Darwin: Far From Science

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Oh joy, another fun thread!

It would be fun, in the intellectual sense, if you could bring something to the table.

Your post reveals quite the opposite.

When an OP begins with "Some dunce" and continues with BS, it is extremely hard to take you seriously.

Then you supply supposed quotes from people who believe in evolution as reason not to believe in evolution?

Then you supply supposed quotes from commies and authoritarian socialists who believe in evolution as a reason not to believe in evolution?

I'm desperately waiting for a punchline. I hope it's worth the wait.

Stop begging.

OK>...here's another chance

This is what I've shown so far.....see if you can find any errors herein:



The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.


Now....was there any of the above that a moron like you is prepared to deny?

Your very first mistake is to claim that we evolutionary biologists are Darwinists.

When some clown argues with Darwin, we laugh. We corrected Darwin's errors a very long time ago.

What???

You're stating what the OP claims...that Darwin's theory is false????

Now....what is your pal gonna say....he claimed it was a 'fact'???


Get your stories straight!

Hah, you are so damn dumb. Nobody in their right mind would take that away from what either of us said.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.

Yawn ..... We applaud the progressive extension of the promises of the Declaration of Independence to more people, especially to women, African-Americans, religious minorities, and gay and lesbian people. Our greatest challenge today is to continue to extend the promise of political freedom and economic opportunity to those who are still denied it, in our own country and around the world."

Cato's Mission

Looks like you're lumping again.

"1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism,whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness."


True?

No. If you want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Liberals have no problem with that, as long as you don't force your sauce, meatballs, and noodles on me.

I can always prove that Liberalism is a spin-off of Bolshevism.....but for today, the importance of Darwin to you Leftists.

Perhaps you wanna try....

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.




Now....was there any of the above that you are prepared to deny?

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.

Yawn ..... We applaud the progressive extension of the promises of the Declaration of Independence to more people, especially to women, African-Americans, religious minorities, and gay and lesbian people. Our greatest challenge today is to continue to extend the promise of political freedom and economic opportunity to those who are still denied it, in our own country and around the world."

Cato's Mission

Looks like you're lumping again.

"1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism,whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness."


True?

No. If you want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Liberals have no problem with that, as long as you don't force your sauce, meatballs, and noodles on me.

They gave up on educated adults long ago. Now they have to target children:
Republicans considering law to allow Creationism to be taught as a scientific theory

A Map of Thousands of Schools That Are Allowed to Teach Creationism With Taxpayer Money

Did you find anything 'crazy' in here.....or are you simply too far gone to recognize that you've been thoroughly indoctrinated?

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.


Now....was there any of the above that a moron like you is prepared to deny?




By ignoring the simple challenge which is the essence of your attempted denial, you have proven everything I wrote.

Excellent.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Oh joy, another fun thread!

It would be fun, in the intellectual sense, if you could bring something to the table.

Your post reveals quite the opposite.

When an OP begins with "Some dunce" and continues with BS, it is extremely hard to take you seriously.

Then you supply supposed quotes from people who believe in evolution as reason not to believe in evolution?

Then you supply supposed quotes from commies and authoritarian socialists who believe in evolution as a reason not to believe in evolution?

I'm desperately waiting for a punchline. I hope it's worth the wait.

Stop begging.

OK>...here's another chance

This is what I've shown so far.....see if you can find any errors herein:



The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.


Now....was there any of the above that a moron like you is prepared to deny?

Your very first mistake is to claim that we evolutionary biologists are Darwinists.

When some clown argues with Darwin, we laugh. We corrected Darwin's errors a very long time ago.

What???

You're stating what the OP claims...that Darwin's theory is false????

Yes! I know, you are shocked.

Now....what is your pal gonna say....he claimed it was a 'fact'???


Get your stories straight!

Yeah, it happens.

We can close this thread now.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

More on brainwashing children:

Creationist brainwashing - Bad Astronomy

Long ago these fools realized that they are laughed right out of any serious company. So they build fancy museums with attractions for children and target children in their science classrooms.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It would be fun, in the intellectual sense, if you could bring something to the table.

Your post reveals quite the opposite.

When an OP begins with "Some dunce" and continues with BS, it is extremely hard to take you seriously.

Then you supply supposed quotes from people who believe in evolution as reason not to believe in evolution?

Then you supply supposed quotes from commies and authoritarian socialists who believe in evolution as a reason not to believe in evolution?

I'm desperately waiting for a punchline. I hope it's worth the wait.

Stop begging.

OK>...here's another chance

This is what I've shown so far.....see if you can find any errors herein:



The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.


Now....was there any of the above that a moron like you is prepared to deny?

Your very first mistake is to claim that we evolutionary biologists are Darwinists.

When some clown argues with Darwin, we laugh. We corrected Darwin's errors a very long time ago.

What???

You're stating what the OP claims...that Darwin's theory is false????

Yes! I know, you are shocked.

Now....what is your pal gonna say....he claimed it was a 'fact'???


Get your stories straight!

Yeah, it happens.

We can close this thread now.

"We can close this thread now."

Gee.....the same thing every Liberal tries to do when an opposing voice speaks up.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.

Yawn ..... We applaud the progressive extension of the promises of the Declaration of Independence to more people, especially to women, African-Americans, religious minorities, and gay and lesbian people. Our greatest challenge today is to continue to extend the promise of political freedom and economic opportunity to those who are still denied it, in our own country and around the world."

Cato's Mission

Looks like you're lumping again.

"1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism,whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness."


True?

No. If you want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Liberals have no problem with that, as long as you don't force your sauce, meatballs, and noodles on me.

They gave up on educated adults long ago. Now they have to target children:
Republicans considering law to allow Creationism to be taught as a scientific theory

A Map of Thousands of Schools That Are Allowed to Teach Creationism With Taxpayer Money

Did you find anything 'crazy' in here.....or are you simply too far gone to recognize that you've been thoroughly indoctrinated?

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.


Now....was there any of the above that a moron like you is prepared to deny?




By ignoring the simple challenge which is the essence of your attempted denial, you have proven everything I wrote.

Excellent.

I am unmoved. Fools like you declare victory always. Funny how you think you win every battle, despite losing the war 100 years ago.

 

[PoliticalChic]

More on brainwashing children:

Creationist brainwashing - Bad Astronomy

Long ago these fools realized that they are laughed right out of any serious company. So they build fancy museums with attractions for children and target children in their science classrooms.

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."

i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.


Now....was there any of the above that a moron like you is prepared to deny?

Speak up, moron!!!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Evil fundamentalist Ken Ham blames everyone but himself for failure:

Creationist Ken Ham Blames Atheists For Ark Park Failure

Crazy person attempts crazy stupid idea....fails spectacularly...blames atheists. No Ken, trust me, plenty of Christians are laughing at you, too.

 

[BlindBoo]

1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.

Yawn ..... We applaud the progressive extension of the promises of the Declaration of Independence to more people, especially to women, African-Americans, religious minorities, and gay and lesbian people. Our greatest challenge today is to continue to extend the promise of political freedom and economic opportunity to those who are still denied it, in our own country and around the world."

Cato's Mission

Looks like you're lumping again.

"1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism,whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness."


True?

No. If you want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Liberals have no problem with that, as long as you don't force your sauce, meatballs, and noodles on me.

I can always prove that Liberalism is a spin-off of Bolshevism.....but for today, the importance of Darwin to you Leftists.

Perhaps you wanna try....

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.




Now....was there any of the above that you are prepared to deny?

Without Point number 1. ".....Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness." the rest falls apart.

Liberals espouse freedom of religion.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ken Ham, tax money thief:

Town expected flood of business after Noah’s Ark opened. So far, it’s a trickle.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.

Yawn ..... We applaud the progressive extension of the promises of the Declaration of Independence to more people, especially to women, African-Americans, religious minorities, and gay and lesbian people. Our greatest challenge today is to continue to extend the promise of political freedom and economic opportunity to those who are still denied it, in our own country and around the world."

Cato's Mission

Looks like you're lumping again.

"1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism,whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness."


True?

No. If you want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Liberals have no problem with that, as long as you don't force your sauce, meatballs, and noodles on me.

I can always prove that Liberalism is a spin-off of Bolshevism.....but for today, the importance of Darwin to you Leftists.

Perhaps you wanna try....

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.




Now....was there any of the above that you are prepared to deny?

Without Point number 1. ".....Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness." the rest falls apart.

Liberals espouse freedom of religion.

You Liberals sure are afraid of the truth.


"Liberals espouse freedom of religion."

Let's check.


Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????



Sounds a lot like this:
"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more." " The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia," Richard Overy, p. 275



Liberals, the progeny of the Bolsheviks.

 

[BlindBoo]

Yawn ..... We applaud the progressive extension of the promises of the Declaration of Independence to more people, especially to women, African-Americans, religious minorities, and gay and lesbian people. Our greatest challenge today is to continue to extend the promise of political freedom and economic opportunity to those who are still denied it, in our own country and around the world."

Cato's Mission

Looks like you're lumping again.

"1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism,whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness."


True?

No. If you want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Liberals have no problem with that, as long as you don't force your sauce, meatballs, and noodles on me.

I can always prove that Liberalism is a spin-off of Bolshevism.....but for today, the importance of Darwin to you Leftists.

Perhaps you wanna try....

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.




Now....was there any of the above that you are prepared to deny?

Without Point number 1. ".....Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness." the rest falls apart.

Liberals espouse freedom of religion.

You Liberals sure are afraid of the truth.


"Liberals espouse freedom of religion."

Let's check.


Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????



Sounds a lot like this:
"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more." " The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia," Richard Overy, p. 275



Liberals, the progeny of the Bolsheviks.

The restriction is actually a law, .....and it isn't exclusive to religious institutions.

Lyndon Johnson is best known as America's 36th president, the Texan who assumed the office when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963. Texas politics can be rough, and Johnson knew how to play that game. Therein lies the origin of the "Johnson amendment."

The restriction was championed by LBJ in 1954 when Johnson was a U.S. senator running for re-election. A conservative nonprofit group that wanted to limit the treaty-making ability of the president produced material that called for electing his primary opponent, millionaire rancher-oilman Dudley Dougherty, and defeating Johnson. There was no church involved.

Johnson, then Democratic minority leader, responded by introducing an amendment to Section 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code dealing with tax-exempt charitable organizations, including groups organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literacy and educational purposes, or to prevent cruelty to children or animals. It said, in effect, that if you want to be absolved from paying taxes, you couldn't be involved in partisan politics.

There was no record of any debate around the amendment.

"The logical argument favoring such an amendment is that those corporations qualifying for the section 501(c)(3) tax subsidy should not be permitted to directly or indirectly use that subsidy to support candidates for office," said Michael Hone in the Case Western article.

However it was likely, he said, that "Johnson was motivated by a desire to exact revenge on the foundation he believed supported his opponent and to prevent it and other nonprofit corporations from acting similarly in the future."

LBJ and the ban on political activity by religious groups

Wasn't Johnson a religious man?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"1. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism,whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness."


True?

No. If you want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Liberals have no problem with that, as long as you don't force your sauce, meatballs, and noodles on me.

I can always prove that Liberalism is a spin-off of Bolshevism.....but for today, the importance of Darwin to you Leftists.

Perhaps you wanna try....

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.




Now....was there any of the above that you are prepared to deny?

Without Point number 1. ".....Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness." the rest falls apart.

Liberals espouse freedom of religion.

You Liberals sure are afraid of the truth.


"Liberals espouse freedom of religion."

Let's check.


Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????



Sounds a lot like this:
"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more." " The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia," Richard Overy, p. 275



Liberals, the progeny of the Bolsheviks.

The restriction is actually a law, .....and it isn't exclusive to religious institutions.

Lyndon Johnson is best known as America's 36th president, the Texan who assumed the office when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963. Texas politics can be rough, and Johnson knew how to play that game. Therein lies the origin of the "Johnson amendment."

The restriction was championed by LBJ in 1954 when Johnson was a U.S. senator running for re-election. A conservative nonprofit group that wanted to limit the treaty-making ability of the president produced material that called for electing his primary opponent, millionaire rancher-oilman Dudley Dougherty, and defeating Johnson. There was no church involved.

Johnson, then Democratic minority leader, responded by introducing an amendment to Section 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code dealing with tax-exempt charitable organizations, including groups organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literacy and educational purposes, or to prevent cruelty to children or animals. It said, in effect, that if you want to be absolved from paying taxes, you couldn't be involved in partisan politics.

There was no record of any debate around the amendment.

"The logical argument favoring such an amendment is that those corporations qualifying for the section 501(c)(3) tax subsidy should not be permitted to directly or indirectly use that subsidy to support candidates for office," said Michael Hone in the Case Western article.

However it was likely, he said, that "Johnson was motivated by a desire to exact revenge on the foundation he believed supported his opponent and to prevent it and other nonprofit corporations from acting similarly in the future."

LBJ and the ban on political activity by religious groups

Wasn't Johnson a religious man?

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

Here are the facts:

Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.


Now.....answer the questions:

What possible compelling government interest could this represent????


And, 2, how does this Liberal attack on the first amendment differ from what Stalin did:

"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more."



Admit it.....'Liberal' has become just a camouflage of fascism.

 

[BlindBoo]

No. If you want to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Liberals have no problem with that, as long as you don't force your sauce, meatballs, and noodles on me.

I can always prove that Liberalism is a spin-off of Bolshevism.....but for today, the importance of Darwin to you Leftists.

Perhaps you wanna try....

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.




Now....was there any of the above that you are prepared to deny?

Without Point number 1. ".....Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness." the rest falls apart.

Liberals espouse freedom of religion.

You Liberals sure are afraid of the truth.


"Liberals espouse freedom of religion."

Let's check.


Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????



Sounds a lot like this:
"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more." " The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia," Richard Overy, p. 275



Liberals, the progeny of the Bolsheviks.

The restriction is actually a law, .....and it isn't exclusive to religious institutions.

Lyndon Johnson is best known as America's 36th president, the Texan who assumed the office when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963. Texas politics can be rough, and Johnson knew how to play that game. Therein lies the origin of the "Johnson amendment."

The restriction was championed by LBJ in 1954 when Johnson was a U.S. senator running for re-election. A conservative nonprofit group that wanted to limit the treaty-making ability of the president produced material that called for electing his primary opponent, millionaire rancher-oilman Dudley Dougherty, and defeating Johnson. There was no church involved.

Johnson, then Democratic minority leader, responded by introducing an amendment to Section 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code dealing with tax-exempt charitable organizations, including groups organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literacy and educational purposes, or to prevent cruelty to children or animals. It said, in effect, that if you want to be absolved from paying taxes, you couldn't be involved in partisan politics.

There was no record of any debate around the amendment.

"The logical argument favoring such an amendment is that those corporations qualifying for the section 501(c)(3) tax subsidy should not be permitted to directly or indirectly use that subsidy to support candidates for office," said Michael Hone in the Case Western article.

However it was likely, he said, that "Johnson was motivated by a desire to exact revenge on the foundation he believed supported his opponent and to prevent it and other nonprofit corporations from acting similarly in the future."

LBJ and the ban on political activity by religious groups

Wasn't Johnson a religious man?

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

Here are the facts:

Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.


Now.....answer the questions:

What possible compelling government interest could this represent????


And, 2, how does this Liberal attack on the first amendment differ from what Stalin did:

"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more."



Admit it.....'Liberal' has become just a camouflage of fascism.

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

The law prevents tax free organizations from engaging in partisan politics if they want to keep their tax free status. It in no way relates to the anti religious Soviet law you describe.

Fascism has come to America wrapped in a flag.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I can always prove that Liberalism is a spin-off of Bolshevism.....but for today, the importance of Darwin to you Leftists.

Perhaps you wanna try....

The thread stated
a. In order for communism, statism, collectivism, Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness.
Then, quoted Lenin to document same.

b. The OP stated that there is life on earth, and pointed out that the Founder attributed same to the Creator.

c. I quoted the editor of Nature magazine, pointing out that human mental abilities differs from that of other organism.

d. I quoted Alfred Wallace, co-inventor of Darwinism, "physical characteristics," Wallace observes in this essay, "are not explicable on the theory of variation and survival of the fittest" -- the criteria of Darwinian natural selection.

e. Wallace labeled much of Darwin's theory as "evolutionary fantasy."

f. I stated that the above reveals the value of Darwin to Marxists, and the joy of Engels upon latching on to Darwin's theory.


g. the most basic requirement of science: the conclusions of reproducible experimentation, known as 'The Scientific Method,'


h. The fossil record should provide proof of the gradual progression toward diversity....but even Darwin admits that it doesn't: "I can give no satisfactory answer..... The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."



i. ....many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day.... with no transitional fossils preceding them in the fossil record, most of the major phyla presently on earth appear abruptly in the fossil record.

And...noted that scientific proof of Darwin's theory is the Litmus Test.




Now....was there any of the above that you are prepared to deny?

Without Point number 1. ".....Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness." the rest falls apart.

Liberals espouse freedom of religion.

You Liberals sure are afraid of the truth.


"Liberals espouse freedom of religion."

Let's check.


Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????



Sounds a lot like this:
"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more." " The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia," Richard Overy, p. 275



Liberals, the progeny of the Bolsheviks.

The restriction is actually a law, .....and it isn't exclusive to religious institutions.

Lyndon Johnson is best known as America's 36th president, the Texan who assumed the office when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963. Texas politics can be rough, and Johnson knew how to play that game. Therein lies the origin of the "Johnson amendment."

The restriction was championed by LBJ in 1954 when Johnson was a U.S. senator running for re-election. A conservative nonprofit group that wanted to limit the treaty-making ability of the president produced material that called for electing his primary opponent, millionaire rancher-oilman Dudley Dougherty, and defeating Johnson. There was no church involved.

Johnson, then Democratic minority leader, responded by introducing an amendment to Section 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code dealing with tax-exempt charitable organizations, including groups organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literacy and educational purposes, or to prevent cruelty to children or animals. It said, in effect, that if you want to be absolved from paying taxes, you couldn't be involved in partisan politics.

There was no record of any debate around the amendment.

"The logical argument favoring such an amendment is that those corporations qualifying for the section 501(c)(3) tax subsidy should not be permitted to directly or indirectly use that subsidy to support candidates for office," said Michael Hone in the Case Western article.

However it was likely, he said, that "Johnson was motivated by a desire to exact revenge on the foundation he believed supported his opponent and to prevent it and other nonprofit corporations from acting similarly in the future."

LBJ and the ban on political activity by religious groups

Wasn't Johnson a religious man?

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

Here are the facts:

Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.


Now.....answer the questions:

What possible compelling government interest could this represent????


And, 2, how does this Liberal attack on the first amendment differ from what Stalin did:

"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more."



Admit it.....'Liberal' has become just a camouflage of fascism.

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

The law prevents tax free organizations from engaging in partisan politics if they want to keep their tax free status. It in no way relates to the anti religious Soviet law you describe.

Fascism has come to America wrapped in a flag.

"The law prevents tax free organizations from engaging in partisan politics ..."

1. What possible compelling government interest could this represent????




And, 2, how does this Liberal attack on the first amendment differ from what Stalin did:

"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more."





Just in case you've never read the first amendment....

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

'shall'....not 'should.'

'no law'.....not 'a few laws'


Can we agree that 'Liberal' is just another name for fascist?

 

[BlindBoo]

Without Point number 1. ".....Liberalism, whatever, to succeed, religion and belief in God must be banished from the public consciousness." the rest falls apart.

Liberals espouse freedom of religion.

You Liberals sure are afraid of the truth.


"Liberals espouse freedom of religion."

Let's check.


Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????



Sounds a lot like this:
"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more." " The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia," Richard Overy, p. 275



Liberals, the progeny of the Bolsheviks.

The restriction is actually a law, .....and it isn't exclusive to religious institutions.

Lyndon Johnson is best known as America's 36th president, the Texan who assumed the office when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963. Texas politics can be rough, and Johnson knew how to play that game. Therein lies the origin of the "Johnson amendment."

The restriction was championed by LBJ in 1954 when Johnson was a U.S. senator running for re-election. A conservative nonprofit group that wanted to limit the treaty-making ability of the president produced material that called for electing his primary opponent, millionaire rancher-oilman Dudley Dougherty, and defeating Johnson. There was no church involved.

Johnson, then Democratic minority leader, responded by introducing an amendment to Section 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code dealing with tax-exempt charitable organizations, including groups organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literacy and educational purposes, or to prevent cruelty to children or animals. It said, in effect, that if you want to be absolved from paying taxes, you couldn't be involved in partisan politics.

There was no record of any debate around the amendment.

"The logical argument favoring such an amendment is that those corporations qualifying for the section 501(c)(3) tax subsidy should not be permitted to directly or indirectly use that subsidy to support candidates for office," said Michael Hone in the Case Western article.

However it was likely, he said, that "Johnson was motivated by a desire to exact revenge on the foundation he believed supported his opponent and to prevent it and other nonprofit corporations from acting similarly in the future."

LBJ and the ban on political activity by religious groups

Wasn't Johnson a religious man?

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

Here are the facts:

Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.


Now.....answer the questions:

What possible compelling government interest could this represent????


And, 2, how does this Liberal attack on the first amendment differ from what Stalin did:

"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more."



Admit it.....'Liberal' has become just a camouflage of fascism.

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

The law prevents tax free organizations from engaging in partisan politics if they want to keep their tax free status. It in no way relates to the anti religious Soviet law you describe.

Fascism has come to America wrapped in a flag.

"The law prevents tax free organizations from engaging in partisan politics ..."

1. What possible compelling government interest could this represent????




And, 2, how does this Liberal attack on the first amendment differ from what Stalin did:

"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more."





Just in case you've never read the first amendment....

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

'shall'....not 'should.'

'no law'.....not 'a few laws'


Can we agree that 'Liberal' is just another name for fascist?

"It's important to note that the prohibition is not just restricted to religious institutions. It's nonprofit charitable organizations in general."

BTW in 1954 both the Presidency and Congress were controlled by Republicans.

Pastors To Protest IRS Rules on Political Advocacy

 

[PoliticalChic]

You Liberals sure are afraid of the truth.


"Liberals espouse freedom of religion."

Let's check.


Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????



Sounds a lot like this:
"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more." " The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia," Richard Overy, p. 275



Liberals, the progeny of the Bolsheviks.

The restriction is actually a law, .....and it isn't exclusive to religious institutions.

Lyndon Johnson is best known as America's 36th president, the Texan who assumed the office when John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963. Texas politics can be rough, and Johnson knew how to play that game. Therein lies the origin of the "Johnson amendment."

The restriction was championed by LBJ in 1954 when Johnson was a U.S. senator running for re-election. A conservative nonprofit group that wanted to limit the treaty-making ability of the president produced material that called for electing his primary opponent, millionaire rancher-oilman Dudley Dougherty, and defeating Johnson. There was no church involved.

Johnson, then Democratic minority leader, responded by introducing an amendment to Section 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code dealing with tax-exempt charitable organizations, including groups organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literacy and educational purposes, or to prevent cruelty to children or animals. It said, in effect, that if you want to be absolved from paying taxes, you couldn't be involved in partisan politics.

There was no record of any debate around the amendment.

"The logical argument favoring such an amendment is that those corporations qualifying for the section 501(c)(3) tax subsidy should not be permitted to directly or indirectly use that subsidy to support candidates for office," said Michael Hone in the Case Western article.

However it was likely, he said, that "Johnson was motivated by a desire to exact revenge on the foundation he believed supported his opponent and to prevent it and other nonprofit corporations from acting similarly in the future."

LBJ and the ban on political activity by religious groups

Wasn't Johnson a religious man?

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

Here are the facts:

Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.


Now.....answer the questions:

What possible compelling government interest could this represent????


And, 2, how does this Liberal attack on the first amendment differ from what Stalin did:

"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more."



Admit it.....'Liberal' has become just a camouflage of fascism.

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

The law prevents tax free organizations from engaging in partisan politics if they want to keep their tax free status. It in no way relates to the anti religious Soviet law you describe.

Fascism has come to America wrapped in a flag.

"The law prevents tax free organizations from engaging in partisan politics ..."

1. What possible compelling government interest could this represent????




And, 2, how does this Liberal attack on the first amendment differ from what Stalin did:

"Stalin was the driving force behind a magnified anti-religious campaign....an new law....8 April 1929...No religion was permitted any longer to engage in what was loosely called religious propaganda....Clerics were permitted to perform divine service and nothing more."





Just in case you've never read the first amendment....

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

'shall'....not 'should.'

'no law'.....not 'a few laws'


Can we agree that 'Liberal' is just another name for fascist?

"It's important to note that the prohibition is not just restricted to religious institutions. It's nonprofit charitable organizations in general."

BTW in 1954 both the Presidency and Congress were controlled by Republicans.

Pastors To Protest IRS Rules on Political Advocacy

Under Democrat/Liberal LBJ, the law was passed that deprived pastors of their right of free speech.
What possible compelling government interest could this represent????


Asked several times about the reason for this silencing of religious officials, you have patently ignored the query.

I'll assume it is because it proves exactly what I stated: Liberals oppose free speech, the Constitution, and the religious.


The witness is excused....you've served your purpose.


And, it fits seamlessly with the premise of this thread.
The Left needs to silence any who are believers.

 

[JoeB131]

Soooo.....we can agree that your attempt to change the subject indicates that, as is always the case.....every single thing in the OP is 100% correct, accurate and true?

No, your lack of reading comprehension skills really doesn't mean anything.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Soooo.....we can agree that your attempt to change the subject indicates that, as is always the case.....every single thing in the OP is 100% correct, accurate and true?

No, your lack of reading comprehension skills really doesn't mean anything.

Clearly this delusional person is perfectly content with just telling himself that we agree with him, whether it's true or not.