 400 years ago, it was first theorised that life was a constant speed. It took until centuries later for the ability to measure it. Light was thought to travel through a substance called aether, but that was disproven in the 1880s. From there, Einstein had the ability to derive special relativity – that the speed of light is fundamental to the nature of the universe and that matter IS energy. Thus e=mc² has become the fundamental equation of reality.

    Back then, they had no idea how old the universe was. It wasn’t that long ago that there were galaxies that were found to be outside our own, and in the 1920s it was discovered that the galaxies were moving away from us – the further the galaxy, the further away it was. From here, combined with our knowledge of the fundamental forces, the idea of the big bang first came about. In the 1960s, a prediction of the big bang – cosmic background radiation, was discovered and thus the hypothesis of big bang cosmology was given validity by making a confirmed falsifiable prediction.

    Even today, more study of the universe is changing what we know about it. We have black holes, string theory, the holographic universe, multiverse theories, ideas such as dark matter and dark energy – and while many of these are probably wrong, these are the tentative conclusions drawn in order to explain what’s there and predict what we should find. Drawing conclusions before the evidence? That’s what religion does, not science.

  653. #655 Sven DiMilo
    April 5, 2009

    Garlic?
    Right so here we are again with the troll-stomping thing. But what occurs to me is the Dawkins quote about anybody who claims to reject biological evolution is either stupid, ignorant, insane, or wicked…it’s pretty clear which category this guy derender exemplifies, no? So why waste time with somebody like that? I’m looking for a thread where the smart, educated, sanely realist and good people are hanging out.

  654. #656 strange gods before me
    April 5, 2009

    What’s up with the vampire references?

    Are those supposed to be jokes?

    Does he think he’s funny?

  655. #657 Tulse
    April 5, 2009

    What geologist would you recommend? A evolution based one or creation based one?

    A reality-based one.

  656. #658 Sven DiMilo
    April 5, 2009

    Well, it turns out everybody’s over here.
    So, Opening Day or what? Any baseball fans?

  657. #659 derender
    April 5, 2009

    Kel:

    I do believe that some aspects that Darwin studied is indeed fact. For example, when Darwin studied the beaks of finches, he noticed that some were entirely differnt, but wer of the same bird.

    I can hadle that. I realize that naimals as well as viruses and bacteria can change over time to adapt to their environment. That is one apsect of evolution I do beleive. it’s the whole molecules to man thing that seems far fetched. You have to understand that mixing evolution with religion is a diffucult task simply becuase the two contradict each other. Anyway, I’ll continue tomorrow night. I have to go to work in the morning.

  658. #660 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    So, Opening Day or what? Any baseball fans?

    hell yeah

    go Braves

  659. #661 Ken Cope
    April 5, 2009

    So why waste time with somebody like that? I’m looking for a thread where the smart, educated, sanely realist and good people are hanging out.

    If we were on zombie patrol, and, in response to our challenge, heard any random sample of the shite that derender is spewing, we’d have shot his head clean off, and then would have been only marginally surprised to discover that it was entirely bereft of brains. Unfortunately, picking off zombie lies and trolls seems to be what brings smart, educated, sanely realist and good people together here, thanks to our gracious host.

  660. #662 Kel
    April 5, 2009

    I can talk to Kel with respect and dignity, but you are just nuts.

    Hate to say it, but being courteous is not the same thing as being respectful. When you push a completely misunderstood version of science and refuse to budge from that position, that is not being respectful or acting with dignity.

    Ever heard of High school Biology. The whole book is preaching Darwinism without question. Students are turned away when they question the book.

    *facepalm* by calling it darwinism, you are showing your profound ignorance on the subject. This is exactly what I mean, you have no understanding of science and are showing no respect here to people who do. Instead you are just pushing the same creationist rhetoric that has been disproven time and time again.

    Evolution is taught because it’s the only theory that has evidential support and has the power to explain the diversity of life. It’s not sacred, all scientific knowledge is tentative. Quite simply there is no alternative that has come about to challenge evolution by natural selection, so you can whine all you want about how it’s the only one taught – but it’s the only one taught for the same reason that heliocentric orbit is taught or that the theory of gravity is taught. In fact we know more about evolution than gravity, we have never observed the proposed graviton that fits in the standard model of physics.

    Evolution is the only one taught because it’s the only theory that has scientific validity – if you wish to see another theory taught alongside evolution, first come up with a competing theory. And remember that theory in science does not mean guess, it’s a well supported hypothesis that can explain a variety of facts.

  661. #663 Jadehawk
    April 5, 2009

    it’s the whole molecules to man thing that seems far fetched.

    your argument from personal incredulity is worthless. just because you can’t wrap your head around something, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen

  662. #664 Wowbagger, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Does he think he’s funny?

    Considering that he seems to think he’s intelligent, well-informed, open-minded and intellectually honest when he (demonstrably) isn’t, I wouldn’t be surprised if he also thought he was funny.

    I guess he hasn’t worked out we’re laughing at him.

  663. #665 Patricia, OM
    April 5, 2009

    Look out Kel, de-rearender has a crush on you. *wink*

    So Janine is a destroyer of children? OK, me too. Over 400 in my life time. Oh, and just to be perfectly plain, I do not regret destroying any one of them. Got that derender?

    Creationism basically deals with te age of the earth from a historical and geneological point of view rather than froma universe point of view.

    So derender is a mormon with a Raid and tongue fetish?

    Inquiring foulmouthed vulgar child destroying minds want to know.

  664. #666 Sven DiMilo
    April 5, 2009

    go Braves

    Best record in baseball…for now…

    The Mets bought relief this winter…watch out.

  665. #667 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    I guess he hasn’t worked out we’re laughing at him.

    Well, his attempts to insult me were pure comedy gold.

  666. #668 Ken Cope
    April 5, 2009

    You have to understand that mixing evolution with religion is a diffucult task simply becuase the two contradict each other.

    Why yes, yes they do!

    Anyway, I’ll continue tomorrow night. I have to go to work in the morning.

    Any boil sucker has to get up pretty early in the morning these days, to keep the only job they’re qualified for.

  667. #669 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 5, 2009

    Sadly, I am a fan of the Chicago Cubs. Go ahead and make fun of me, I deserve it.

  668. #670 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 5, 2009

    Best record in baseball…for now…

    The Mets bought relief this winter…watch out.

    Yeah I know. It’s going to be an interesting NL East this year.

  669. #671 Menyambal
    April 5, 2009

    The business about Darwin being a racist comes from a few misunderstandings. He used the word “races” in a way that was clearly meant to encompass everything from breeds to species, and he used the word “favored” with “races” only in terms of survival value. He once referred to living conditions in Africa and said that conditions there would improve to be more like Europe, but folks assume that he meant that Africans were at fault and would be eliminated–he meant that the higher apes would probably be accidentally eliminated, providing an even greater contrast between civilized humans and the remaining monkeys.

    Darwin himself was a very good man, but his goodness or badness has nothing to do with evolution. He described natural selection, which is the mechanism that drives evolution, but he did not invent evolution. He just explained what makes evolution happen.

  670. #672 BMS
    April 5, 2009

    So, Opening Day or what? Any baseball fans?

    .

    go Braves

    Too bad Maddox retired. Last season with, and for, the Padres was just abysmal. Some of the games were just amazing. Couldn’t do anything right.

  671. #673 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 6, 2009

    Sadly, I am a fan of the Chicago Cubs. Go ahead and make fun of me, I deserve it.

    At the risk of boring the non-sports fans here, the Cubs are actually pretty good or rather should be this year.

  672. #674 plum grenville
    April 6, 2009

    Aaaaw! Dertface has gone to bed? I wanted to refute his Darwin-owned-slaves fantasy. And ask him if he left school before covering citation practices. I thought Darwin’s Plantation must be an obscure work of the Sainted Master with which I was not familiar.

    Darwin’s entire family were abolitionists. Had been for several generations at least.

    Slavery was abolished in England in 1772, in the Mansfield Decision, and in British colonies in 1834. Darwin was born in 1809. FAIL.

  673. #675 Sven DiMilo
    April 6, 2009

    I do believe that some aspects that Darwin studied is indeed fact. For example, when Darwin studied the beaks of finches, he noticed that some were entirely differnt, but wer of the same bird. I can hadle that. I realize that naimals as well as viruses and bacteria can change over time to adapt to their environment. That is one apsect of evolution I do beleive. it’s the whole molecules to man thing that seems far fetched.

    Quoted…just because.

  674. #676 Janine, Insulting Sinner
    April 6, 2009

    In the Central, the Cubs will have no competition. The Brewers will have offense but no pitching, Sheets and the fat guy are gone. The Cardinals, Astros, Reds and Pirates? Bleh! Yes, they are one of the best teams in the NL, perhaps the best. But they have won nothing. Also, the 2006 Cardinals, arguably one of the worst World Series winner ever, shows that talent does not always win out.

    But you have to remember Chimpy, the last time the Cubs won anything, none of my grandparents were around. They are all gone. Until that hated team that I route for wins, I deserve abuse for my loyalty.

  675. #677 Patricia, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Shit! I thought I was getting that HTML stuff pretty good for a hillbilly.

    Derender you’re going to need much more than garlic to defend yourself against me, you namby pamby, sissy assed wannabe christian. Your gawd is a pale coward compared to MOCCUS the god of bacon and pork chops*.

    Lay off Janine & snort some Raid, you’ll feel better.

    *Moccus, Romano-Celtic local swine god.

  676. #678 Kel
    April 6, 2009

    it’s the whole molecules to man thing that seems far fetched.

    Far fetched in what way?

    Reasons we know we evolved:

    • Fused chromosome – Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, while all other great apes have 24 pairs. That means for common ancestry to be true, we should see a fused chromosome in our genome that corresponds to two chromosomes in the chimpanzee genome or that we should see a split chromosome in all other great apes. Now the latter is really unlikely, so the former must be true if common ancestry was true… and when sequencing the chimpanzee genome we found it. Human chromosome #2 directly relates to two chimpanzee chromosomes. We even have the fused markers in our DNA – two centromeres and telemeres fused in the middle of the chromosome.
    • ERV markers – there are certain types of viruses that insert it’s DNA into the genetic code of animals. If this infects the reproductive cells, this will be passed down as a genetic marker. So if humans and chimpanzees shared a common ancestor, we should see many of these markers in exactly the same position in both genomes. And we’ve found this too, of one type of ERV, the ERV-K, we found 17 markers in exactly the same position on the human and chimpanzee genome. Remember that the genetic code is 3 billion characters long, so for that to happen by chance is impossible.
    • Pseudogenes – Genes can be activated or inactivated with the switch of a single marker in the genetic code. As such, genes that no longer serve a use are inactivated rather than deleted. So we should see in our genome markers that are inactivated in both us and chimpanzees that are not in other creatures. The ability to create vitamin C for example fits this criteria. We don’t need to waste energy synthesising vitamin C since we can get it from our diet, so turning that gene off will not only not be disadvantageous, but even advantageous as it costs to synthesise the vitamin.
    • Genetic drift – to further elaborate on pseudogenes, since the gene is turned off, any mutation on the gene will not matter. So over time, mutations will accumulate and at a fairly constant, so common ancestry can be traced by seeing what copies of the gene are closer genetically. By this, our copy of the inactive gene should be closer to chimpanzees than to gorillas – and that is indeed the case.
    • Fossil record – We have found plenty of skulls that show a clear progression to modern man. Our last ancestor with chimpanzees was about 7 million years ago, and we have found skulls that would satisfy a common ancestor for both. Then there are the australopithecines that are around from 4 million years ago to about 2 million years ago, again showing more human-like traits. They were already upright creatures by that stage. The brain gradually got bigger and around 2 million years ago that’s when we get to the homo line of fossils. One fossil – homo habilis cannot be decided whether it really fits into the homo or the australopithecine category, it’s just that good as an intermediate species. Finally we see early homo sapiens and our recent cousins – the neanderthals that only diverged from us around 500,000 years ago

    That’ll do for a start. If you aren’t convinced, there’s plenty of other evidence that shows common ancestry – like shared genes, embryology, morphology, anatomy, biogeographical distribution of life, etc. Though there are two books you should be reading: Neil Shubin – Your Inner Fish, and Jerry Coyne – Why Evolution Is True.

  677. #679 Ken Cope
    April 6, 2009

    If you aren’t convinced, there’s plenty of other evidence that shows common ancestry

    Appeals to the intellect are here, I’m afraid, generous to a fault, Kel; as you well know, you can’t reason someone out of any position that reason had nothing to do with in the first place.

  678. #680 Patricia, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Dammit, I’m missing the best of the fun and holding up my end of being gruesome because I have to help build more chicken coops. Daaaaaang!

  679. #681 Sven DiMilo
    April 6, 2009

    I have hated the Cubs with a white-hot burning hate since that evening in 1969 when a benchwarmer named Jimmy Qualls singled with 1 out in the ninth to break up Tom Seaver’s perfect game. That crappy little single is seared into my amygdala forever.

  680. #682 BMS
    April 6, 2009

    Okay. What?s with the Discovery Channel?

    Right now its runnig a multi-part series entitled, ?Who Was Jesus??

    That?s bad enough, right, on the Discovery Channel?

    The very first voiceover says:

    “This is the true story of Jesus Christ.?

    Yeah. Right.

  681. #683 Kel
    April 6, 2009

    You have to understand that mixing evolution with religion is a diffucult task simply becuase the two contradict each other.

    Maybe you should read Finding Darwin’s God and Only A Theory by Dr Ken Miller. Now I’m with you on this, I personally find religion and science very hard to reconcile. It’s one of the reasons why I’m an atheist, but there are many theists who do reconcile the ideas. I wouldn’t doubt Ken Miller’s sincerity as a biologist or as a Christian for a second, nor would I do the same for Robert T Bakker or Francis Collins. Nor would I doubt the commitment to science and religion displayed by the Arch Bishop of Canterbury or the George Coyne, the chief vatican astronomer. Point is, while difficult, the views can be reconciled.

    But in all honesty, this is the year 2009, we have sent people to the moon, travelled beyond pluto and sitting on your desk is a machine that can do more mathematical calculations than the human race combined. We’ve eradicated smallpox, put electricity into every home, have the ability to fly across the world in a matter of hours, split the atom, and created a global communications network. Science works, and you would be a fool to ignore it for any reason at all – and that includes God. Science does not say God doesn’t exist, but it does show how the universe works. Creationism is killed by science, God is not.

  682. #684 plum grenville
    April 6, 2009

    Ugh! Sports talk. Bedtime for this Bonzo relative.

  683. #685 Ken Cope
    April 6, 2009

    I wouldn’t doubt Ken Miller’s sincerity as a biologist or as a Christian for a second, nor would I do the same for Robert T Bakker or Francis Collins.

    And I can’t help but wonder what they could have accomplished if they hadn’t hobbled themselves with religion. If you haven’t read Francis Collins, or worse, heard him on the radio gabbling about taking three frozen waterfalls as a message from gob about “the trinity,” then you don’t know what it’s like to be embarrassed on behalf of somebody who then claims to speak for science.

    Creationism is killed by science, God is not.

    God has never been so coherent or consistent a concept as creationism has been–something that’s never been alive can hardly be said to have been killed, no matter how many times a stake has been driven into the empty coffin a body would be buried in, had it ever existed in the first place.

  684. #686 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    Well, his attempts to insult me were pure comedy gold.

    if you think that’s funny, you should have seen his attempts at flirting earlier. a caveman with a club would have been a true Don Juan compared to that.

  685. #687 Patricia, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Kel, most excellent points.

    The next question for the christian is: what part of the bible is relevant today?

    Stoning lesbians, stoning sassy children, stoning the checkers at Wal-Mart? Stoning gay men, stoning anyone wearing a cotton shirt, rayon skirt and leather sandals? Stoning someone eating shrimp salad for lunch? They have no clue.

  686. #688 Kel
    April 6, 2009

    Appeals to the intellect are here, I’m afraid, generous to a fault, Kel; as you well know, you can’t reason someone out of any position that reason had nothing to do with in the first place.

    The very least you can do is try, if they haven’t examined the evidence then it seems that it’s pertinent to demonstrate the validity of an idea before mocking them for rejecting it. It may simply be that (s)he has never been exposed to the evidence, it may be that the evidence has not been explained properly, or that (s)he was too stubborn to listen the first time (we’ve all been there on that one).

    Whatever the reason, it’s always good to show that there are good reasons that scientists accept a theory even if they won’t walk away believing it. If nothing else, it will demonstrate that there are facts out there to support the theory – something that is definitely lacking in the understanding of evolution to the layman. Human knowledge should be available for everyone, even if they choose to ignore it.

  687. #689 Sven DiMilo
    April 6, 2009

    Uh-oh, driving off the Wodehousians with sports talk. Who’s next? Let’s see…say, I’m listening right now to the latest archival release from the Grateful Dead, Carousel Ballroom SF 2/14/68–mind-searing amazingness.

  688. #690 Menyambal
    April 6, 2009

    Patricia, you’ve been doing great. Are you a real hillbilly? I’m in the Missouri Ozarks, myself. In Christian County, for Gawds’ sake.

    I just went off and read about _Darwin’s_Plantation_. That is one twisted book. Ham argues that Darwin increased racism and slavery, totally ignoring the fact that just a couple of years after _Origin_ came out, the USA had a massive internal war to wipe out slavery–if one wants to make silly correlations. No wonder poor derender totally misunderstood, although how he got to Darwin owning slaves is possible only through reading only the title. Do you suppose ol’ Ken Ham deliberately chooses his titles on that basis?

    And why is it that trying to deal with people like derender and Ken Ham makes me wish that there was a god? It reminds me of the first time that I got into an old Russian helicopter, sitting there feeling it thrash up to speed, and knowing that I hadn’t a hope in hell, or even a “Hail Mary”. I survived the flight, and a few more, but I sometimes despair of surviving in a world with people like derender in it.

    Thanks, all, for some hope.

  689. #691 Aquaria
    April 6, 2009

    Ugh. Sports. Well, basketball is okay. It at least moves a lot, except for the last 3:00 of regulation. If you’re at a game, it’s the perfect time to go to the bathroom or hit up the concession stand. No lines!

  690. #692 BMS
    April 6, 2009

    Ooooo, Jadehawk, I missed his “flirting”!

    Another thread? Or this one and I put it out of my mind?

  691. #693 Ken Cope
    April 6, 2009

    The very least you can do is try, if they haven’t examined the evidence then it seems that it’s pertinent to demonstrate the validity of an idea before mocking them for rejecting it.

    When a scumbag troll shows up here frothing at the mouth and, in the name of Jay-Zuz, using our status as atheists as an opportunity to slag off everybody, the calm rational response of rattling off the facts about the twin-nested hierarchy, even though I understand the impulse and applaud the perspicacity, just starts to look like a disposable character in the B-move, fumbling for the right religious icon even as the monster shuffles closer and closer. It will not have the intended effect, other than to make the rest of us proud of you for having the wherewithal to calmbly share some basic facts-o-life with the shuffling zombie.

  692. #694 Kel
    April 6, 2009

    Nothing is going to be gained by reacting back. All it’ll do is confirm in their mind that atheists are a pack of immoral fools. Going around punching people is going to mean others punch back, but if you are only looking at the behaviour of others, then it’s going to feel like you are the one who is being abused.

    I agree, it may not have the intended effect. But what else can we do? Most people have been miseducated on the matter, and that is only expounded by the many who exploit that ignorance for the sake of profit or pushing their own agenda. People more than ever only expose themselves to views they want to hear, it’s important to show that at times this can lead people down a very wrong path.

  693. #695 Patricia, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Menyambal – Yep, hillbilly. My grandmother was from Old Misery. The rest from Kentucky and Tennessee. The farms my folks and brothers live on now were paid for with shine money.

    Gawd it makes me feel old to say that.

  694. #696 BMS
    April 6, 2009

    Nothing is going to be gained by reacting back.

    Maybe not that you can perceive.

  695. #697 Kel
    April 6, 2009

    The next question for the christian is: what part of the bible is relevant today?

    Obviously there has to be something still, otherwise it wouldn’t proliferate. As I see it, the message of relevance is the same as comes from other religions – a connection with reality around us. It’s not that the bible offers us anyhting special in a way to understand nature, it doesn’t offer us any special moral guidance, it doesn’t give us a sense of history. But it attempts to do all those, and it wraps it up in necessities like the human need for community. And as such the bible stays relevant because it is satisfying to the individual through attempting to be a complete guide to reality.

  696. #698 Kel
    April 6, 2009
    Nothing is going to be gained by reacting back.

    Maybe not that you can perceive.

    Agreed, I don’t see the value in starting a flame war for the sake of it. It’s worth at least trying to explain things before writing someone off. Maybe that’s my naivety speaking.

  697. #699 Patricia, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Kel I don’t want to misunderstand you.

    I think you are for punching back … is it the lateness of the hour, or the amount of wine?… Inquiring minds want to know. :D

  698. #700 Ken Cope
    April 6, 2009

    By the time some asshole freeper shows up here hating the Mexicans and bragging about how they make their own bullets, it isn’t exactly everybody’s cue to leaflet-bomb the intruder with remedial science and try new experiments in framing, espousing NOMA as if it were a good thing. Religion is what it took to get the idiot to such a state of depravity in the first place. Appeals to religion-accommodating scientists, who got to be scientists while still being strung out on religion, aren’t going to be any more effective than trying to teach him the eight-fold path, or phenomenology.

  699. #701 Kel
    April 6, 2009

    Kel I don’t want to misunderstand you.

    I think you are for punching back …

    I’m for trying to diffuse the attack before punching back.

    espousing NOMA as if it were a good thing

    I agree with you Ken, but I still feel it’s worth at least trying to at least expose them to the evidence for the science. And remember what I said: Now I’m with you on this, I personally find religion and science very hard to reconcile. It’s one of the reasons why I’m an atheist, but there are many theists who do reconcile the ideas. – nothing of that statement is incorrect in my view. Just showing options, and not pretending that my personal view on the matter of them being incompatible is the only way of seeing the world…

    Appeals to religion-accommodating scientists, who got to be scientists while still being strung out on religion, aren’t going to be any more effective than trying to teach him the eight-fold path, or phenomenology.

    To be honest, I couldn’t give a shit if they remain Christian or not. It’s that they understand how science works – that’s the real goal in my view. Not even to believe in what science says, but at least understand how it works. It’s a great tradegy that almost all of those who argue against evolution have no idea of what evolution really is.

  700. #702 Menyambal
    April 6, 2009

    Patricia: ‘Shine, huh? I once got a tour of a “distillery” that was extracting plant oils up in the hills of Indonesia. My guide told the old man that I was from a moonshining family, which was utter crud, but it got me in. Once in, though, I realized that I could have run the place–pot still, cooling coils and all. Maybe it is in my blood.

  701. #703 Kel
    April 6, 2009

    Ken, would I say that I think the ideas are incompatible if I was trying that Matt Nisbet coddling bullshit? All I can do is be open and honest about the options. I make no secret of the fact that I’m an atheist, that I don’t think the bible is a book of any value in this modern world, and that I feel that NOMA is a weak way of looking at both science and religion. God to me has always been a god of the gaps – born out of human ignorance and propagated in the absence of a suitable challenger, and that in 2009 we have enough understanding of the universe in order to declare the God hypothesis dead. Merely pointing out that there are differing opinions on this issue and pointing someone to look at Ken Miller (is anyone on here really going to complain that a creationist is reading Miller?) is not being accomodationalist. It’s being honest.

  702. #704 Patricia, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Whoa, no Kel. That is not what I mean.

    What part of the bible is relevant today? I say, not much.

  703. #705 Ken Cope
    April 6, 2009

    It’s that they understand how science works – that’s the real goal in my view.

    Whatever gets them through the night, I agree, I’ve got no beef with wherever anybody happens to believe, if they’ve got the slightest shred of human tolerance and are willing to reciprocate. I spent years thinking I could accommodate science and woo with each other. But most of these guys go beyond fideism and either assign credit for their science skills to their religion, or try to claim they hold their religious beliefs for scientific reasons. While heddle will defend Collins, even heddle claims the reason he’s a believer is not out of any rational cause, but because he was singled out for a kick-in-the-head miraculous intervention from his god. Apart from the narcissism approaching Zaphod-Beeblebrox proportions, he at least isn’t usually trying to claim that it’s scientific to think as he does.

  704. #706 Ken Cope
    April 6, 2009

    Sorry, Kel, to accuse you of hanging with Padfoot, Mooney, Nisbet and Prongs, was beyond the pale, and I apologize. Most of the shots that we take at trolls aren’t really intended to be read and understood by the trolls, but by the people who are at any and all stages on their journey: the lurkers, or at least readers who may profit from seeing various strategies in action to note for when they find themselves in similar encounters in real life.

  705. #707 Kel
    April 6, 2009

    What part of the bible is relevant today? I say, not much.

    I’d go one step further and say that beyond a narrative for Christian culture nothing at all. It fails as a moral guide, it fails as a historical guide, it utterly fails as an explanation for reality, and there’s just so much horrible things in there the best we can ever expect is for someone to interpret the bible to conform with the current moral zeitgeist. It’s an archaic and draconian text, with enough contradictory passages that any theist can twist it to justify their own ends. I honestly don’t know how anyone can find any value in that mythology at all.

    Just curious Patrica, as a former Christian, what do you think of the Outsider Test For Faith?

  706. #708 Patricia, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Menyambal – Yep, my family used to run shine, but now we just have crocks of hooch. *grin* I predict (!) that hooch is going to be worth something again.

  707. #709 Patricia, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Kel, The Outsider test for faith is a bunch of sissy, non-believing wannabe christians. They aren’t worth their weight in gopher wood.

  708. #710 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    Ooooo, Jadehawk, I missed his “flirting”!
    Another thread? Or this one and I put it out of my mind?

    this thread, somewhere in the late #300′s.

  709. #711 Bone Oboe
    April 6, 2009
  710. #712 Bone Oboe
    April 6, 2009

    What I meant was Derender?

  711. #713 Josh
    April 6, 2009

    We have to do this on two fronts, now? Seriously?

    We have seen dinosaurs fighting. Do you think those two dinosaurs just had a heart attack and died suddenly and fossilized in a fight scene. Why would a sudden burial not explain this?

    No one is disputing that these two individuals were buried quickly. There are disagreements about exactly what happened, but no one is disputing quick burial for these two dinosaur skeletons.

    http://www.mnhn.ul.pt/geologia/gaia/9.pdf

    Why is it that you creationists are so convinced that everything in geology is a slow, gradual process? What–you don’t think we see the tsunamis happen and the volcanoes erupt?

    The rapid burial isn’t a problem for us. However, the problem for you is how several months of receding flood waters can deposit thick sequences of river sediments and semi-arid desert sand:

    http://www.jstor.org/pss/3515294

    gsa.confex.com/gsa/2008AM/finalprogram/abstract_147501.htm

    http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1206/0003-0082(2005)498%5B0001:NSSDEA%5D2.0.CO%3B2

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VHG-4V47CMB-
    2&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221
    &_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=59f62de1a008705e97396e9b82ac9d97

  712. #714 MAJeff, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Jesus fucking christ. Ignore the troll. It’s not as though the little fuckwit is capable of learning.

  713. #715 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    It would be nice if we could have a couple of 101 threads: Evolution 101, Geology 101, and the like. That way when ignoramuses like derender show up, they can simply be directed to those threads with “Sorry, the grown-ups are trying to have a conversation here. Go to this thread (link). When you’re done you can come back, but if you try to bring up anything already covered there you will be ignored.”

  714. #716 clinteas
    April 6, 2009

    It would be nice if we could have a couple of 101 threads: Evolution 101, Geology 101, and the like

    Excellent idea.Like the “sticky” posts on forums,so not everything has to be rehashed constantly.I’d be all for that.

  715. #717 Stephen Wells
    April 6, 2009

    Historical trivia item re. Darwin and slavery: while a student in Edinburgh, Charles Darwin paid for taxidermy lessons from a freed slave by the name of John Edmonston, who lived in the city and made his living as an instructor in that art.

    I have no idea where the latest idiot got his “Darwin owned slaves” line from. It would be odd, given that he was an abolitionist and strongly condemned the horrible cruelty that he witnessed among South American slave-owners. From the journal of the Beagle voyage:

    “On the 19th of August we finally left the shores of Brazil.
    I thank God, I shall never again visit a slave-country. To
    this day, if I hear a distant scream, it recalls with painful
    vividness my feelings, when passing a house near Pernambuco,
    I heard the most pitiable moans, and could not but
    suspect that some poor slave was being tortured, yet knew
    that I was as powerless as a child even to remonstrate. I
    suspected that these moans were from a tortured slave, for I
    was told that this was the case in another instance. Near
    Rio de Janeiro I lived opposite to an old lady, who kept
    screws to crush the fingers of her female slaves. I have
    stayed in a house where a young household mulatto, daily
    and hourly, was reviled, beaten, and persecuted enough to
    break the spirit of the lowest animal. I have seen a little
    boy, six or seven years old, struck thrice with a horse-whip
    (before I could interfere) on his naked head, for having
    handed me a glass of water not quite clean; I saw his
    father tremble at a mere glance from his master’s eye.
    These latter cruelties were witnessed by me in a Spanish
    colony, in which it has always been said, that slaves are
    better treated than by the Portuguese, English, or other
    European nations. I have seen at Rio de Janeiro a powerful
    negro afraid to ward off a blow directed, as he thought, at his
    face. I was present when a kind-hearted man was on the
    point of separating forever the men, women, and little
    children of a large number of families who had long lived
    together. I will not even allude to the many heart-sickening
    atrocities which I authentically heard of; — nor would I have
    mentioned the above revolting details, had I not met with
    several people, so blinded by the constitutional gaiety of the
    negro as to speak of slavery as a tolerable evil. Such people
    have generally visited at the houses of the upper classes, where
    the domestic slaves are usually well treated, and they have
    not, like myself, lived amongst the lower classes. Such
    inquirers will ask slaves about their condition; they forget
    that the slave must indeed be dull, who does not calculate
    on the chance of his answer reaching his master’s ears.

    It is argued that self-interest will prevent excessive cruelty;
    as if self-interest protected our domestic animals, which
    are far less likely than degraded slaves, to stir up the rage
    of their savage masters. It is an argument long since protested
    against with noble feeling, and strikingly exemplified,
    by the ever-illustrious Humboldt. It is often attempted to
    palliate slavery by comparing the state of slaves with our
    poorer countrymen: if the misery of our poor be caused
    not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is
    our sin; but how this bears on slavery, I cannot see; as well
    might the use of the thumb-screw be defended in one
    land, by showing that men in another land suffered from
    some dreadful disease. Those who look tenderly at the slave
    owner, and with a cold heart at the slave, never seem to put
    themselves into the position of the latter; what a cheerless
    prospect, with not even a hope of change! picture to yourself
    the chance, ever hanging over you, of your wife and
    your little children — those objects which nature urges even
    the slave to call his own — being torn from you and sold
    like beasts to the first bidder! And these deeds are done
    and palliated by men, who profess to love their neighbours
    as themselves, who believe in God, and pray that his Will be
    done on earth! It makes one’s blood boil, yet heart tremble,
    to think that we Englishmen and our American descendants,
    with their boastful cry of liberty, have been and are so
    guilty: but it is a consolation to reflect, that we at least
    have made a greater sacrifice, than ever made by any nation,
    to expiate our sin.”

  716. #718 Stephen Wells
    April 6, 2009

    Evolution 101 could consist largely of links to talkorigins.

    For geology 101 we could maybe condense Josh’s post 713 into something like:

    “In the fossil record we see evidence of some things happening very quickly and other happening very slowly. Things happening very quickly are compatible with either a young or an old earth. Things happening very slowly are only compatible with an old earth. Therefore the earth is old.”

  717. #719 cinteas
    April 6, 2009

    Things happening very quickly are compatible with either a young or an old earth. Things happening very slowly are only compatible with an old earth. Therefore the earth is old.”

    Or just:

    “Timescales matter” !

  718. #720 Kel
    April 6, 2009

    Geology – if you have a problem with radiometric dating, then why do you believe in the atomic bomb?

  719. #721 Kseniya
    April 6, 2009

    Rob spewed:

    I refuse to adhere to your left wing propoganda. These links are pro-gay marriage and you know it. Why don’t you give some links that are not politically motivated? The APA is a joke now as well becuase they have been threatened by far left terrorists to keep their mouth shut on issues of homosexuality being pshychological. It’s sad when the far left pressure physchologists to change thier professional viewpoints to make a political statement. So much for freedom and free speech. Will these far left pests ever use a fair method of debate rather than threats of lawsuits by criminal organizations ike the ACLU?

    LOLOLOLOLOLOL! LOLOLOLOLOLOL! LOLOLOLOLOL!

    Brainwash alert!

    You poor creature. Everything you say is a lie. You feeble-minded, paranoid, ignorant fool.

    By the way, the APA dropped homosexuality from the DSM almost 40 years ago. They were way ahead of the social curve on the issue of sexual orientation and the psychological aspects thereof, not because “left-wing terrorists” threatened them (what a paranoid construct that is! seek help immediately) but because they examined a vast array of facts, and made an informed conclusion – unlike, say, YOU, who refuse to examine facts or make rational conclusions at all. You’ve swallowed the hateful mind-worm of your political forebearers, and do nothing but vomit up its filthy, squirming, photophobic progeny. You know nothing of freedom of thought, for you exercise none.

  720. #722 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 6, 2009

    Simon, you’re an idiot.

  721. #723 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    For extra credit, try to see yourself in them. Your and their politics have a common root in casual human selfishness, fear and distrust.

    Are you comparing the intellectual tradition of Friedman, Hayek, Mises, Nozick and Rothbard – some of the most influential economists and philosophers in human history – to the rantings of third-rate trolls like Rob and derender?

    I’m not a genius myself, and at times I don’t doubt that I talk utter crap. In my defence, when I realise that I’ve done so, I usually retract it. But the ideology to which I subscribe is one which has attracted many of the greatest intellectuals, and my role models, through the ages.

    Yes, there is lowbrow conservatism of the type espoused by Rush Limbaugh, and there are plenty of idiots and bigots on the “political right” (whatever that broad blanket term really means). I have little in common with them, however. I am pro-immigration; liberal on social issues; and in favour of a secular state.

    I just happen to support the free market and small government. I know I don’t always do so very coherently or articulately; but the fact that I myself am inadequate in expressing these ideas doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with the ideas themselves.

  722. #724 Rey Fox
    April 6, 2009

    Simon, are you typing with one hand?

  723. #725 Menyambal
    April 6, 2009

    “Far left terrorists”?!? What? Who? Where can I sign up? What will we do? Do I get a weapon? What kind of weapon would a far left terrorist use to threaten the APA, anyhow? The complete works of Charles Darwin? What? What?

  724. #726 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Simon, are you typing with one hand?

    If so, I really don’t want to know what he’s using the other one for…

  725. #727 Menyambal
    April 6, 2009

    Walton says:

    Friedman, Hayek, Mises, Nozick and Rothbard – some of the most influential economists and philosophers in human history … many of the greatest intellectuals, and my role models, through the ages.

    See, there’s part of what folks are trying to get across about you having things in common with the lower right. You have picked out a troupe of people to follow, and you puff them up as being marvelous. You are a follower, not a free-thinker.

    I know that you are going to think that I am an idiot when I say this, but I’ve never heard of ANY of those people other than Friedman, who I assume is Milton. And I’ve read a lot. I’m thinking that they aren’t all that influential in the world.

    But they may have been a big influence on you, Walton, which is where you and the lower elements of the right wing match up. You may not be a fan of Rush Limbaugh, but you are a fan. You follow. You find a guru, and associate yourself with him and his work, not your own.

    Charles Darwin, God love him, was a good man and a great scientist, but I do not follow him, no matter what people on the Christian right think. I like Barack Obama, and have hope for him, but I do not worship the man, no matter what Bush worshippers think.

    Your influences may be better people, but rattling off a list of influences is a right rightist trick.

  726. #728 Josh
    April 6, 2009

    Evolution 101 could consist largely of links to talkorigins.

    If my two years or whatever of reading this blog have taught me anything, it’s that they won’t follow them.

  727. #729 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    No, can’t be a link to talkorigins. That’s just information. I was envisioning threads where they’d be cordoned off, where they could as a question (ONCE), and have everyone go at it. Much more lively than talkorigins. Plus, since it would be in-house, they couldn’t complain of people kicking them out and telling them to go elsewhere.

  728. #730 siMon
    April 6, 2009

    walton #726
    If so, I really don’t want to know what he’s using the other one for…

    if i am not wrong you are the one who refused to use drugs, are you a homosexual or bisexual ?

  729. #731 KI
    April 6, 2009

    simon-de-vile, attacking Walton is as low as you can go. Really, man you need self-administered .45 caliber lead therapy.

  730. #732 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    if i am not wrong you are the one who refused to use drugs, are you a homosexual or bisexual ?

    None of your business.

    But I apologise for my insinuation earlier, It was an attempt at humour.

  731. #733 Josh
    April 6, 2009

    In the fossil record we see evidence of some things happening very quickly and other happening very slowly. Things happening very quickly are compatible with either a young or an old earth. Things happening very slowly are only compatible with an old earth. Therefore the earth is old.

    In general, I don’t see how, if I do that, this is anything more than me making an unsubstantiated counter-assertion in response to an unsubstantiated assertion. And I don’t see how that helps, because it’s essentially a string of “No, you’re wrong” statements being sent back and forth. But if that’s what’s preferred, then fine.

  732. #734 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    But if that’s what’s preferred, then fine.

    No, no no. Blanket statements get one nowhere. Detail is fabulous; it’s just hard on everyone having to rehash it every time someone new pops up. If the detail could be enshrined in a specific place to point newbies, and stay live for additional fighting discussion, all the easier.

  733. #735 strange gods before me
    April 6, 2009

    Are you comparing the intellectual tradition of Friedman, Hayek, Mises, Nozick and Rothbard – some of the most influential economists and philosophers in human history – to the rantings of third-rate trolls like Rob and derender?

    Yes, inasmuch as they use high-falutin language to obscure the fact that they are nothing more than apes hoarding food and baring their teeth in defiance.

    And Rothbard was a dummy.

    But the ideology to which I subscribe is one which has attracted many of the greatest intellectuals, and my role models, through the ages.

    Uh, wow. Argument from authority. Good job, Walton.

    I am aware of all libertarian traditions. Have you studied any of the better leftist thinkers?

  734. #736 strange gods before me
    April 6, 2009

    I just happen to support the free market and small government. I know I don’t always do so very coherently or articulately; but the fact that I myself am inadequate in expressing these ideas doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with the ideas themselves.

    Yeah, and the fact that theists are ever inadequate in making their case doesn’t mean that their gods don’t exist.

    However, if their gods do not exist, then we can expect that they will never present convincing evidence for gods.

    And if conserva-libertarianism is intellectually bankrupt, then we can expect that its advocates will have to rely on oversimplification and obscurantism to win converts.

    Your inadequate argumentation is consistent with this hypothesis.

  735. #737 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    I am aware of all libertarian traditions. Have you studied any of the better leftist thinkers?

    I’m very superficially familiar with the ideas of Marx and of Noam Chomsky, though I haven’t read many of the works of either and wouldn’t be qualified to discuss them in any depth. As to any other leftist philosopher, I don’t have a clue.

    The most credible leftist writing today is, of course, Paul Krugman. As I’m not an economist of any sort, I couldn’t even begin to critically analyse his work within his area of expertise (and it would be supremely arrogant for me to try to do so). But I’ve read many of his newspaper editorials and columns (written for laymen); and it is fairly clear that his left-of-centre political stance is not merely a product of his economic research, but is also, to a very great degree, a consequence of his values. As a self-proclaimed “progressive”, many of his political ideals are clearly informed by a belief (express or implicit) that it is part of the role of the state to save people from themselves and from their own poor decisions. I profoundly disagree with that; and despite his economic brilliance, I cannot accept his ideas about public policy where his normative goals are so substantially different to mine.

  736. #738 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    it is part of the role of the state to save people from themselves and from their own poor decisions.

    There’s the rub, Walton. That’s one bright shining place where libertarians interpret things in an entirely different universe than progressives. People don’t need saving from themselves and their decisions; they need their circumstances mediated to bring them to the same base level of competition as others, to make everything more fair.
    Tell me, Walton: take a kid whose parents were never home because they were working 2 shifts each to make ends meet, who went to a failing underfunded school and never quite had enough to eat to pay attention in class rather than think about how hungry he was, who had no peer influences that were any good, who gets watched with suspicion and often roughed up just because of his appearance everywhere he goes, and tell me why his current station in life is the result of his own bad decisions rather than the cumulative effect of all of his formative experiences beyond his control.

  737. #739 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    who went to a failing underfunded school

    Libertarians have an answer to that – school vouchers.

    and never quite had enough to eat to pay attention in class rather than think about how hungry he was

    How many people in modern Western society are suffering from undernourishment? IIRC, a larger problem among the poor is overnourishment/obesity caused by the abundance of cheap high-fat processed foods.

    who had no peer influences that were any good

    That’s sad, but what can the State do about it? If anything, enabling the kid to go to a good school – via providing a system of school vouchers, so that private education won’t be just for the rich – will help with that.

  738. #740 SC, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Yes, there is lowbrow conservatism of the type espoused by Rush Limbaugh,

    You don’t really wnat to go there again, do you, Walton? You should pay attention to what Menyambal is telling you @ #727.

  739. #741 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    How many people in modern Western society are suffering from undernourishment?

    According to the USDA, 36.2 million in the United States. But that’s no big deal; just be careful not to trip over them on the way to your assumptions.

    IIRC, a larger problem among the poor is overnourishment/obesity caused by the abundance of cheap high-fat processed foods.

    You recall incorrectly. Nutrition and calories are two entirely different things. You cannot say that someone who eats too many calories is “overnourished”, and again, there are far more who don’t even have enough calories. Besides, this is once again a systemic issue. The entire system of food production in the US is set up with the side effect that poor people cannot afford nutritious food, and are left with only being able to buy empty, processed starches. If you had a family of 5 to feed all week and only $10 to do it with, which would you buy: four tomatoes, two heads of lettuce, and a bottle of salad dressing, or 14 boxes of mac and cheese?

  740. #742 Josh
    April 6, 2009

    But that’s no big deal; just be careful not to trip over them on the way to your assumptions.

    Oh, snap.

  741. #743 SC, OM
    April 6, 2009

    How many people in modern Western society are suffering from undernourishment?

    You’re an ignorant twit. If you ever come to the US, why don’t you volunteer at a food bank?

    IIRC, a larger problem among the poor is overnourishment/obesity

    This is not “overnourishment.” People are suffering from micronutrient malnutrition and the conditions that causes due to a lack of good food. This diet is causing disease. People aren’t “overnourished” or “well fed.”

    caused by the abundance of cheap high-fat processed foods.

    All that’s available/affordable to many people, thanks to corporate industrial agriculture: Killing People and the Planet Since the 1950s.

  742. #744 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    According to the USDA, 36.2 million in the United States. But that’s no big deal; just be careful not to trip over them on the way to your assumptions.

    I’m a little sceptical. What definition of “undernourished” are they using? Is it a definition that a starving family in Ethiopia would recognise? Can you provide a link to the statistics?

    We see this kind of nonsense when leftists assert that “X number of people in the US/UK are living in poverty”, using an index of so-called “relative” poverty; they calculate what constitutes “poverty” by reference to the average earnings and standard of living in the country. So what they are really measuring is not absolute destitution, but merely inequality. If a large part of a community suddenly gets richer while the rest remains the same, the relative poverty levels will increase, despite the fact that no one has actually become poorer in absolute terms. While I don’t know what kind of measurement is used for your statistics on undernourishment, I’d very much like to find out.

    The entire system of food production in the US is set up with the side effect that poor people cannot afford nutritious food, and are left with only being able to buy empty, processed starches.

    How much of this is caused by the iniquitous federal system of agricultural subsidies? Agricultural protectionism is, in my view, one of the worst and most large-scale abuses committed by Western governments today, and is something to which libertarians are passionately opposed.

  743. #745 Sven DiMilo
    April 6, 2009

    Did you know that there is more to life, and more even to political philosophy, than just economics?
    It’s true!

  744. #746 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Carlie – on reflection, I was unnecessarily rude and abrasive to you in my post at #744. I apologise (especially as I acknowledge that I could be totally wrong about the statistics; I’ll reserve judgment until I’ve seen the data).

  745. #747 Stephen Wells
    April 6, 2009

    Carlie wins. Walton, you need to be better informed before your opinions have value to others.

  746. #748 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 6, 2009

    Did you know that there is more to life, and more even to political philosophy, than just economics?
    It’s true!

    Yes, there is bacon

  747. #749 Emmet, OM
    April 6, 2009

    … but the fact that I myself am inadequate in expressing these ideas doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with the ideas themselves.

    Okaaay, but how can you support, indeed advocate for, ideas that, by your own admission, you can’t even articulate?

  748. #750 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    If you had a family of 5 to feed all week and only $10 to do it with, which would you buy: four tomatoes, two heads of lettuce, and a bottle of salad dressing, or 14 boxes of mac and cheese?

    The bigger question is: why would anyone be so irresponsible as to have so many children, when they can’t afford to spend more than $10 a week on food? Should someone like that be raising children in the first place?

  749. #751 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Carlie wins. Walton, you need to be better informed before your opinions have value to others.

    What am I not “informed” about, pray tell? I have addressed Carlie’s points. I am waiting for her to show me the statistics she cited regarding undernourishment in the US population, so that I can find out what definition of “undernourishment” is being used. This makes a substantial difference to the strength of her argument.

  750. #752 Ray Ladbury
    April 6, 2009

    Walton, malnutrition is not a subjective condition. It means one is not getting enough of some particular nutrient. In many urban, poor neighborhoods, the local “store” will not even carry fresh produce. Canned and frozen vegetables as well as many other nutritious foods are not available because the owner makes more profit from prepared foods. In some families, the school lunch and breakfast programs provide the only food the kids get all day. Thus, you have the paradoxical problem of people becoming obese on high-fat, high-carbohydrate food and still not getting adequate protein. This is real. I’ve seen the same symptoms of malnutrition here in the US that I saw in Africa.

    There are also increasing problems in rural areas

  751. #753 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    Walton,you’re right, I should have provided a link.
    Here is the main USDA page with all their reports on food security in the US.

    You are also right in wondering exactly what the definition used is, but it’s really tiring when the first response to contrary data is “I don’t believe your data.” That’s the easy way out, to not believe that anything is true. Wouldn’t the USDA have some impetus to be somewhere around accurate, given that they’re the main government food agency and it kind of looks bad form them to say that a lot of the population has food problems? “Sorry, we suck” doesn’t usually get one reappointed to one’s job. If anything, I would guess that it’s underreported.

  752. #754 Bobber
    April 6, 2009

    Walton, you are speaking again like a young person who has very little practical experience trying to live independently in the modern world. I don’t mean to be condescending in saying that, and I apologize for the tone; but I can’t help but believe it to be accurate.

    I cannot speak to the situation of the poor in European nations, countries where there is likely to be more of a safety net for their citizens than we have in the States.

    Millions of people in the U.S. suffer from malnourishment; as has been pointed out above, corporately manufactured processed foods cost far less, in the bulk necessary to provide a subsistence level of calories, than more healthy alternatives. These processed foods are loaded with starches that, coupled with our more sedentary life styles, lead to all manner of harmful conditions. Unfortuately, because many of the same people who cannot afford to eat in a healthy manner are also among the millions who cannot afford healthcare in our privatized system, they are condemned either to a premature death due to entirely avoidable causes, or to overburdening the only real source of public health care in this country – the already bursting-to-the-seams emergency rooms. Hospitals are being forced to close because of the money they are losing treating people in their emergency rooms, which of course exacerbates the situation.

    There’s a whole lot wrong here: the continuing concentration of the means of food production and delivery in fewer and fewer corporate hands, meaning fewer local markets and less locally-grown (and generally healthier) produce; the continued insistence on viewing health care as a commodity rather than as a basic human right; and don’t even get me started on the mismanagement and misplaced priorities of our public school system, which maintains the status quo but whose problems can in NO WAY be solved by the use of vouchers.

    That’s sad, but what can the State do about it?

    The State – that is, an entity that is comprised of, and carries out the actual wishes of, the citizenry, rather than of a powerful oligarchy bent on protecting their own privileged positions at the expense of the many – can do much, but only if the excessive power of the few can be curtailed.

  753. #755 Sven DiMilo
    April 6, 2009

    Should someone like that be raising children in the first place?

    -Walton

    I am not that kind of Libertarian, really; I don’t hate poor people.

    -R.A. Wilson

  754. #756 Emmet, OM
    April 6, 2009

    using an index of so-called “relative” poverty; they calculate what constitutes “poverty” by reference to the average earnings and standard of living in the country.

    Which is the only sensible or meaningful metric: the fact that one can subsist in Malawi on $2 per day is of absolutely no relevance to someone living in Oxford. The definition of poverty must be related to the local cost of living in order to be meaningful. Similarly, the local standard of living must be taken into account unless you consider that living in a local authority slum makes a person “rich” because it’s not a shanty town.

    Your putting the “relative” in “relative poverty” in scare-quotes suggests that you believe the wingnut canard that “relative poverty” in the West is defined by “having a 46″ plasma-screen TV rather than a 52″ plasma-screen TV”.

  755. #757 SC, OM
    April 6, 2009

    We see this kind of nonsense when leftists assert that “X number of people in the US/UK are living in poverty”, using an index of so-called “relative” poverty; they calculate what constitutes “poverty” by reference to the average earnings and standard of living in the country. So what they are really measuring is not absolute destitution, but merely inequality.

    You don’t know what you’re talking about. Poverty figures are determined by an income threshold below which people cannot fulfill basic human needs (food, shelter,…) such that they can live healthy lives. Figures cited for the number of people and families living in poverty don’t even take into account that the average family living in poverty in struggling on half that threshold income. Your distinction is ideological tripe. Poverty is poverty. The line between not having a home and not being able to nourish your family or get medical care and absolute (life-threatening) poverty is not at all clear, and to imply that these people are not “really” poor – “Oh, they’re just being compared to people living in mansions – they’re doing fine!” – is ignorant and outrageous. And using poor people in Africa to try to dismiss or minimize the reality of poverty in the West while you promote policies that plunge the people in Africa further into poverty is really obscene. You don’t know anything or care anything about poor people anywhere. Stop being an ignorant ideologue.

  756. #758 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    The bigger question is: why would anyone be so irresponsible as to have so many children, when they can’t afford to spend more than $10 a week on food? Should someone like that be raising children in the first place?

    Maybe because they couldn’t afford to buy birth control pills in the first place, and condoms don’t always work, and they lives in a state ruled by anti-abortionist wingnuts who have managed set up enough restrictions so as to make it almost impossible to get an abortion in a safe, timely, and affordable manner anywhere within 200 miles of her?

  757. #759 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    Heh. Word substitution fail. I had put “her” as my example person with many kids, then changed it to “them” to indicate that it’s not solely the burden or issue of the woman involved, but forgot to change all the associated verbs. And didn’t fix it everywhere, for that matter. Sorry for my bads English.

  758. #760 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    why would anyone be so irresponsible as to have so many children,

    oh yes, because the U.S. has excellent sex-ed, birth-control grows on trees, and homo economicus is real.

  759. #761 Endor
    April 6, 2009

    “The bigger question is: why would anyone be so irresponsible as to have so many children, when they can’t afford to spend more than $10 a week on food? Should someone like that be raising children in the first place?”

    So, if this were the family of a former GM factory worker who’s just lost their job after it was sent to a foreign country, this person is irresponsible?

    Are you saying that no one should have kids unless they are wealthy?

  760. #762 SC, OM
    April 6, 2009

    The bigger question is: why would anyone be so irresponsible as to have so many children, when they can’t afford to spend more than $10 a week on food? Should someone like that be raising children in the first place?

    Hear that anyone who lost your job or had your spouse die or leave you or has to care for sick relatives or buy your own medications on a minimum wage?

    You’re a monster, Walton.

  761. #763 Endor
    April 6, 2009

    EDIT: Are you saying that no one should have kids unless they are wealthy AND have can foretell the future and can absolutely positively guaranty that no hardships will ever befall them?

    Monster is correct. Callous, clueless, heartless monster.

  762. #764 Bobber
    April 6, 2009

    If you had a family of 5 to feed all week and only $10 to do it with, which would you buy: four tomatoes, two heads of lettuce, and a bottle of salad dressing, or 14 boxes of mac and cheese?

    The bigger question is: why would anyone be so irresponsible as to have so many children, when they can’t afford to spend more than $10 a week on food? Should someone like that be raising children in the first place?

    My sister moved to North Carolina. She found a job; her daughter found a job; her son had a harder time finding one and remained unemployed for some time. She bought a condo with my parents’ assistance, but between her job and her daughter’s, she could afford the mortgage. She married a man who was employed at the time. Then there were layoffs, and she lost her job. Her husband, who had never been properly diagnosed in the piss-poor medical system down here, was finally diagnosed with a mental illness, and that, coupled with an injury sustained at work, caused him to lose his job. For a variety of reasons, most of them rooted in his youth, he has been denied financial assistance. Both he and my sister lost their health care benefits. Her daughter, even though she is employed, did not have health care benefits for three months. Her daughter’s boyfriend was kicked out of his home by his mother, and moved in with my sister – it was either that, or be homeless.

    So let’s count: sister, husband, son, daughter, daughter’s boyfriend – that’s five people, one of whom was employed, all of them without health care, and now suddenly unable to pay bills or mortgage. At the same time the price of gasoline soared, the price of food followed suit; they didn’t have heat the entire winter, ’cause if they paid that, they would have lost their condo. They cut out every single frill they could, and they subsisted on what they could get from the local food bank and what they could get in bulk for cheap dollars (canned pasta and mac and cheese, mostly). Husband ran off a few times, as a result of his mental illness, which they couldn’t afford to have treated. Son finally found a job overnight at Wal-Mart, which is, of course, part time (because nearly all of the jobs there are) and minimum wage, despite being more than 30 hours per week, with – again, of course – no healthcare benefits. Sister finally wound work as a census taker, a temporary job, but it’s still money coming in. She couldn’t take a job as a group home worker – she is physically unable to restrain violent clients.

    So,

    The bigger question is: why would anyone be so irresponsible as to have so many children, when they can’t afford to spend more than $10 a week on food? Should someone like that be raising children in the first place?

    Not everyone starts out only being able to afford $10 a week for food; sometimes people are thrust into that situation, for no reasons they can control. Or else, would you have poor people divorce, kick their own children out of their homes, and not offer food and shelter, such as it is, to friends?

    My sister’s case is in no way unique. Millions of people will share similar tales with you – but you will not usually hear them economists, who deal with the numbers of poverty, and not the faces. If you have not done so, I strongly urge you to do some human services work. I guarantee you that you will find a different perspective in how you view the poor and marginalized.

  763. #765 CatBallou
    April 6, 2009

    Walton, why do you imagine that people plan to find themselves in those circumstances??
    Regarding the “Big Macs or veggies” decision, it’s indisputable that there are very few grocery stores in poorer neighborhoods, at least in the U.S. People have to rely on convenience stores for much of their food, where any fresh items are grossly overpriced.

  764. #766 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    not just wealthy, endor: guaranteed wealthy for the rest of their lives.

    if you can’t guarantee that you’ll never lose your job, miscalculate on the stock-market, get an illness that isn’t covered by your insurance etc., you really shouldn’t breed.

    libertarianism FTL

  765. #767 catgirl
    April 6, 2009

    Rob is a perfect example of why it’s called homophobia.

    In a gay “marriage”, who decides which person is the husband and which one is the wife?

    Which one plays the female role and which one plays the male role?

    Which one weras the pants and which one wears the dress?

    Which one mows the lawn and which one cooks dinner?

    Which one is the stay at home mom?

    People like Rob love to use justifications for strict gender roles. They insist that they need be misogynist, because marriage and society just can’t work any other way. They fear gay marriage, because it removes their justification for treating their wives badly. If two people can have a marriage that isn’t dictated by gender roles and the world doesn’t explode, then that means fundies like Rob are wrong when they justify the necessity of strict gender roles. It’s also terrifying to them that they can imagine themselves in a gay marriage where they would be treated as badly as they treat their own wives, and they know it’s bad. Rob acts like it’s just so terrible that a man (even in a heterosexual relationship) might have to cook or actually take care of his own kids!

    Here’s a very simple answer to all of Rob’s questions. The person who is best at or likes doing various things is the one who should do them. If a husband is better than his wife at cooking, then he should cook. If a wife likes to mow the lawn, then she should do it. It’s actually very simple. If both partners actually respect each other, love their kids, and are willing to contribute fairly to their own household, then all the necessary work will get done, regardless of anatomy.

  766. #768 SC, OM
    April 6, 2009

    *waves to Emmet*

    Glad you made it back safe and sound!

  767. #769 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Unfortuately, because many of the same people who cannot afford to eat in a healthy manner are also among the millions who cannot afford healthcare in our privatized system

    Surely Medicaid and SCHIP cover many (though I’m aware, not all) of those who genuinely cannot afford healthcare? I’m in favour of controlled expansion of the scope of those programmes, since I am conscious of the fact that there are some people who don’t qualify for either but still can’t afford care (e.g. because they have a congenital disease and are uninsurable). Contrary to what you may believe, I’m not lacking in compassion; those who are poor or chronically ill should receive state subsidies to enable them to afford treatment.

    But at the same time, those people who could afford health insurance, but, for whatever reason, choose not to, should not get treated at the expense of the state. Healthcare is not a “basic human right”; it’s something which costs money, and that money has to come from somewhere. If a middle-class family chooses not to spend their money on health insurance, why should they be treated at the expense of their more prudent neighbours?

    Hospitals are being forced to close because of the money they are losing treating people in their emergency rooms, which of course exacerbates the situation.

    Indeed; the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, while well-intentioned, was rather poorly thought out.

    Your putting the “relative” in “relative poverty” in scare-quotes suggests that you believe the wingnut canard that “relative poverty” in the West is defined by “having a 46″ plasma-screen TV rather than a 52″ plasma-screen TV”.

    No; but “relative poverty” in the West does not mean that a person is literally starving to death and begging for scraps in order to survive. And you have not answered the main point I was making: if, due to economic growth, most of the population in a country gets richer, while its poorer population remains at the same level, its relative poverty index will increase, despite the fact that no one is actually poorer (in absolute terms) than they previously were.

    And using poor people in Africa to try to dismiss or minimize the reality of poverty in the West while you promote policies that plunge the people in Africa further into poverty is really obscene.

    The “policies that plunge the people in Africa further into poverty” are Western protectionist tariffs and farm subsidies which prevent Third World producers from competing on an equal footing in the global market. All of which I oppose.

    Yes, I realise it’s unfair that the IMF and the World Bank forced poor countries to liberalise their markets, while the US and EU continue protecting home-grown industry and farming from foreign competition. But the answer to this unfairness is not to halt the process of liberalisation, but rather to extend it to the West. One thing of which you cannot accuse me is being insufficiently vocal in my opposition to Western trade protectionism.

  768. #770 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    I wouldn’t call Walton a monster, just very sheltered. I come from a pretty privileged middle-middle class background, and I know when I was younger I never thought about the problems other people might be going through, or how they came to be in that position. That kind of understanding really does have to be developed by seeing examples of how it happens, and learning about how circumstances can intertwine to disastrous results. For me, it started in college when I finally met people outside of my little socioeconomic circle, and it grew from there. Walton does think before he stops and listens, but he has been listening to the responses to his statements, which is a good thing. (Not that he has to agree with those responses, but just consider them.)

  769. #771 Endor
    April 6, 2009

    “They fear gay marriage, because it removes their justification for treating their wives badly.”

    BINGO. He’s worries people will see the benefits of rejecting and abandoning bullshit gender roles. And, even more so, he’s worried he doesn’t measure up. If the hypothetical Mrs. Rob sees an egalitarian gay/lesbian couple, she might leave him for a woman!
    ;)

  770. #772 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Bobber and Endor: OK, I apologise; my comment (about poor families with many children being irresponsible) was poorly thought out. I retract it. It does not, however, detract from the validity of some of the other points I’m making.

  771. #773 Endor
    April 6, 2009

    “I wouldn’t call Walton a monster, just very sheltered.”

    unexamined privilege makes monsters. Being a monster doesn’t require premeditation exclusively. Being so callously ignorant and arrogant does just fine.

    Which is a long way of saying, he may not mean to be a monster, but he is.

  772. #774 Emmet, OM
    April 6, 2009

    SC,OM:

    *waves to Emmet*

    *hugs SC*

  773. #775 derender
    April 6, 2009

    Just exactly what is a troll? Maybe only VAMIPRES AND WEREWOLVES can kill trolls.

    Patricia, you’re even worse than Janine. Yuck

  774. #776 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Millions of people will share similar tales with you – but you will not usually hear them economists, who deal with the numbers of poverty, and not the faces. If you have not done so, I strongly urge you to do some human services work. I guarantee you that you will find a different perspective in how you view the poor and marginalized.

    But surely acquiring that kind of emotional reaction, based on experience of individual cases, detracts from one’s ability to make a cool, detached, rational consideration of the economic big picture? Should one allow empathy and personal feelings to cloud one’s judgment in matters of public policy?

  775. #777 Endor
    April 6, 2009

    “Healthcare is not a “basic human right”; it’s something which costs money, and that money has to come from somewhere. ”

    See what I mean? This is positively chilling. It’s clearly spoken by someone who’s never had to suffer without healthcare, whos never had to sit by helpless while a loved one suffers and there’s no way to help them.

  776. #778 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    Surely Medicaid and SCHIP cover many (though I’m aware, not all) of those who genuinely cannot afford healthcare?

    as someone without health-insurance for the last 6 years, living with someone who hasn’t had health-insurance for the last 27 years (occasional trips to a foster home aside), I’d like to inform you that you’re so wrong it isn’t even funny.

  777. #779 Ray Ladbury
    April 6, 2009

    Walton says: “The “policies that plunge the people in Africa further into poverty” are Western protectionist tariffs and farm subsidies which prevent Third World producers from competing on an equal footing in the global market.”

    Ever think that maybe there could be other contributing factors–like 4 centuries of being ravaged by slavery, colonialism and neocolonialism. Like maybe being left with zero infrastructure–hell, having even the phone lines torn out by the colonizers when the Zaire (now DRC) voted for independence.

    Good God, Walton. Have you ever been to Africa? Have you ever been anywhere? Yes, unfair tariffs contribute to poverty, but Africa has a helluva long way to go before the boats are seaworthy enough to be lifted by a rising tide.

  778. #780 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    No; but “relative poverty” in the West does not mean that a person is literally starving to death

    Yet if they are too malnourished, sick, hungry, and tired to be able to hold down a job, you will hold them personally responsible for it.

    Surely Medicaid and SCHIP cover many (though I’m aware, not all) of those who genuinely cannot afford healthcare?

    Not all in the least. It’s also only emergency care, so if one is diabetic, it will help when you need a leg cut off or go into a blood sugar induced coma, but not before. And then, of course, you can’t work.

    But at the same time, those people who could afford health insurance, but, for whatever reason, choose not to, should not get treated at the expense of the state.

    Who are these mythical people? Please provide some data of your own showing how many people can afford health care yet don’t buy it. Don’t forget to factor in the fact that any pre-existing conditions will double to quadruple the cost of health care on an individual basis.

  779. #781 Stu
    April 6, 2009

    And you have not answered the main point I was making: if, due to economic growth, most of the population in a country gets richer, while its poorer population remains at the same level, its relative poverty index will increase, despite the fact that no one is actually poorer (in absolute terms) than they previously were.

    Knock it off Walton. The federal poverty level is determined by the cost of goods essential for survival, adjusted for inflation.

  780. #782 derender
    April 6, 2009

    endore:

    Your may leave for a far right creationist who is addicted to Fox News and Ann coulter. Thta’s probably why you are so sour.

  781. #783 Endor
    April 6, 2009

    “But surely acquiring that kind of emotional reaction, based on experience of individual cases, detracts from one’s ability to make a cool, detached, rational consideration of the economic big picture? Should one allow empathy and personal feelings to cloud one’s judgment in matters of public policy?”

    Do you intend to come off like a sociopath?

  782. #784 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Derender, you can always stay away. After all, you aren’t an atheist, so you can’t claim this blog is your cup of tea. So, continue to show us how a dumb godbotting reactionary with delusions of adequacy, and no idea of evidence, sounds.

  783. #785 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    Oh, and don’t forget that there are also people who could afford health insurance, but still can’t get it because every insurance company turns them down as a high risk due to their existing health. This is because the American healthcare industry is that beautiful privately owned free market you so love, and they are allowed to build their customer base any way they choose. In a shared-risk situation, this is profoundly stupid.

  784. #786 Josh
    April 6, 2009

    No; but “relative poverty” in the West does not mean that a person is literally starving to death and begging for scraps in order to survive.

    Not in mass quantities, no. But you’re deluded if you don’t think that there aren’t people living on the edge of starvation in the US. Or, if not on the edge itself, are close enough to look at it and would be on the edge if there weren’t assistance available.

    And you have not answered the main point I was making: if, due to economic growth, most of the population in a country gets richer, while its poorer population remains at the same level, its relative poverty index will increase, despite the fact that no one is actually poorer (in absolute terms) than they previously were.

    Can you show me when this has happened where the cost of living hasn’t also increased?

    And what families are you thinking of that choose not to purchase health care? What are you talking about?

  785. #787 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    And getting back to the topic of the post, this is one of the reasons why same-sex marriage is so important: health care is stupidly difficult to get in this country, one of the end-runs around it is being married to someone who’s managed to snag a good policy, and that end-run is given to heteros but denied to homosexuals.

  786. #788 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    oh carlie, there definitely are those fuckers who, despite making $100000 a year, don’t feel the need for health insurance. generally single white males in their mid twenties to mid thirties, but I know one example of a father of 4 who can’t be bothered to pay insurance.

    those people however are a reason FOR universal health care not some idiotic argument against it. I see no reason why those fuckers shouldn’t pay their fair share, especially since they use ER’s and free clinics in emergencies as much as poor people.

  787. #789 Josh
    April 6, 2009

    but I know one example of a father of 4 who can’t be bothered to pay insurance.

    Seriously? What the fuck is up with that?

  788. #790 Bobber
    April 6, 2009

    But surely acquiring that kind of emotional reaction, based on experience of individual cases, detracts from one’s ability to make a cool, detached, rational consideration of the economic big picture? Should one allow empathy and personal feelings to cloud one’s judgment in matters of public policy?

    There is a decided difference between an emotional reaction that leads a mob to pick up pitchforks and harry the cruel, autocratic baron out of town (however justified that may be) and an emotional reaction that leads us to have compassion for people who suffer for no sin other than having been born, or thrust into, poverty. OF COURSE we should allow empathy to help us determine the most humane and equitable course of action; I would argue that it is the economists who bring the clouds that obscure the real issues at hand.

    ALL cases are “individual cases”. While public policy cannot be enacted to meet every individual’s needs, it CAN be enacted to allow the point-of-care givers the flexibility (and ability) to address those individual needs. Unfortunately, in the States there is a muddled bureaucracy that requires streamlining, an unwillingness to provide proper funding for necessary programs, and a general disagreement over what programs actually are necessary. This confusion stems from the inappropriate mixing of politics and economics where empathy is what is needed, instead.

    In short (don’t you wish I had said this at the beginning? I talk too much), what we need is more empathy, not less.

    But even more to the point, what is needed is to let the people who are most in need have a voice at the table where the allocation of resources is made. In truth (and this should warm the cockles of your libertarian heart), what is needed is a devolution of decision making to the many. I have serious doubts that any real reform can take place while power remains in the hands of people whose interests are so vested in maintaining their privileges and those of their class.

    But I digress…

    … as usual.

  789. #791 SC, OM
    April 6, 2009

    No; but “relative poverty” in the West does not mean that a person is literally starving to death and begging for scraps in order to survive. And you have not answered the main point I was making: if, due to economic growth, most of the population in a country gets richer [most of the US is not getting richer in real terms], while its poorer population remains at the same level, its relative poverty index will increase, despite the fact that no one is actually poorer (in absolute terms) than they previously were.

    I’ve explained to you that the poverty threshold is calculated according to the minimum income an individual or family needs for the basics of living, and explained that the average family in poverty struggles on about half this amount. The number of people relying on food banks (“begging for scraps,” as you put it) is large and growing even in the wealthier parts of the US. People are hungry and malnourished; they are sick; they are homeless. They are dying from a number of factors related to this condition.

    The “policies that plunge the people in Africa further into poverty” are Western protectionist tariffs and farm subsidies which prevent Third World producers from competing on an equal footing in the global market. All of which I oppose.

    What an idiot ideological lemming you are.

    Yes, I realise it’s unfair that the IMF and the World Bank forced poor countries to liberalise their markets,…[and cut and privatize public goods and services, and steal land that people need to provide for themselves, and promote industries that pollute their land and water,...]

    Oh, of course! The World Bank/IMF forced policies that have caused suffering and death on an immense scale in poor countries should absolutely be extended! The only answer to disastrous policies like the expansion of global food markets, the destruction of local food economies and commons, and chemical/fossil-fuels-based agriculture is…well, more of all of it! If we’re going to commit planetary suicide we may as well do it in a great nitrogenous blaze!

    Anyway, I see this is going along the typical Walton path. I’m out of here.

  790. #792 Sven DiMilo
    April 6, 2009

    We are all great nitrogenous blaze now.

  791. #793 Emmet, OM
    April 6, 2009

    if, due to economic growth, most of the population in a country gets richer, while its poorer population remains at the same level, its relative poverty index will increase, despite the fact that no one is actually poorer (in absolute terms) than they previously were.

    I don’t think you’ve thought that out.

    If most of the population of a country gets richer, the cost of living will rise proportionately. The poor may have the same amount of money (in absolute terms), but they can’t buy as much with it, so while they are not financially poorer in a gross, simplistic and, frankly, stupid and naive sense, they are a hell of a lot worse off: they are “actually poorer”.

    The problem here is that you’re implicitly attempting to define poverty in purely monetary terms. There’s a very good reason why sociologists don’t do that and, instead, define poverty primarily according to basic food, clothing, housing, and medical care requirements, then, when required to express this secondarily in monetary terms, calculate the poverty line based on the cost of those requisites in the local economy. What part of this is hard to understand?

  792. #794 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    Seriously? What the fuck is up with that?

    he’s a terminal idiot. what can i say.

  793. #795 MAJeff, OM
    April 6, 2009

    And getting back to the topic of the post, this is one of the reasons why same-sex marriage is so important: health care is stupidly difficult to get in this country, one of the end-runs around it is being married to someone who’s managed to snag a good policy, and that end-run is given to heteros but denied to homosexuals.

    Part of this also continues to point out the problem of our insane system of financing health care delivery. For poor same-sex couples, even having one spouse employed at a place like, say, Wal-Mart might still leave a family policy out of reach. Removing the gender restrictions on marriage eligibility is a good start, but it doesn’t address many of the problems that are part of the distribution of social welfare benefits almost exclusively through (or in ways modeled upon) the marital family.

  794. #796 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    ah yes, MAJeff’s post reminds me of another problem in the U.S.: the ridiculous ways in which certain things are coupled here:

    health-care delivery to a particular job funding of schools to local real estate, etc.

    it’s almost as if this shit was designed to make life difficult for the non-wealthy

  795. #797 SC, OM
    April 6, 2009

    *hugs Emmet*

    OK, now I’m out of here. I mean it this time. I’m really, really going to stop procrastinating and go. Hittin’ that little X in the corner as soon as I’ve submitted my comment. Won’t even read what’s been posted since and exposing myself to SIWOTI triggers. I’m gone, I tell ya. Leaving now. Right now.

  796. #798 MAJeff, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Won’t even read what’s been posted since and exposing myself to SIWOTI triggers. I’m gone, I tell ya. Leaving now. Right now.

    Oh, pour some gin and get over it….

  797. #799 Sven DiMilo
    April 6, 2009

    SC, I know how it is. Just when I think I’m out, they drag me back in. [/pacino]

  798. #800 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Emmett @793: I meant richer in real terms, adjusted for inflation. I wasn’t speaking in purely monetary terms.

    If (to take a grossly exaggerated hypothetical) the prosperity of a country improved to the point that the average family could afford to buy six cars, a family who could only afford one car would be considered poor, in relative terms. (I’m not claiming that this is the reality of relative poverty; it’s a theoretical example.)

    Bobber:

    But even more to the point, what is needed is to let the people who are most in need have a voice at the table where the allocation of resources is made. In truth (and this should warm the cockles of your libertarian heart), what is needed is a devolution of decision making to the many. I have serious doubts that any real reform can take place while power remains in the hands of people whose interests are so vested in maintaining their privileges and those of their class.

    You’re assuming something fundamental here, without addressing it. You are presupposing that, where a person creates wealth, that said wealth (or a portion thereof) belongs to the community, and that the community has a right to make a collective decision about how that wealth should be used. In my opinion, it does not. If X establishes a successful business, and, after paying his employees and creditors, makes a large profit, it is X that has created that wealth. The wealth does not belong to the community, and it is not for the community to decide how it should be allocated. The wealth belongs to X, since he is the one who created it through his investment of labour and capital.

    I would agree that there is a real problem with the fact that, in most countries, those who control wealth also have a disproportionate amount of influence over the workings of government. My proposed solution to this would be to have a government so powerless, and with its activities so prescribed and limited, that it simply wouldn’t matter who controlled it.

    Contrary to popular belief, libertarianism is not about giving wealthy people and large corporations whatever they want. Indeed, the interests of the largest corporations are always antithetical to those of the free market, since their incentive is to create monopolies.

    But this does not mean that all wealth created is the property of the community, and that the community has a right to decide democratically how it should be allocated. If I expend my skill and labour creating wealth, that wealth is mine. My neighbour has no right to have a say in how I choose to spend it.

    On humanitarian grounds, it is necessary to have some public subsidies for the very poor; but this should be the minimal amount necessary to keep them alive. We

  799. #801 LE
    April 6, 2009

    Surely Medicaid and SCHIP cover many (though I’m aware, not all) of those who genuinely cannot afford healthcare?

    Walton, this is painfully naive. Very few American adults qualify for Medicaid unless they are nearly disabled. Both programs are State (as opposed to state) controlled which means that coverage varies according to where you live, both programs are underfunded, SCHIP doesn’t apply to adults at all, and the application process is deliberately time consuming and intrusive, to the point that a lot of people who should qualify are excluded. Please explain to me how an adult, with no job yet still doesn’t qualify for Medicaid, who is barely putting together the income to cover rent/mortgage, is supposed to come up with an additional $500 to $1500 per month to buy private insurance? Keep in mind that at those rates, a private insurance policy would most likely not cover drugs and would likely have a multi-thousand dollar per year deductible on most coverage, which would make it effectively useless for regular preventive care. That is assuming one doesn’t have a “preexisting condition” (which can be anything from diabetes to a history of migranes) which would make the cost exponentially higher, if not disqualify the person completely.

    No; but “relative poverty” in the West does not mean that a person is literally starving to death and begging for scraps in order to survive.

    Others have pointed out why there’s nothing wrong with “Relative poverty” statistics, much better than I can, so I’ll leave it to them. But I want to point out that you’re talking apples and oranges here – any poverty statistics you hear coming out of the United States won’t use the definitions of “Relative Poverty” you’re used to in the UK and Europe. Generally we use the federal poverty standard, which is an outdated metric put together in the 60s which doesn’t take into account realistic housing, transportation or healthcare expenses – it assumes that food accounts for about 1/3 of household expenses and it’s calculation of necessary living expenses is then based entirely on food prices. I don’t know about you, but even when I was a grad student (and actually fell below the federal poverty line for a while) food only accounted for maybe a 1/4 of my expenses – housing accounted for more than half. Most sociologists will tell you that, far from inflating the poverty numbers, the federal standard severely underestimates real poverty.

    I happen to agree with you to some small extent on farm subsidies, but (and I am not an economist) I think that is probably a miniscule part of what causes real poverty in western countries – and is completely tangential to an argument about the role of the state in leveling the playing field for it’s citizens.

  800. #802 SC, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Damn you people! Damn you all to hell!

    Oh, pour some gin and get over it….

    Gin? Gin? Gin

    SC, I know how it is.

    I can stop commenting any time I want. Any. Time.

  801. #803 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Sorry, forgot to finish the above comment before posting it.

    Please provide some data of your own showing how many people can afford health care yet don’t buy it.

    Well, Wikipedia claims (though the relevant citation is a broken link, and I have no idea whether these figures are up to date) that around one-fifth of the uninsured are able to afford coverage, and that another quarter are eligible for public coverage but haven’t applied for it. I will do some research and find out whether these facts are accurate; I don’t vouch for them in any way.

    Oh, and don’t forget that there are also people who could afford health insurance, but still can’t get it because every insurance company turns them down as a high risk due to their existing health.

    I’ve acknowledged this problem multiple times in my comments here, and I am of the opinion that those who are uninsurable due to pre-existing congenital conditions, et al., should receive state subsidies.

  802. #804 SC, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Actually, Walton’s comments on this thread are the argument equivalent of gin. It’s like being at a party where they run out of everything but gin. Time to go home and go to sleep.

    Too bad the rest of you are like rum… :)

  803. #805 strange gods before me
    April 6, 2009

    I wouldn’t call Walton a monster, just very sheltered. I come from a pretty privileged middle-middle class background, and I know when I was younger I never thought about the problems other people might be going through, or how they came to be in that position.

    I take your point, and being sheltered can have that effect, but Walton really is a monster. Watch him bobbing and weaving to avoid allowing that I should steal a loaf of bread rather than die, even if those are my only two options. This is a thought experiment that removes all ambiguity and mitigating factors, asking only whether the poor should die or take extralegal measures to live. He can sense that I’m going to call him a monster if he comes out and says “just die,” but he won’t allow the alternative. So he’s defaulting to “go ahead and die.” And as ever, he’s a coward and afraid to be criticized for just coming out and saying it.

  804. #806 Stu
    April 6, 2009

    My proposed solution to this would be to have a government so powerless, and with its activities so prescribed and limited, that it simply wouldn’t matter who controlled it.

    And then what, Walton? The rich will take care of everyone else? Butterflies and candy will spontaneously start falling from the sky?

  805. #807 Endor
    April 6, 2009

    “On humanitarian grounds, it is necessary to have some public subsidies for the very poor; but this should be the minimal amount necessary to keep them alive.”

    Oh how charitable of you. They can have help, but only the bare minimum. What a fucking gem of humanity you are.

    A monster and a sociopath.

  806. #808 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    If (to take a grossly exaggerated hypothetical) the prosperity of a country improved to the point that the average family could afford to buy six cars, a family who could only afford one car would be considered poor, in relative terms.

    very well, let’s roll with this example:
    now, keep in mind that the fact that the average fammily now has 6 cars means that there’s absolutely no need for non privately-owned-car based transportation, since if one car fails, they can pick one of the many others. so no need for any public transport, no need for insurances to provide a replacement car in case of an accident, no more “my car broke down, i’ll be late for work” excuses accepted at work etc.
    also, gas will be far more expensive*, things will be far more spread out, houses will be built primarily with ginormous garages in mind, thus making the houses available on the market too expensive for the poor person; parking in cities will become more expensive, due to lack of space and thus high demand for parking structures;

    with those changes alone, the family with a single car will suddenly depend on their one vehicle for virtually all of life’s necessities, which will be tougher and more expensive to maintain and use than before, thus actually lowering the standard of living for the one-car-family, despite them not being any poorer in monetary terms.

    *I’m not even going to go into the details of how increased demand for gas makes virtually all aspects of life more expensive.

  807. #809 strange gods before me
    April 6, 2009

    Walton, let’s test your general familiarity with famous contributors to leftism. Without peeking at google, take a guess at who wrote this:

    We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible. … These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable. … A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

    And this:

    The proportion of the expense of house-rent to the whole expense of living, is different in the different degrees of fortune. … The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich; and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be any thing very unreasonable It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.

    Answer key:
    http://preview.tinyurl.com/5jse2

    http://preview.tinyurl.com/dwomz

  808. #810 Bobber
    April 6, 2009

    You’re assuming something fundamental here, without addressing it. You are presupposing that, where a person creates wealth, that said wealth (or a portion thereof) belongs to the community, and that the community has a right to make a collective decision about how that wealth should be used. In my opinion, it does not. If X establishes a successful business, and, after paying his employees and creditors, makes a large profit, it is X that has created that wealth. The wealth does not belong to the community, and it is not for the community to decide how it should be allocated. The wealth belongs to X, since he is the one who created it through his investment of labour and capital.

    We have been down this road before. Yes, we do have a fundamentally different idea of the relationship of the individual to society. Forgive my presumption, but I would characterize your view as: each individual is a free and autonomous agent, acting in his/her own self-interest regardless of the effect those actions have upon others (except within very permissive strictures) – free-rolling marbles on a flat plain, say. Whereas I view the individual as connected to every other individual in his/her society by invisible webs – those same marbles, but tethered to every other marble by multitudinous threads.

    Your “successful businessman” may have the economic acumen and fortitude to create that business, but (especially in the case of manufacturing) what good is the idea, without the funding, land, resources, and above all, LABOR to make that idea a reality? Your idea works well on the level of the individual crafstperson, but when it comes to corporations, you are multiplying levels of dependence, responsibility, and INDEBTEDNESS – not just to financial creditors, but to the workers who transform a dream into a tangible product, to their families, and to the environment in which they live. Because without these things, that “successful businessman” would be just a raving lunatic with a dream and nothing else. And as long as money remains the currency of exchange and the way in which we measure power, then it is money that need be used to pay back those debts – to acknowledge that without those various threads of interdependence, none of the businessman’s success would be possible.

  809. #811 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    I’ve acknowledged this problem multiple times in my comments here, and I am of the opinion that those who are uninsurable due to pre-existing congenital conditions, et al., should receive state subsidies.

    ha! you do realize that everything up to and including a yeast infection can be counted as a “pre-existing condition” if the insurer feels like it?

    you’re seriously making no sense. either that, or you’re now advocating universal state-funded healthcare. i’m not quite sure.

  810. #812 speedwell
    April 6, 2009

    OK, folks, you know I’m a libertarian. Walton, you need a good hard smack and a dunk in cold water. How can anyone who claims to have read Hayek and von Mises be ignorant of the causes of poverty? How can anyone who claims to be a libertarian use the same mouth to claim that poor people must necessarily be irresponsible and undeserving?

  811. #813 Stu
    April 6, 2009

    speedwell: Because Walton’s is libertarianism with strict-father model sauce.

  812. #814 speedwell
    April 6, 2009

    In my opinion, it does not. If X establishes a successful business, and, after paying his employees and creditors, makes a large profit, it is X that has created that wealth. The wealth does not belong to the community, and it is not for the community to decide how it should be allocated. The wealth belongs to X, since he is the one who created it through his investment of labour and capital.

    The business owner is not the voice of collective labor just because he has paid for it. If the laborer hasn’t been compensated according to his own valuation of his labor; if the mind-worker hasn’t been compensated according to his own valuation of his intellectual capital, then either the business owner or the worker is engaging in fraud to the extent that he is paying more than the value of the work. That’s what a free exchange means. Think.

  813. #815 Watchman
    April 6, 2009

    Kseniya wrote:

    You’ve swallowed the hateful mind-worm of your political forebearers, and do nothing but vomit up its filthy, squirming, photophobic progeny.

    How satisfyingly lurid — and you’ve addressed it to the right person. Two points.

  814. #816 speedwell
    April 6, 2009

    Ouch, I need to go eat sugar; my hands are shaking and I’m sweating, but even worse, I sound like a dumbass. For “the extent that he is paying more than the value of the work” please read something more like “to the extent that he is paying LESS than the true value of what he is buying.” Still sounds stupid, but a little less so. Back in a bit with blood sugar levels repaired. :)

  815. #817 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    *pokes speedwell with a stick* are you sure you’re a libertarian? That up there sounded like straight out of the ParEcon handbook

    [/friendly tease]

  816. #818 strange gods before me
    April 6, 2009

    The bigger question is: why would anyone be so irresponsible as to have so many children, when they can’t afford to spend more than $10 a week on food? Should someone like that be raising children in the first place?

    You are a fucking fascist.

    This is proof that you worship the rich and hate the poor. You believe that if someone cannot afford an abortion — or cannot afford to travel out of Northern Ireland for an abortion — then they are a bad person and should have their children taken away. If they experience a loss of their job or a drop in income, they are a bad person and should have their children taken away. And these things don’t happen to the rich because the rich are good, worthy people.

    And since the poor are bad people, they should not be given assistance to help them raise their children. No, they cannot be trusted with it. Instead, the state should take take their children away from them, because bad poor people must not be allowed to be raise children.

    You can “apologize” for it all you want, but if you didn’t hate the poor then the idea never would have occurred to you in the first place.

  817. #819 speedwell
    April 6, 2009

    Libertarians, on the whole, are insensitive to context, whether the context of individual people in a community, or the context of individual actions within an environment of other actions. People needn’t be grouped together as a collective, and they needn’t be particularized into hapless autonomy. They may merely be understood as individual actors in a context. You don’t even need to pretend there is such a thing as free will. If we truly had real free will, we wouldn’t have the sorts of dependencies and predictabilities that make contractual exchanges possible.

    I was fortunate enough to once have a philosophy teacher who understood how to apply contextual thinking to libertarianism. It helped me to get much of the paternalistic muck out of the machinery and to stop thinking of other people as the means to my egotistical individual ends.

    Libertarians who go about whining that they can’t have freedom because they’re so held down by the government… truly pitiful. You must have freedom in spite of oppression. You can’t wait around for the invisible hand to sweep clean the Augean marketplace and set things right in your lifetime. You need to stand up and do things one individual at a time, starting with yourself.

  818. #820 Carlie
    April 6, 2009

    Hey Walton, here’s another link for you. Of course, if you want to say losing your home isn’t that bad, more power to you.

  819. #821 speedwell
    April 6, 2009

    are you sure you’re a libertarian?

    Hell, no, I’m not sure.

    I’m Ayn Rand’s several-times-removed blood cousin, but fuck John Galt. Objectivists and libertarians are followers. I try to think for myself. I stand for the individual. But reality is reality, and I don’t mind looking ignorant if you at least grant me the chance to learn. I might not learn exactly what you think you’re teaching, though. :)

  820. #822 speedwell
    April 6, 2009

    Christ, let’s all stop talking about libertarianism. Aren’t my hovering-around-60-blood-sugar rants silly enough for you? :)

    Iowa is a victory for self-determinism, not more, and not less. A bunch of individuals who insisted on respect for their sexuality, who were whole, healthy individuals in tune with reality, won the day. And it doesn’t matter which sex they want to marry–the fact that they now have the right to choose is the important thing.

    That’s why we sidetracked into libertarianism, folks. Because of liberty.

  821. #823 Emmet, OM
    April 6, 2009

    If (to take a grossly exaggerated hypothetical) the prosperity of a country improved to the point that the average family could afford to buy six cars, a family who could only afford one car would be considered poor, in relative terms. (I’m not claiming that this is the reality of relative poverty; it’s a theoretical example.)

    No, it’s a stupid caricature that is not substantially different from my “46″ vs 52″ plasma-screen TV” parody of the right-wing ideologue position.

    The family who could only afford one car would only be considered poor if it were the case that more than one car was necessary in order to meet basic standards of nutrition, clothing, housing, etc. You’re stubbornly trying to redefine relative poverty into a straw-man caricature that serves your glibertarian ideology, rather than accepting the eminently sensible actual definition, which has been explained to you several times (in some cases by people whose specialisation is in this area and actually know what the fuck they’re talking about), as the amount of money calculated to be necessary, on average, to meet basic food, clothing, housing and other needs in the local economy. Now, you could legitimately argue that you don’t agree with the assessment of certain things as “needs” — a detailed argument based on local conditions and a particular set of assessments — but you can’t just dismiss the concept of relative poverty based on a straw-man without being exactly like a YEC who laughs at evolution because it “says that fish turn into horses”. Inventing a ludicrous caricature of a term, based on profound and willful ignorance, and then proceeding to ridicule your invention just makes you look like a complete idiot. You can do better.

  822. #824 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    Emmet (and others), keep in mind that the poverty line in much of Europe is 60% of the median income. so one can slip below the poverty line there without actually slipping below earning what’s absolutely necessary. however, this model is not used in the U.S., and Walton’s Strawman of this relative poverty also doesn’t take into account that people don’t just get wealthier in a vacuum, not affecting their environment and those who haven’t gotten wealthier.

  823. #825 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Actually, Walton’s comments on this thread are the argument equivalent of gin.

    I’ll take that as a compliment, as I’m rather partial to a gin and tonic. (Especially with ice and a slice of lime.)

    How can anyone who claims to be a libertarian use the same mouth to claim that poor people must necessarily be irresponsible and undeserving?

    I don’t think I said that, and if I did, it wasn’t what I meant to say. That certainly isn’t what I think.

    I am not especially knowledgeable or clever, and from time to time I misunderstand things I’ve read, or I express myself badly, or I just go off on a tangent and talk utter bollocks (without meaning to). The latter is more or less what has happened today. But I generally use this site as a sounding-board; when a thought passes through my head, I post it here, and I can be sure that someone will call me out on it. If I find said thought impossible to defend, then it was probably complete nonsense to begin with.

    Maybe I’m an idiot. But I’m not a monster or a fascist, or any of the other things I’ve been labelled on this thread.

  824. #826 Walton
    April 6, 2009

    Emmet (and others), keep in mind that the poverty line in much of Europe is 60% of the median income. so one can slip below the poverty line there without actually slipping below earning what’s absolutely necessary.

    Yes, that’s the kind of relative poverty to which I was referring. To be clear, I have no problem with the US federal poverty statistics (which are, as Emmet correctly points out, based on an assessment of the cost of living).

  825. #827 Emmet, OM
    April 6, 2009

    Emmet (and others), keep in mind that the poverty line in much of Europe is 60% of the median income. so one can slip below the poverty line there without actually slipping below earning what’s absolutely necessary.

    I’m sure that’s been calculated, based on the correlation between cost-of-living and median income, to be a reasonable estimate. For every person who slips below the poverty line without actually slipping below earning what’s absolutely necessary, there is probably one who is technically above the poverty line, but isn’t earning what’s absolutely necessary. Of necessity, the poverty line is an average and there will be people in both tails, not just one.

  826. #828 strange gods before me
    April 6, 2009

    Maybe I’m an idiot. But I’m not a monster or a fascist, or any of the other things I’ve been labelled on this thread.

    I’m sorry, Walton, but the evidence indicates otherwise.

    Have you decided on bread or death for me yet?

    I want to ask you something about Medicaid and S-CHIP but it sort of depends on an explicit answer to that question.

  827. #829 Menyambal
    April 6, 2009

    My wife just got home from her job at a Missouri elementary school. I asked about poverty. She said the school sends backpacks of food home with about twelve kids every weekend. Some of those kids have to hide the food from their parents to keep them from eating it all up.

  828. #830 Cotku
    April 6, 2009

    I may be ignorant here, but Walton to me sounds like he has read a lot of theory, but not seen much of it in actual practice.

    I claimed libertarianism for a short while after doing a little reading, and having grown up in a middle class American home, and only seeing abuses of the system, rather than the good that can come from it. Living on your own at 18, working part time (because full time jobs were near impossible to come by), not having enough money to feed yourself a proper meal, and seeing people who were simply choosing to live off the government have a better standard of living can make you ill to your stomach. (By the way, I was considered to make about $500 a year too much to get government assistance)

    The way I’ve figured it, (please correct me if I’m wrong, I’m new here), the systems we have in place to help people in bad situations are inherently good, but in my opinion need reworking. I would love to see the EBT system operate more like WIC, where a family is told to purchase nutritional items for their family (in a way that can be tailored of course) on a weight or volume basis, not based on a pure dollar amount. Hopefully this would allow more children in poverty to receive full meals, instead of the nutritionally empty foods that are available for cheap in supermarkets.

    I’m also not a fan of the cash that can be pulled out on EBT (at least in my state, I’m from Georgia) and then used for whatever the person wishes. I worked in a gas station for too long, and usually saw it spent on cigarettes or alcohol. Couldn’t the program just be expanded to help with items such as clothing and other non-food needs?

    Please give me mercy, I’m trying to learn and expand my horizons from the jaded child I was.

  829. #831 Jadehawk
    April 6, 2009

    Yes, that’s the kind of relative poverty to which I was referring. To be clear, I have no problem with the US federal poverty statistics (which are, as Emmet correctly points out, based on an assessment of the cost of living).

    and if you had continued reading (or maybe if I had expressed myself clearer; or if you had read my comment before that) you’d have noticed that even considering THAT, you’re still creating a strawman, since people don’t get wealthier in a vacuum. in your example the rise in gas and parking costs alone would make the one-car-family effectively poorer.

  830. #832 Watchman
    April 6, 2009

    Walton to me sounds like he has read a lot of theory, but not seen much of it in actual practice.

    That is correct.

  831. #833 Walton
    April 7, 2009

    Your “successful businessman” may have the economic acumen and fortitude to create that business, but (especially in the case of manufacturing) what good is the idea, without the funding, land, resources, and above all, LABOR to make that idea a reality? Your idea works well on the level of the individual crafstperson, but when it comes to corporations, you are multiplying levels of dependence, responsibility, and INDEBTEDNESS – not just to financial creditors, but to the workers who transform a dream into a tangible product, to their families, and to the environment in which they live. Because without these things, that “successful businessman” would be just a raving lunatic with a dream and nothing else. And as long as money remains the currency of exchange and the way in which we measure power, then it is money that need be used to pay back those debts – to acknowledge that without those various threads of interdependence, none of the businessman’s success would be possible.

    I agree that people are interdependent. But that interdependence is created through contracts and trade links; it does not require state coercion in order to function. A manufacturer depends on thousands of people around the world in order to produce and sell his products; suppliers, shippers, labourers, retailers, etc. But these people are not forced to assist him. Rather, they enter into contracts for their mutual benefit. They perform their obligations to him under their contracts, and he pays them what they are owed under those contracts. Where, in this picture, is there any justification for confiscating wealth from the manufacturer and distributing it to others?

  832. #834 Britomart
    April 7, 2009

    Walton check out the term ‘Enlightened self interest’

    Money spent on public health means you are less likely to get a disease from your water supply or from the untreated TB of some one you pass on the street.

    Money spent on public education means your factory workers are better educated and better able to do their jobs. not only that, their neighbors are better educated and able to do better jobs so they will have more money to buy your products.

    Money spent on transportation resources (air, rail, roads) means your materiel will get to you faster so you can make your products more effiently and your products will get to market in one peice without being shattered by potholes or train wrecks on bad tracks.

    Enlightened self interest.

    Follow the implications and dont be so greedy.

    Thank you kindly

  833. #835 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    April 7, 2009

    Money spent on public education means your factory workers are better educated and better able to do their jobs. not only that, their neighbors are better educated and able to do better jobs so they will have more money to buy your products.

    Not to mention less poverty and therefore less crime and probably less health care costs.

  834. #836 CosmicTeapot
    April 7, 2009

    Wanders in, whistling innocently!

    Looks round to see what all the fuss is about!

    AAAAAAARRRGH, another libertarian hijacking!!!

    Abandon thread, abandon thread!

    Whoooosh…..

    ___<;,><_@_@@_@@@_@@@@@_____________

  835. #837 Walton
    April 7, 2009

    Britomart @#835: I never said I was against all taxation. Public money spent on public goods, like those you mention, is necessary, because these things by their nature cannot be provided adequately by the free market.

    What I was arguing against is the notion that, because a person has (for whatever reason) succeeded and created wealth, he owes that wealth or a portion thereof to “the community” and it should therefore be distributed to his more needy neighbours. (This proposition is usually described by its proponents as “social justice”, which is, of course, an oxymoron, as justice is individual and society is by definition collective.)

    Yes, if a person wishes to continue enjoying the benefits of national defence, law and order, public health and disease control, transport infrastructure, etc., then he must pay for those things. But he does not owe a duty to support his less successful neighbour.

  836. #838 aratina
    April 7, 2009

    Awesome ending, Cosmic Teapot! Let me just throw out the life preserver: 17 more days till Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals, and Transgendered People can marry a person of the same-sex in Iowa! Hooray!

  837. #839 Nerd of Redhead, OM
    April 7, 2009

    But he does not owe a duty to support his less successful neighbour.

    Support, no, help out in time of need, yes. This is why most of us here consider libertarianism to be morally bankrupt. It is something you need to think about.

    Here’s a hint. Put yourself on the receiving end of what you don’t like. For example, you could loose your job for a number of reasons, and it can take a long time, even a couple of years, to find suitable employment. Would you like some assistance or not during that time?

  838. #840 LE
    April 7, 2009

    Walton, your hypothetical manufacturer didn’t spring fully formed from the head of Adam Smith. He is the product of a society. He went to schools that, even if they weren’t publicly funded, benefited from the existence of publicly funded schools, and publicly funded research. He has a workforce that has benefited from those schools as well. He operates in a society with the rule of law so he doesn’t need to spend all his profits on bribes or worry about the next warlord over destroying what he’s built (unless you are talking about businesses in Somalia?). He lives in an area with adequate public services so he doesn’t need to worry about himself or his workforce being wiped out by cholera or some such. His workers are productive because they live in a society where, if he pays them enough, they can easily obtain adequate food, shelter, transportation to work, etc. He can distribute whatever it is he manufactures on the publicly provided roads. And unless he is the sole and personal owner of his business (a rare thing these days) he benefits from government protections that allow him form a corporation and limit his personal liability for the actions of his business – his personal assets and home can’t be seized to pay his business’ debts – so he’s benefiting from the legal fiction of the corporation.

    He also benefits if the society that he lives in provides something of a social safety net so that those with less resources are less likely to become completely destitute and take desperate measures, like turning to crime or to drugs or neglecting their children (Or all three – there’s criminal neglect and abuse of course. But it’s my impression that the majority of neglect of children is the more mild forms that result from parents who are too overworked and tired trying to provide the basics of food and shelter to actually spend time with their children). Your hypothetical businessman’s quality of life is improved because his neighborhood is not littered with beggars. Better still, if society can provide them with sufficient resources to get back on their feet, those who are on the edge might become a net benefit to society again (or at least not a net drain), which is also to his benefit.

    There are a thousand other tangible and intangible benefits that your business owner gets from the society he operates in. Is every one of those benefits codified in a contract? No, because those contracts are with other individuals who have their own debts to society, not with the society at large. He is indebted to society and society is justified, within limits, in asking for additional tangible support from someone who has benefited more than most, and continues to do so.

    In my mind he is obligated to give back in intangible ways as well. That’s not something we can legislate (at least not in the US because our Constitution, quite rightly, forbids it), but we have a phrase for those who don’t : selfish assholes.

    Something further to think about: He is also, by operating a business and controlling a larger portion of resources than most people, using more of society’s tangible and intangible benefits than the average wage-slave is. Shouldn’t those who use a thing pay more than those who don’t?

    (And, because I haven’t said it previously – GO IOWA! Woo-Hoo!)

  839. #841 Endor
    April 7, 2009

    “Would you like some assistance or not during that time?”

    I’m willing to bet that Walton is going to give a similar response as faux-lifers give, i.e. “The only moral abortion is MY abortion”. The only proper form of public assistance is what benefits Walton.

    Or, he’ll play the faux piety game and say “no”, though its a big fat lie.

  840. #842 Britomart
    April 7, 2009

    Walton is anyone suggesting that you stand on a street corner and hand out $20 bills ?

    What exactly is it that you object to and on what grounds ?

    I dare you to eat healthy on food stamps. Particularly if you have any sort of health problem like celiac or diabetes.

    And have you given any thought as to WHY your neighbor is less successful? What can you do to help them be more successful?

    What I find amazing is most of the people with the greedy attitude I see here are professed devout Xians. I run into them all the time on the Undernet. Last time I read the bible it was Jesus saying give all you have to the poor. How come they don’t follow that suggestion and instead are stomping about the countryside poking into peoples bedroom habits ???

  841. #843 strange gods before me
    April 7, 2009

    What I find amazing is most of the people with the greedy attitude I see here are professed devout Xians. I run into them all the time on the Undernet. Last time I read the bible it was Jesus saying give all you have to the poor. How come they don’t follow that suggestion and instead are stomping about the countryside poking into peoples bedroom habits ???

    They aren’t Christian because it seemed to them like a reasonable belief system with decent ethics.

    They’re Christian because it confers power and social status upon them. Wherever any religion flourishes, it establishes something like a caste system. Devoting oneself to the cult brings prestige and authority.

    Good Christians are Good Christians because it gives them license to control others.

  842. #844 strange gods before me
    April 7, 2009

    If X establishes a successful business, and, after paying his employees and creditors, makes a large profit, it is X that has created that wealth.

    Actually no. The employees created that wealth. They’re the ones who did the work.

    If an employee is under contract that pays her 10c per widget, and the employer takes those widgets from her and sells them for 15c, then her work was actually worth 15c, not 10c, and the employer has stolen 5c from her. The only reason she agreed to the contract was because she was coerced: under capitalism — a rigged game — a worker’s options are work for this employer who will rob you, or work for that employer who will rob you, or starve to death.

    Now, there are at least two options that restore some amount of fairness.

    1 There’s syndicalism or other forms of revolutionary socialism where the workers own the means of production. Those workers’ companies large enough to need management elect their management from among themselves. No more thieving, unaccountable bosses.

    2 There’s mixed economies, social democracies, where employees are permitted to steal their workers’ wealth but the employers are then taxed for a portion of that stolen profit. The broader community, made up of more workers than bosses, then votes on how to distribute those taxes to their mutual benefit.

    You now wish to protest, “but there are other ways, right-wing libertarian ways!” No there aren’t. Look around you. Every nation on earth is either of type 1 or type 2, because workers do not permit anything less. Ever wonder why you can say “there’s never been a libertarian state tried”? Historically whenever a mixed economy veers too far toward pure capitalism, the workers’ discontent becomes violent and you end up with the pendulum swinging much further back in the other direction.

    Your options are basically these, give us social democracy or we will give you revolutionary socialism.

    LE’s wise comment above explains part of the moral basis for the mixed economy. Adam Smith knew this stuff, which is why he was in favor of some progressive taxation. (I presume you clicked on my answer key above, hope that wasn’t a spoiler.) You’d be wise to try to deal with this reality rather than dreaming of revolution for your bosses’ paradise.

  843. #845 strange gods before me
    April 7, 2009

    Now Walton,

    Will you please answer “stolen bread or death” for me? Either here or back in the New Zealand thread? I went through your analogies with abortion and kidneys, and explained why they weren’t equivalent. I jumped through your hoops. You left me holding a flaming hoop and it’s going to burn my hand.

    You can’t make things any worse for yourself. You’ve already intimated that your answer is “go ahead and die” and I can use that against you without your explicit nod. See I’ve already done it, in this thread.

    But I do have serious questions about policy and they do depend on your answer.

  844. #846 speedwell
    April 7, 2009

    But he does not owe a duty to support his less successful neighbour.

    Sure he does. He owes a duty to his own self-interest. There is an optimum balance between giving and not giving. If you don’t give enough to the less fortunate or to causes that help them effectively, then you fail to support and improve the society you live in. If you give too much, then you lower your own standard of living unacceptably. (My fiance’s sister was once married to a rabidly Christian fellow who gave anything they owned away if he felt like someone else needed it. When he gave away the baby’s crib, that we bought for them, to someone “less fortunate,” leaving his own without one, that was the end of that marriage.)

    When I was in college, I shared an apartment with three other girls. Each of us had our own rooms. One of my roommates was having a hard time keeping up with her classes, and the cleanliness of her room suffered. Was I obligated to help her keep it clean? No, of course not. Well, not, that is, unless I wanted trash and bugs to overflow into my part of the house. I wasn’t going to be her cleaning lady, but I chose to do the minimum necessary to help maintain my own standard of cleanliness.

  845. #847 strange gods before me
    April 7, 2009

    Above, my number 2 should have said

    “2 There’s mixed economies, social democracies, where employers are permitted to steal their workers’ wealth but the employers are then taxed for a portion of that stolen profit.”

    Hopefully that was obvious, as it didn’t make sense otherwise.

  846. #848 strange gods before me
    April 7, 2009

    Sure he does. He owes a duty to his own self-interest. There is an optimum balance between giving and not giving. If you don’t give enough to the less fortunate or to causes that help them effectively, then you fail to support and improve the society you live in.

    Walton’s answer is going to be that the rest of society should not be able to compel him, through taxes (even though voluntary charitable giving is tax deductible), to fulfill that duty.

  847. #849 speedwell
    April 7, 2009

    rest of society should not be able to compel him, through taxes

    And he’d be correct. Doing your duty is different from being compelled to do it. The first is the act of a free, responsible member of society, and the second is the forced obedience of someone who does not own their own person or products.

  848. #850 LE
    April 7, 2009

    And to bring it back to the start of the thread: The Vermont Legislature just voted to overturn the Governor’s veto and became the first State to allow same sex-marriage through action from the Legislature!

    Go Vermont!

    PZ already has another thread going …

  849. #851 strange gods before me
    April 7, 2009

    And he’d be correct.

    But of course you’re wrong.

    If he doesn’t do his share of the duty, then his share is left over and creates a larger burden upon everyone else. He does not have the right to make the rest of us pick up his fair share. We have the right to compel him to play fairly.

    Doing your duty is different from being compelled to do it. The first is the act of a free, responsible member of society, and the second is the forced obedience of someone who does not own their own person or products.

    It’s funny how you libertarians use words that are in the English language, but you don’t seem to realize that you’re not speaking in a manner that is coherent to other people.

    Paying one’s taxes is not the same as owning nothing.

    I know that to libertarians, it seems self-evident that taxes equal slavery and speed limits equal fascism, but the rest of us just hear the corner ravings of a crank.

  850. #852 Walton
    April 7, 2009

    If an employee is under contract that pays her 10c per widget, and the employer takes those widgets from her and sells them for 15c, then her work was actually worth 15c, not 10c, and the employer has stolen 5c from her. The only reason she agreed to the contract was because she was coerced: under capitalism — a rigged game — a worker’s options are work for this employer who will rob you, or work for that employer who will rob you, or starve to death.

    You forgot one other option: set up your own business and sell your goods yourself.

    The employers are not a set-apart hereditary caste. They are simply ordinary people. Many entrepreneurs, in fact, come from working-class backgrounds.

    Of course, it is very true that some types of business are well-nigh impossible to establish without large amounts starting capital; which is why we need a healthy financial system and wide availability of credit, so that those people who do not have access to large financial resources still have a fair chance to start their own businesses and survive in the free market. We also need an effective educational system (including school vouchers, so that prestigious private schools won’t just be for the rich) so that people from all backgrounds can acquire the skills they need to advance themselves.

    If a person has the skills to produce a product worth 10c, he or she has a choice. She can set up on her own, running her own business; that way she keeps all the profit from her work, but she also runs the risk of failure and bankruptcy. Or she can enter into a contract to work for someone else – meaning that she doesn’t bear the risks of running her own business, but that she cannot keep all the profit from what she produces.

    I am not claiming that all capitalist nations have great social mobility. Many do not. As I said, there are several prerequisites: political stability, wide availability of investment and credit (which, incidentally, is one of the first things to suffer in an economy laden with high taxes and over-regulation), well maintained infrastructure, and a decent education system. But this is not a reason to claim that anyone who employs workers is stealing the fruits of their labour.

    Every nation on earth is either of type 1 or type 2, because workers do not permit anything less.

    The fact that the less successful wish to steal from the more successful – and that they try to use the power of the State to do so – does not make it right that they should do so.

    I know that to libertarians, it seems self-evident that taxes equal slavery and speed limits equal fascism, but the rest of us just hear the corner ravings of a crank.

    I have never claimed that speed limits equal fascism. Fascism is a specific political ideology, and it’s an abuse of the term to apply it indiscriminately to whatever one dislikes. And speed limits are justifiable, since they prevent citizens from harming one another through careless driving.

  851. #853 Walton
    April 7, 2009

    If an employee is under contract that pays her 10c per widget, and the employer takes those widgets from her and sells them for 15c, then her work was actually worth 15c, not 10c, and the employer has stolen 5c from her. The only reason she agreed to the contract was because she was coerced: under capitalism — a rigged game — a worker’s options are work for this employer who will rob you, or work for that employer who will rob you, or starve to death.

    You forgot one other option: set up your own business and sell your goods yourself.

    The employers are not a set-apart hereditary caste. They are simply ordinary people. Many entrepreneurs, in fact, come from working-class backgrounds.

    Of course, it is very true that some types of business are well-nigh impossible to establish without large amounts starting capital; which is why we need a healthy financial system and wide availability of credit, so that those people who do not have access to large financial resources still have a fair chance to start their own businesses and survive in the free market. We also need an effective educational system (including school vouchers, so that prestigious private schools won’t just be for the rich) so that people from all backgrounds can acquire the skills they need to advance themselves.

    If a person has the skills to produce a product worth 10c, he or she has a choice. She can set up on her own, running her own business; that way she keeps all the profit from her work, but she also runs the risk of failure and bankruptcy. Or she can enter into a contract to work for someone else – meaning that she doesn’t bear the risks of running her own business, but that she cannot keep all the profit from what she produces.

    I am not claiming that all capitalist nations have great social mobility. Many do not. As I said, there are several prerequisites: political stability, wide availability of investment and credit (which, incidentally, is one of the first things to suffer in an economy laden with high taxes and over-regulation), well maintained infrastructure, and a decent education system. But this is not a reason to claim that anyone who employs workers is stealing the fruits of their labour.

    Every nation on earth is either of type 1 or type 2, because workers do not permit anything less.

    The fact that the less successful wish to steal from the more successful – and that they try to use the power of the State to do so – does not make it right that they should do so.

    I know that to libertarians, it seems self-evident that taxes equal slavery and speed limits equal fascism, but the rest of us just hear the corner ravings of a crank.

    I have never claimed that speed limits equal fascism. Fascism is a specific political ideology, and it’s an abuse of the term to apply it indiscriminately to whatever one dislikes. And speed limits are justifiable, since they prevent citizens from harming one another through careless driving.

  852. #854 Bobber
    April 7, 2009

    The fact that the less successful wish to steal from the more successful – and that they try to use the power of the State to do so – does not make it right that they should do so.

    How is it stealing to retake what is yours by right? The individual is subject to the rules established by the society to which he or she belongs. Interdependence requires cooperation and the sharing of resources. And true success is measured not on the status of an individual, but by the overall well-being of the society.

    If a person has the skills to produce a product worth 10c, he or she has a choice. She can set up on her own, running her own business; that way she keeps all the profit from her work, but she also runs the risk of failure and bankruptcy. Or she can enter into a contract to work for someone else – meaning that she doesn’t bear the risks of running her own business, but that she cannot keep all the profit from what she produces.

    Until you change the rules of credit to allow everyone who wishes to start a business to have absolute access to as much cash as they need, without having to meet preconditions and the scrutiny of lenders, the playing field is rigged against the person who has no money, or no connections that allow him or her to sidestep the usual rules. Also, starting a business can be a highly time-intensive activity with little chance of renumeration, especially in the first years – another blow against the person who has no ready access to cash, since many people have families and mortgages and car payments and health insurance to pay for; there simply isn’t the time, let alone the money, to create a business. As always, the choices a person can make are unduly – and I submit to you, unfairly – influenced by the overemphasis placed in our capitalist society on wealth. I can guarantee you that I have met more than one young person who has the creativity and the desire to become a successful business person, but whose “choices” for advancement in that direction are eliminated by the socio-economic situation into which they, through no fault of their own, exist.

  853. #855 Walton
    April 7, 2009

    Will you please answer “stolen bread or death” for me? Either here or back in the New Zealand thread?

    No, I won’t, because I think it’s too simplistic and stark a dichotomy. You’re trying very hard to force me into a corner, using a hypothetical thought-experiment that, by your own admission, is not realistic.

  854. #856 Britomart
    April 7, 2009

    Walton, did you miss my questions in post 843?

    Two other points:

    1) the ability to fabricate something that can sell for $250 or what ever in no way confers the abil