phonon
Posts: 396
Joined: Nov. 2006
|
| Quote | | Words “Intelligent” and “Design” Can’t Be Used Together in K-12 |
Well, apparently, in some schools, you can't use the words "that's" and "gay" simultaneously.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article....ol.html
I'd really be suspended if I were in school.
"Intelligent Design? That's gay."
The "mom" and "dad" thing can't be true, can it?
The whole WND article sounds like something I'd read at WND, but is there any truth to it? Sounds totally ridiculous.
[quote=Dr.GH,April 29 2007,22:11] | Quote (Ichthyic @ April 29 2007,20:02) | It should be remembered by all here at least, that Panda's Thumb contributers Ed Brayton, and Timothy Sandefur are rabid opponents of environmental protection or any form of government regualtion of mining, logging etc...
They call it "Libretarianism" and they are strong supporters of the The Cato Institute which is the source of George II's environmental attacks. The Cato Institute is also a major opponent of all forms of public education. Sandefur is a fellow of the Pacific Legal Foundation, which is best known for attempting to overturn protections granted under the EPA and particularly the Endangered Species Act to all species threatened by forest clear-cutting in the Pacific Northwest. The Pacific Legal Foundation was also very proud of their recent successful efforts to segregate schools in southern California. Sandefur's personal specialty, IIRC, is to eliminate worker protection laws.
This is a major reason I dropped out of PT- any operation supporting science education should never tolerate people opposed to science and education. |
My approach to the conflict of environmentalism and libertarianism is to say that under libertarianism, the sole purpose of government is to protect your rights. If someone pollutes the air or wipes out an entire forest or blows up a mountain to get at coal then ruins a forest and all its streams, then they are violating your rights. The coal companies or the logging companies do not have rights. The individuals that own them do, but there is no inherent right (god given right) to blow up a mountain or pollute the air, even if you "own" the land upon which you are polluting. That's not a right.
This goes for the EPA and the FDA, etc. Those agencies are in place to protect your rights.
That's the argument I start with.
I'm all for small government libertarianism. But some people go way too far with it. What they are really in favor of is anarchism, or some form of it.
| Quote (Arden Chatfield @ April 30 2007,09:55) | Maybe he agrees GW is real, just that it's horribly wicked for the government to do anything about it.
Guess that's the subtle difference between a Republican and a Libertarian. |
Actually, at least nowadays, there is a HUGE difference.
Both corporate parties are all about big government these days. There are some members in each of the parties that are against it but they are marginalized. (the old joke: Democrats are big government in your wallet and Republicans are big government in your bedroom.)
Also, like a said above and as you also pointed out, all sorts of people call themselves libertarian and they are not. example:Bill Maher. 
--------------
With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg
To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg
|
^Tard
