Dear Liberals: I Want a Divorce!

[Foxfyre]

Glossing over the obvious gaps just as expected. Liberal land gets all the academics except the ones who are looking for proof of the bible and the climate change deniers, good luck getting anything of commercial worth out of them.

No they don't get 'All the acedmics IF they are Conservative and CHOOSE to side with the settlement to our favour...but then a good number of inventors weren't acedemics at all but were good with life, with machinery, and saw a niche, and a need and THINKING... and thier understanding of practicality stood out and they changed the world.

Nice try..but press on, will you?

The machine age is over, the age of cybernetics and biology is already upon us and is not receiving a warm welcome in conservative circles. Also you know for a fact that huge areas of research would be off limits and certain subjects will be forbidden from all learning institutions. Any academic worth his sheepskin will be out of conservative land like a shot.

Hopefully all academics who got their sheepskin via liberal academia will find a happy home on your side of the border. We don't want them. Somehow I doubt this superior tolerance you are claiming for your side of academia will include allowing any arguments for intelligent design as put forth by Einstein and Spinoza, American exceptionalism, any unpolitically correct theories or concepts, or the merits of personal responsibility and accountability and the dangers in failure to hold people accountable for the choices they make. But that won't be our problem and the little liberals you will be creating will surely thrive in Liberalland.

We will keep those who have somehow managed to learn to think critically, who allow all theories and concepts to be fully explored, who demand that all of history, the good and the bad, be taught, and who do not condemn those who think outside the box or engage in theoretical exercises like this thread.

 

[Foxfyre]

Glossing over the obvious gaps just as expected. Liberal land gets all the academics except the ones who are looking for proof of the bible and the climate change deniers, good luck getting anything of commercial worth out of them.

God I hope so. We're perfectly willing for you to have all the liberal professors in modern day academia and all the pointy heads from the leftist media. We'll be most happy to take Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Star Parker, Shelby Steele, Charles Krauthammer, Brent Bozell, and all the others who understand and articulate conservatism so well. Ya'll think they are all idiots anyway, so you shouldn't mind at all if they don't come along with the academics who will certainly be more comfortable in Liberalland.

In fact, if we are all happy with the energy distribution, we can now move on to education and what each side wants to have from that.

Dropping another topic like a hot potatoe?

Not at all. I just assumed since you moved on to education that we had settled issues with division of energy. I was quite happy with the settlement. Did you have somethng to add to that?

 

[occupied]

In any liberal society education would be the top priority in planning for the future, there would be no forbidden areas of research or forbidden topics of discussion, Universities would still be state supported and teachers would finally enjoy the status they deserve.

 

[Foxfyre]

In any liberal society education would be the top priority in planning for the future, there would be no forbidden areas of research or forbidden topics of discussion, Universities would still be state supported and teachers would finally enjoy the status they deserve.

Oh well good. I am sooooo happy to see that you are coming around to at least being willing to look at intelligent design as a possibility, that you are willing to express the virtues of the traditional family. It will be refreshing to have it again taught how black people, for instance, were the most rapidly advancing group economically BEFORE the Great Society and all the government programs to 'help' them, and how they have lagged behind ever since.

All those things will be taught on the Conservative side. I am pleased that you are willing to have them taught in Liberalland too. They sure as hell aren't being taught in liberal universities now. You do understand that all of your colleagues probably won't appreciate your conservative point of view on that.

 

[The T]

In any liberal society education would be the top priority in planning for the future, there would be no forbidden areas of research or forbidden topics of discussion, Universities would still be state supported and teachers would finally enjoy the status they deserve.

As it would be in Conservativeland...and earned to boot.

 

[LoneLaugher]

No they don't get 'All the acedmics IF they are Conservative and CHOOSE to side with the settlement to our favour...but then a good number of inventors weren't acedemics at all but were good with life, with machinery, and saw a niche, and a need and THINKING... and thier understanding of practicality stood out and they changed the world.

Nice try..but press on, will you?

The machine age is over, the age of cybernetics and biology is already upon us and is not receiving a warm welcome in conservative circles. Also you know for a fact that huge areas of research would be off limits and certain subjects will be forbidden from all learning institutions. Any academic worth his sheepskin will be out of conservative land like a shot.

Hopefully all academics who got their sheepskin via liberal academia will find a happy home on your side of the border. We don't want them. Somehow I doubt this superior tolerance you are claiming for your side of academia will include allowing any arguments for intelligent design as put forth by Einstein and Spinoza, American exceptionalism, any unpolitically correct theories or concepts, or the merits of personal responsibility and accountability and the dangers in failure to hold people accountable for the choices they make. But that won't be our problem and the little liberals you will be creating will surely thrive in Liberalland.

We will keep those who have somehow managed to learn to think critically, who allow all theories and concepts to be fully explored, who demand that all of history, the good and the bad, be taught, and who do not condemn those who think outside the box or engage in theoretical exercises like this thread.

You really believe that you think critically while the liberals here don't ( or can't ).

You actually believe that you have "dibs" on the USC and that liberals do not hold that document in high regard.

You honestly believe that conservative historians are determined to tell the whole story while liberal historians cherry pick the data.

You think our unwillingness to join you in this fucked up "exercise" is due to our not being able to fathom life without you there to keep us from harming ourselves?

What an outstanding display of arrogance you have put on for us.

 

[occupied]

In any liberal society education would be the top priority in planning for the future, there would be no forbidden areas of research or forbidden topics of discussion, Universities would still be state supported and teachers would finally enjoy the status they deserve.

Oh well good. I am sooooo happy to see that you are coming around to at least being willing to look at intelligent design as a possibility, that you are willing to express the virtues of the traditional family. It will be refreshing to have it again taught how black people, for instance, were the most rapidly advancing group economically BEFORE the Great Society and all the government programs to 'help' them, and how they have lagged behind ever since.

All those things will be taught on the Conservative side. I am pleased that you are willing to have them taught in Liberalland too. They sure as hell aren't being taught in liberal universities now. You do understand that all of your colleagues probably won't appreciate your conservative point of view on that.

You have me all wrong there, spurious theories meant to satisfy religious fanatics are certainly open to discussion but they are equally open to rejection based on it's merits and never brought up again, not forced on a curriculum and propped up by political pressure. It would be funny to see conservative land commission wax figures of Jesus and the prophets for the natural history museum to ride the mechanical dinosaurs.

 

[Foxfyre]

The machine age is over, the age of cybernetics and biology is already upon us and is not receiving a warm welcome in conservative circles. Also you know for a fact that huge areas of research would be off limits and certain subjects will be forbidden from all learning institutions. Any academic worth his sheepskin will be out of conservative land like a shot.

Hopefully all academics who got their sheepskin via liberal academia will find a happy home on your side of the border. We don't want them. Somehow I doubt this superior tolerance you are claiming for your side of academia will include allowing any arguments for intelligent design as put forth by Einstein and Spinoza, American exceptionalism, any unpolitically correct theories or concepts, or the merits of personal responsibility and accountability and the dangers in failure to hold people accountable for the choices they make. But that won't be our problem and the little liberals you will be creating will surely thrive in Liberalland.

We will keep those who have somehow managed to learn to think critically, who allow all theories and concepts to be fully explored, who demand that all of history, the good and the bad, be taught, and who do not condemn those who think outside the box or engage in theoretical exercises like this thread.

You really believe that you think critically while the liberals here don't ( or can't ).

You actually believe that you have "dibs" on the USC and that liberals do not hold that document in high regard.

You honestly believe that conservative historians are determined to tell the whole story while liberal historians cherry pick the data.

You think our unwillingness to join you in this fucked up "exercise" is due to our not being able to fathom life without you there to keep us from harming ourselves?

What an outstanding display of arrogance you have put on for us.

No I think your unwillingness to join us in this excercise just underscores your dullness, lack of humor, lack of ability to think critically or creatively, your inability to see or think outside of your tunnel visioned brainwashed partisanship, and your intense contempt and hatred for anything that doesn't fit inside your tiny view of the world.

But that's just me.

I assume that you liberals don't want any of those things you mentioned or other things that are going to the Conservative side because not one of you has expressed a syllable of appreciation for any of them or have articulated a single rationale for why they fit in with your liberal concepts of how the world should be.

At least Occupied is doing his damndest to try to grasp the concept of the exercise and every once in awhile he almost succeeds. Unfortunately, right now he is being ganged up on pretty badly because so far he is the only liberal that seems to have the ability to even try.

 

[kwc57]

Glossing over the obvious gaps just as expected. Liberal land gets all the academics except the ones who are looking for proof of the bible and the climate change deniers, good luck getting anything of commercial worth out of them.

No they don't get 'All the acedmics IF they are Conservative and CHOOSE to side with the settlement to our favour...but then a good number of inventors weren't acedemics at all but were good with life, with machinery, and saw a niche, and a need and THINKING... and thier understanding of practicality stood out and they changed the world.

Nice try..but press on, will you?

The machine age is over, the age of cybernetics and biology is already upon us and is not receiving a warm welcome in conservative circles. Also you know for a fact that huge areas of research would be off limits and certain subjects will be forbidden from all learning institutions. Any academic worth his sheepskin will be out of conservative land like a shot.

Actually, you are mistaking "social conservatives" with conservatives. I already addressed that with you in an earlier post. They like liberals, are statists that want to legislate and control people's lives. There are plenty of conservative academic and scientific types outside of the small minority in the religious right. While their controlling ways are more in line with you, we'll take and tolerate the "conservative" wignuts since the liberal wingnuts will be going with you.

 

[kwc57]

In any liberal society education would be the top priority in planning for the future, there would be no forbidden areas of research or forbidden topics of discussion, Universities would still be state supported and teachers would finally enjoy the status they deserve.

State supported schools teach state approved cirriculum. They will teach you what they want you to know.

 

[occupied]

Hopefully all academics who got their sheepskin via liberal academia will find a happy home on your side of the border. We don't want them. Somehow I doubt this superior tolerance you are claiming for your side of academia will include allowing any arguments for intelligent design as put forth by Einstein and Spinoza, American exceptionalism, any unpolitically correct theories or concepts, or the merits of personal responsibility and accountability and the dangers in failure to hold people accountable for the choices they make. But that won't be our problem and the little liberals you will be creating will surely thrive in Liberalland.

We will keep those who have somehow managed to learn to think critically, who allow all theories and concepts to be fully explored, who demand that all of history, the good and the bad, be taught, and who do not condemn those who think outside the box or engage in theoretical exercises like this thread.

You really believe that you think critically while the liberals here don't ( or can't ).

You actually believe that you have "dibs" on the USC and that liberals do not hold that document in high regard.

You honestly believe that conservative historians are determined to tell the whole story while liberal historians cherry pick the data.

You think our unwillingness to join you in this fucked up "exercise" is due to our not being able to fathom life without you there to keep us from harming ourselves?

What an outstanding display of arrogance you have put on for us.

No I think your unwillingness to join us in this excercise just underscores your dullness, lack of humor, lack of ability to think critically or creatively, your inability to see or think outside of your tunnel visioned brainwashed partisanship, and your intense contempt and hatred for anything that doesn't fit inside your tiny view of the world.

But that's just me.

I assume that you liberals don't want any of those things you mentioned or other things that are going to the Conservative side because not one of you has expressed a syllable of appreciation for any of them or have articulated a single rationale for why they fit in with your liberal concepts of how the world should be.

At least Occupied is doing his damndest to try to grasp the concept of the exercise and every once in awhile he almost succeeds. Unfortunately, right now he is being ganged up on pretty badly because so far he is the only liberal that seems to have the ability to even try.

Ganging up on the liberals has been the point of this exercise from the start, you are not fooling anyone with the nice act, also the irony of someone claiming to be an eternal optimist selling such a defeatist plan as secession is pretty delicious.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Hopefully all academics who got their sheepskin via liberal academia will find a happy home on your side of the border. We don't want them. Somehow I doubt this superior tolerance you are claiming for your side of academia will include allowing any arguments for intelligent design as put forth by Einstein and Spinoza, American exceptionalism, any unpolitically correct theories or concepts, or the merits of personal responsibility and accountability and the dangers in failure to hold people accountable for the choices they make. But that won't be our problem and the little liberals you will be creating will surely thrive in Liberalland.

We will keep those who have somehow managed to learn to think critically, who allow all theories and concepts to be fully explored, who demand that all of history, the good and the bad, be taught, and who do not condemn those who think outside the box or engage in theoretical exercises like this thread.

You really believe that you think critically while the liberals here don't ( or can't ).

You actually believe that you have "dibs" on the USC and that liberals do not hold that document in high regard.

You honestly believe that conservative historians are determined to tell the whole story while liberal historians cherry pick the data.

You think our unwillingness to join you in this fucked up "exercise" is due to our not being able to fathom life without you there to keep us from harming ourselves?

What an outstanding display of arrogance you have put on for us.

No I think your unwillingness to join us in this excercise just underscores your dullness, lack of humor, lack of ability to think critically or creatively, your inability to see or think outside of your tunnel visioned brainwashed partisanship, and your intense contempt and hatred for anything that doesn't fit inside your tiny view of the world.

But that's just me.

I assume that you liberals don't want any of those things you mentioned or other things that are going to the Conservative side because not one of you has expressed a syllable of appreciation for any of them or have articulated a single rationale for why they fit in with your liberal concepts of how the world should be.

At least Occupied is doing his damndest to try to grasp the concept of the exercise and every once in awhile he almost succeeds. Unfortunately, right now he is being ganged up on pretty badly because so far he is the only liberal that seems to have the ability to even try.

Again.........the OP is full of horseshit falsehoods regarding what liberals want and believe. In order to play your game, we have to accept them. They are false and therefore unacceptable.

And....please stop talking about others lack of creativity and humor when the OP is NOT ORIGINAL content. You did not create it.

Create your own divorce agreement and maybe I'll spend a few minutes putting you in your place.

 

[kwc57]

The machine age is over, the age of cybernetics and biology is already upon us and is not receiving a warm welcome in conservative circles. Also you know for a fact that huge areas of research would be off limits and certain subjects will be forbidden from all learning institutions. Any academic worth his sheepskin will be out of conservative land like a shot.

Hopefully all academics who got their sheepskin via liberal academia will find a happy home on your side of the border. We don't want them. Somehow I doubt this superior tolerance you are claiming for your side of academia will include allowing any arguments for intelligent design as put forth by Einstein and Spinoza, American exceptionalism, any unpolitically correct theories or concepts, or the merits of personal responsibility and accountability and the dangers in failure to hold people accountable for the choices they make. But that won't be our problem and the little liberals you will be creating will surely thrive in Liberalland.

We will keep those who have somehow managed to learn to think critically, who allow all theories and concepts to be fully explored, who demand that all of history, the good and the bad, be taught, and who do not condemn those who think outside the box or engage in theoretical exercises like this thread.

You really believe that you think critically while the liberals here don't ( or can't ).

You actually believe that you have "dibs" on the USC and that liberals do not hold that document in high regard.

You honestly believe that conservative historians are determined to tell the whole story while liberal historians cherry pick the data.

You think our unwillingness to join you in this fucked up "exercise" is due to our not being able to fathom life without you there to keep us from harming ourselves?

What an outstanding display of arrogance you have put on for us.

You obviously don't care for the fare in our fine establishment. The door is to your left laughingstock.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Hopefully all academics who got their sheepskin via liberal academia will find a happy home on your side of the border. We don't want them. Somehow I doubt this superior tolerance you are claiming for your side of academia will include allowing any arguments for intelligent design as put forth by Einstein and Spinoza, American exceptionalism, any unpolitically correct theories or concepts, or the merits of personal responsibility and accountability and the dangers in failure to hold people accountable for the choices they make. But that won't be our problem and the little liberals you will be creating will surely thrive in Liberalland.

We will keep those who have somehow managed to learn to think critically, who allow all theories and concepts to be fully explored, who demand that all of history, the good and the bad, be taught, and who do not condemn those who think outside the box or engage in theoretical exercises like this thread.

You really believe that you think critically while the liberals here don't ( or can't ).

You actually believe that you have "dibs" on the USC and that liberals do not hold that document in high regard.

You honestly believe that conservative historians are determined to tell the whole story while liberal historians cherry pick the data.

You think our unwillingness to join you in this fucked up "exercise" is due to our not being able to fathom life without you there to keep us from harming ourselves?

What an outstanding display of arrogance you have put on for us.

You obviously don't care for the fare in our fine establishment. The door is to your left laughingstock.

What's the matter, bitch? Feeling a bit inferior all of sudden? Want the icky liberal with those nasty salient points to leave the discussion? Poor baby.

 

[occupied]

You really believe that you think critically while the liberals here don't ( or can't ).

You actually believe that you have "dibs" on the USC and that liberals do not hold that document in high regard.

You honestly believe that conservative historians are determined to tell the whole story while liberal historians cherry pick the data.

You think our unwillingness to join you in this fucked up "exercise" is due to our not being able to fathom life without you there to keep us from harming ourselves?

What an outstanding display of arrogance you have put on for us.

You obviously don't care for the fare in our fine establishment. The door is to your left laughingstock.

What's the matter, bitch? Feeling a bit inferior all of sudden? Want the icky liberal with those nasty salient points to leave the discussion? Poor baby.

He has already told me to leave the thread or the country a couple of times because I keep bringing up uncomfortable questions about this insultingly simplistic approach to solving the problems we have, it's the King Solomon solution and look who is opposed to cutting the baby in two.

 

[Foxfyre]

In any liberal society education would be the top priority in planning for the future, there would be no forbidden areas of research or forbidden topics of discussion, Universities would still be state supported and teachers would finally enjoy the status they deserve.

Oh well good. I am sooooo happy to see that you are coming around to at least being willing to look at intelligent design as a possibility, that you are willing to express the virtues of the traditional family. It will be refreshing to have it again taught how black people, for instance, were the most rapidly advancing group economically BEFORE the Great Society and all the government programs to 'help' them, and how they have lagged behind ever since.

All those things will be taught on the Conservative side. I am pleased that you are willing to have them taught in Liberalland too. They sure as hell aren't being taught in liberal universities now. You do understand that all of your colleagues probably won't appreciate your conservative point of view on that.

You have me all wrong there, spurious theories meant to satisfy religious fanatics are certainly open to discussion but they are equally open to rejection based on it's merits and never brought up again, not forced on a curriculum and propped up by political pressure. It would be funny to see conservative land commission wax figures of Jesus and the prophets for the natural history museum to ride the mechanical dinosaurs.

Neither Spinoza or Einstein entertained any religious fantasies of any kind; neither believed in a personal God and neither were religious in any sense. And yet both had open minds when it came to the concept of some sort of intelligence guiding processes in the universe that we can observe and experience. It is THAT which should be entertained by all who have an open mind whether or not they ultimately reject it as implausible or keep an open mind as to the possibilities in it. And if for no other reason than due to the great scientists who entertained the idea, it should not be taught as science but it should not be taboo in academia.

Many conservatives do believe in Jesus; many do not. In Conservativeland he, as well as other great religious figures, would be included in appropriate religious studies, and any honest history of the world has to include the influence of JudeoChristianity, Islam, and other religions. Conservatives know the difference between history and religion, but most Conservatives will not make a child's religion unwelcome in school or attempt to destroy or deny or exclude his/her faith.

Traditional Christmas carols spanning up to two hundred years will be legal in most Conservative Christmas programs at school and the great music of Handel, Brahms, Mendelssohn, Mozart, and Bach will be included in the music curriculum again. Such was the case when many of us were growing up before liberalism drove all religion out of the schools and no theocracy developed, no religious teachings were imposed upon any student, and nobody objected to everyday normal expressions of religion by anybody.

 

[Foxfyre]

You really believe that you think critically while the liberals here don't ( or can't ).

You actually believe that you have "dibs" on the USC and that liberals do not hold that document in high regard.

You honestly believe that conservative historians are determined to tell the whole story while liberal historians cherry pick the data.

You think our unwillingness to join you in this fucked up "exercise" is due to our not being able to fathom life without you there to keep us from harming ourselves?

What an outstanding display of arrogance you have put on for us.

No I think your unwillingness to join us in this excercise just underscores your dullness, lack of humor, lack of ability to think critically or creatively, your inability to see or think outside of your tunnel visioned brainwashed partisanship, and your intense contempt and hatred for anything that doesn't fit inside your tiny view of the world.

But that's just me.

I assume that you liberals don't want any of those things you mentioned or other things that are going to the Conservative side because not one of you has expressed a syllable of appreciation for any of them or have articulated a single rationale for why they fit in with your liberal concepts of how the world should be.

At least Occupied is doing his damndest to try to grasp the concept of the exercise and every once in awhile he almost succeeds. Unfortunately, right now he is being ganged up on pretty badly because so far he is the only liberal that seems to have the ability to even try.

Ganging up on the liberals has been the point of this exercise from the start, you are not fooling anyone with the nice act, also the irony of someone claiming to be an eternal optimist selling such a defeatist plan as secession is pretty delicious.

Ah you made me sorry that I misjudged you and complimented you. My bad. I thought you really had gotten into the spirit of the concept. Guess not. You still can't separate a theoretical exercise from what is real. A pity too, but it seems to be a very relilient characteristic of liberalism.

 

[occupied]

Oh well good. I am sooooo happy to see that you are coming around to at least being willing to look at intelligent design as a possibility, that you are willing to express the virtues of the traditional family. It will be refreshing to have it again taught how black people, for instance, were the most rapidly advancing group economically BEFORE the Great Society and all the government programs to 'help' them, and how they have lagged behind ever since.

All those things will be taught on the Conservative side. I am pleased that you are willing to have them taught in Liberalland too. They sure as hell aren't being taught in liberal universities now. You do understand that all of your colleagues probably won't appreciate your conservative point of view on that.

You have me all wrong there, spurious theories meant to satisfy religious fanatics are certainly open to discussion but they are equally open to rejection based on it's merits and never brought up again, not forced on a curriculum and propped up by political pressure. It would be funny to see conservative land commission wax figures of Jesus and the prophets for the natural history museum to ride the mechanical dinosaurs.

Neither Spinoza or Einstein entertained any religious fantasies of any kind; neither believed in a personal God and neither were religious in any sense. And yet both had open minds when it came to the concept of some sort of intelligence guiding processes in the universe that we can observe and experience. It is THAT which should be entertained by all who have an open mind whether or not they ultimately reject it as implausible or keep an open mind as to the possibilities in it. And if for no other reason than due to the great scientists who entertained the idea, it should not be taught as science but it should not be taboo in academia.

Many conservatives do believe in Jesus; many do not. In Conservativeland he, as well as other great religious figures, would be included in appropriate religious studies, and any honest history of the world has to include the influence of JudeoChristianity, Islam, and other religions. Conservatives know the difference between history and religion, but most Conservatives will not make a child's religion unwelcome in school or attempt to destroy or deny or exclude his/her faith.

Traditional Christmas carols spanning up to two hundred years will be legal in most Conservative Christmas programs at school and the great music of Handel, Brahms, Mendelssohn, Mozart, and Bach will be included in the music curriculum again. Such was the case when many of us were growing up before liberalism drove all religion out of the schools and no theocracy developed, no religious teachings were imposed upon any student, and nobody objected to everyday normal expressions of religion by anybody.

Seems you have a lot of faith in the fairness of people who have repeatedly resorted to some pretty evil things in the name of defining us as a christian nation. Dominionists are not interested in any kind of objective comparative theology and yet you talk as if they would be just fine with allowing anything other than christian dogma to come in contact with any young mind. Think Taliban with a suit and tie.

 

[occupied]

No I think your unwillingness to join us in this excercise just underscores your dullness, lack of humor, lack of ability to think critically or creatively, your inability to see or think outside of your tunnel visioned brainwashed partisanship, and your intense contempt and hatred for anything that doesn't fit inside your tiny view of the world.

But that's just me.

I assume that you liberals don't want any of those things you mentioned or other things that are going to the Conservative side because not one of you has expressed a syllable of appreciation for any of them or have articulated a single rationale for why they fit in with your liberal concepts of how the world should be.

At least Occupied is doing his damndest to try to grasp the concept of the exercise and every once in awhile he almost succeeds. Unfortunately, right now he is being ganged up on pretty badly because so far he is the only liberal that seems to have the ability to even try.

Ganging up on the liberals has been the point of this exercise from the start, you are not fooling anyone with the nice act, also the irony of someone claiming to be an eternal optimist selling such a defeatist plan as secession is pretty delicious.

Ah you made me sorry that I misjudged you and complimented you. My bad. I thought you really had gotten into the spirit of the concept. Guess not. You still can't separate a theoretical exercise from what is real. A pity too, but it seems to be a very relilient characteristic of liberalism.

You misjudged me because you have not been paying attention to my comments, I have not been misrepresenting my position in any way. If it seemed I playing along it was because you were finally addressing the net harm it would cause.

 

[Foxfyre]

You have me all wrong there, spurious theories meant to satisfy religious fanatics are certainly open to discussion but they are equally open to rejection based on it's merits and never brought up again, not forced on a curriculum and propped up by political pressure. It would be funny to see conservative land commission wax figures of Jesus and the prophets for the natural history museum to ride the mechanical dinosaurs.

Neither Spinoza or Einstein entertained any religious fantasies of any kind; neither believed in a personal God and neither were religious in any sense. And yet both had open minds when it came to the concept of some sort of intelligence guiding processes in the universe that we can observe and experience. It is THAT which should be entertained by all who have an open mind whether or not they ultimately reject it as implausible or keep an open mind as to the possibilities in it. And if for no other reason than due to the great scientists who entertained the idea, it should not be taught as science but it should not be taboo in academia.

Many conservatives do believe in Jesus; many do not. In Conservativeland he, as well as other great religious figures, would be included in appropriate religious studies, and any honest history of the world has to include the influence of JudeoChristianity, Islam, and other religions. Conservatives know the difference between history and religion, but most Conservatives will not make a child's religion unwelcome in school or attempt to destroy or deny or exclude his/her faith.

Traditional Christmas carols spanning up to two hundred years will be legal in most Conservative Christmas programs at school and the great music of Handel, Brahms, Mendelssohn, Mozart, and Bach will be included in the music curriculum again. Such was the case when many of us were growing up before liberalism drove all religion out of the schools and no theocracy developed, no religious teachings were imposed upon any student, and nobody objected to everyday normal expressions of religion by anybody.

Seems you have a lot of faith in the fairness of people who have repeatedly resorted to some pretty evil things in the name of defining us as a christian nation. Dominionists are not interested in any kind of objective comparative theology and yet you talk as if they would be just fine with allowing anything other than christian dogma to come in contact with any young mind. Think Taliban with a suit and tie.

That is one of the differences between conservatism and liberalism. Conservatism looks at ALL the history, the good and the bad, the heroes and the villains, the saints and the sinners, and learns from the study. Liberalism tends to cherry pick any negative they can find and uses that to denigrate and/or attack something that they don't like while denying or ignoring any positives that also exist. Conservatism allows complete freedom of thought and does not attempt to regulate that by selectively including only the politically correct version in curriculum. Conservatism trusts human liberty to produce a better world than any that government would direct or mandate; therefore it does not fear allowing students to explore all possibilities of a concept. Conservatism trusts a mind taught to thnk critically to choose the best options out of many offered.

Liberalism seems to attempt to indoctrinate students by limiting what they are allowed to see, think about, express.

And that is why I am most happy to assign all the liberal academics to your side.