# A "warning" about Rick Perry



## weebiscuit (Aug 14, 2011)

Perry's handlers are proclaiming how much job growth there was in Texas under his governorship, but what they don't tell us is that most of those jobs are government jobs and have to do with the defense industry. These were not jobs largely created in the private sector.

Also, if you are happy to see Perry throw his hat in the ring, please read this "warning" about him from the Republican Liberty Caucus, which says in part "The file on Perry’s abuses of power, insider deals with cronies and tax and spend policies is thick, but for a start here are what Texas RLC members voted as the top five Perry scandals which GOP primary voters need to know more about:" http://www.rlc.org/2011/08/12/texas-rlc-sends-out-warning-on-rick-perry/


----------



## CharlesFamily (Aug 14, 2011)

Hmmm....seems he shares some similarities with Republican Ohio Governor John Kasich.

This is from the article on Perry. RLC of Texas Chairman Judson Vandiver asks, “Let’s hope Republicans outside Texas see through all the hype. Let’s all say to to Perry what he said to a Texas state trooper when he tried to bully her after she pulled him over for speeding

: ‘Why don’t you just let us get on down the road?’”
And this from our esteemed governor here in Ohio:

John Kasich calls police officer "idiot."

Barbara


----------



## Jill (Aug 14, 2011)

Really liking him so far and I loved his announcement yesterday (every single word of it).

I've seen footage over the year of Perry traveling for meetings re: bringing jobs to his state. He said something to the effect that is one of the biggest parts of his job. Love it.

Not in favor of bigger government BUT I am in favor of not cutting defense and even possibly increasing spending there -- not to really continue to spend it as we have been necessarily and to spend it SMART -- but to keep it a BIG part of our budget. Without a strong National defense, we may be "relieved" of an economy and jobs market with which to be concerned.

Don't know enough to say he's got my vote, but I am personally very happy to see him as an official option AND I am happy that Michelle Bachmann won the straw poll yesterday.

It's been an exciting few days to be a Conservative voter.


----------



## Jill (Aug 14, 2011)

_*Here is the full transcript of Perry's announcment:*_

Howdy. Thank you, Erick (Erickson, editor of RedState). It is great to be at RedState. And I'll tell you what, it's even better to be governor of the largest red state in America.
​


It's sure good to be back in the Palmetto State, in South Carolina. I enjoy coming to places where people elect folks like Nikki Haley, true conservatives. And also where they love the greatest fighting force on the face of the earth…the United States Military.
​


And I want to take a moment and ask you to just take a silence, think about those young Navy SEALs and the other special operators who gave it all in the service of their country. Just take a moment to say Thank you, Lord, that we have those kind of selfless, sacrificial men and women.
​


Their sacrifice was immeasurable, their dedication profound, and we will never, ever forget them.
​


I stand before you today as the governor of Texas. But I also stand before you the son of two
​

tenant farmers, Ray Perry, who came home after 35 bombing missions over Europe to work his little corner of land out there, and Amelia who made sure my sister Milla and I had everything that we needed, including hand-sewing my clothes until I went off to college.
​


I am also the product of a place called Paint Creek. Doesn't have a zip code. It's too small to be called a town along the rolling plains of Texas. We grew dryland cotton and wheat, and when I wasn't farming or attending Paint Creek Rural School, I was generally over at Troop 48 working on my Eagle Scout award.
​


Around the age of 8, I was blessed – didn't realize it, but I was blessed to meet my future wife, Anita Thigpen, at a piano recital. We had our first date eight years later. And she finally agreed to marry me 16 years after that. Nobody says I am not persistent.

 

There is no greater way to live life than with someone you love, and my first love is with us today, my lovely wife Anita. We're also blessed to have two incredible children, Griffin and Sydney, and they are also with us today, and our wonderful daughter-in-law Meredith. I'd just like to introduce those two. Thank you.
​


What I learned growing up on the farm was a way of life that was centered on hard work, and on faith and on thrift. Those values have stuck with me my whole life. But it wasn't until I graduated from Texas A&M University and joined the United States Air Force, flying C-130's all around the globe, that I truly appreciated the blessings of freedom.
​


To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, I realized that the United States of America really is the last great hope of mankind. What I saw was systems of government that elevated rulers at the expense of the people. Socialist systems cloaked maybe in good intentions but were delivering misery and stagnation. And I learned that not everyone values life like we do in America, or the rights that are endowed to every human being by a loving God.
​


You see, as Americans we're not defined by class, and we will never be told our place. What makes our nation exceptional is that anyone, from any background, can climb the highest of heights. As Americans, we don't see the role of government as guaranteeing outcomes, but allowing free men and women to flourish based on their own vision, their hard work and their personal responsibility. And as Americans, we realize there is no taxpayer money that wasn't first earned by the sweat and toil of one of our citizens.
​


That's why we reject this President's unbridled fixation on taking more money out of the wallets and pocketbooks of American families and employers and giving it to a central government.
​


"Spreading the wealth" punishes success while setting America on course to greater dependency on government. Washington's insatiable desire to spend our children's inheritance on failed "stimulus" plans and other misguided economic theories have given us record debt and left us with far too many unemployed.
​


But of course, now we're told we are in recovery. Yeah.
​


But this sure doesn't feel like a recovery to more than nine percent of Americans out there who are unemployed, or the sixteen percent of African Americans and 11 percent of Hispanics in the same position, or the millions more who can only find part-time work, or those who have stopped even looking for a job.
​


One in six work-eligible Americans cannot find a full-time job. That is not a recovery. That is an economic disaster.
​


If you think about it, for those Americans who do have full-time jobs, they aren't experiencing economic recovery with the rising fuel costs and the food prices that are going up. Recovery is a meaningless word if the bank has foreclosed on your home, if you are under water on your mortgage, or if you are up to the max on your credit card debt. Those Americans know that this President and his big-spending, big-government policies have prolonged our national misery, not alleviated it.
​

And what do we say to our children? Y'all figure it out? Don't worry, Washington's created 17 debt and entitlement commissions in 30 years, but the fact of the matter is they just didn't have the courage to make the decisions to allow you to have the future that you actually deserve? That Washington wouldn't even make modest entitlement program reforms in this last debate? And the President even refused to lay out a plan, for fear of the next election? How can the wealthiest nation in the history of civilization fail so miserably to pay its bills? How does that happen?
​


Well, Mr. President, let us tell you something: you can't win the future by selling America off to foreign creditors.
​


We cannot afford four more years of this rudderless leadership. Last week, that leadership failed, and the tax and spend and borrow agenda of this President led to the first ever downgrade of the credit rating of the United States of America.
​


In reality though, this is just the most recent downgrade. The fact is for nearly three years President Obama has been downgrading American jobs. He's been downgrading our standing in the world. He's been downgrading our financial stability. He's been downgrading our confidence, and downgrading the hope for a better future for our children. That's a fact.
​


His policies are not only a threat to this economy, so are his appointees – a threat. You see he stacked the National Labor Relations Board with anti-business cronies who want to dictate to a private company, Boeing, where they can build a plant. No president, no president should kill jobs in South Carolina, or any other state for that matter, simply because they choose to go to a right-to-work state.
​


You see, when the Obama Administration is not stifling economic growth with over-regulation, they are achieving the same through their reckless spending. Debt is not only a threat to our economy, but also to our security.
​


America's standing in the world is in peril, not only because of disastrous economic policies, but from the incoherent muddle that they call foreign policy. Our president has insulted our friends and he's encouraged our enemies, thumbing his nose at traditional allies like Israel. He seeks to dictate new borders for the Middle East and the oldest democracy there, Israel, while he is anabject failure in his constitutional duty to protect our borders in the United States.
​


His foreign policy seems to be based on alienating our traditional allies, while basing our domestic agenda on importing those failed Western European social values. We don't need a president who apologizes for America. We need a president who protects and projects those values.
​

Look, it's pretty simple: we're going to stand with those who stand with us, and we will vigorously defend our interests. And those who threaten our interests, harm our citizens – we will simply not be scolding you, we will defeat you.
​


Our nation cannot and it must not endure four more years of aimless foreign policy. We cannot and must not endure four more years of rising unemployment, rising taxes, rising debt, rising energy dependence on nations that intend us harm.

 

It is time to get America working again. To get citizens – to get our citizens working in good jobs and getting the government to working for the people again. 
​


Page one of any economic plan to get America working is to give a pink slip to the current resident in the White House.
​


Listen, we just got to get back to the basic truths of economic success. As Governor, I've had to deal with the consequences of this national recession. In 2003, and again this year, my state faced billions of dollars in budget shortfalls. But we worked hard, we made tough decisions, we balanced our budget. Not by raising taxes, but by setting priorities and cutting government spending. It can and it must be done in Washington, DC.
​


Dr. Schwertner (State Representative, R-Williamson County, TX), we have led Texas based on some just really pretty simple guiding principles. One is don't spend all of the money. Two is keeping the taxes low and under control. Three is you have your regulatory climate fair and predictable. Four is reform the legal system so frivolous lawsuits don't paralyze employers that are trying to create jobs.
​


Over the years, we have followed this recipe to produce the strongest economy in the nation. Since June of 2009, Texas is responsible for more than 40 percent of all of the new jobs created in America.
​


Now think about that. We're home to less than 10 percent of the population in America, but forty percent of all the new jobs were created in that state.
​


I've cut taxes. I have delivered historic property tax reductions. I was the first governor since World War II to cut general revenue spending in our state budget. We passed lawsuit reform, including just this last session a "loser pays" law to stop the frivolous lawsuits that were happening.
​


And I know I've talked a lot about Texas here in the last little bit. I'm a Texan and proud of it. But first, and foremost, I'm an incredibly proud American.
​


And I know something: America is not broken. Washington, D.C., is broken!
​


We need balanced budgets. We need lower taxes. We need less regulation. And we need civil justice reform – those same four principles. Our country's most urgent need is to revitalize our economy, stop the generational theft that is going on with this record debt.
​


I come to South Carolina because I will not sit back and accept the path that America is on. Because a great country requires a better direction. Because a renewed nation needs a new president.
​


It is time to get America working again. And that's why, with the support of my family, and an unwavering belief in the goodness of America, I declare to you today as a candidate for President of the United States.

 

It's time for America to believe again. It's time to believe that the promise of our future is far greater than even our best days behind us. It's time to believe again in the potential of private enterprise, set free from the shackles of overbearing federal government. And it's time to truly restore our standing in the world, and renew our faith in freedom as the best hope for peace in this world that's beset with strife.
​


The change we seek will never emanate out of Washington, D.C. It will come from the windswept prairies of Middle America, the farms and factories across this great land, from the hearts and minds of the goodhearted Americans who will accept not a future that is less than our past, patriots – patriots who will not be consigned to a fate of less freedom in exchange for more government.
​


We do not have to accept our current circumstances. We will change them. We are Americans.
​


That's what we do. We roll up our sleeves. We go to work. We fix things. We stand up and proudly proclaim that Washington is not our caretaker and we reject the state that, in Margaret Thatcher's words, she said a state that takes too much from us in order to do too much for us. We will not stand for that any longer.
​


We're dismayed at the injustice that nearly half of all Americans don't even pay any income tax.
​


And you know the liberals out there are saying that we need to pay more. We are indignant about leaders who do not listen and spend money faster than they can print it.
​


In America, the people are not subjects of government. The government is subject to the people. And it is up to us, to this present generation of Americans, to take a stand for freedom, to send a message to Washington that we're taking our future back from the grips of central planners who would control our healthcare, who would spend our treasure, who downgrade our future and micro-manage our lives.
​


It is time to limit and simplify the taxes in this country. We have to quit spending money we don't have. We need to get our fiscal house in order and restore our good credit. And we will repeal this President's misguided, one-size-fits-all government healthcare plan immediately.
​


We'll create jobs. We'll get America working again. We'll create jobs and we'll build wealth, we'll truly educate and innovate in science, and in technology, engineering and math. We'll create the jobs and the progress needed to get America working again.
​


And I'll promise you this: I'll work every day to make Washington, D.C. as inconsequential in your life as I can. And at the same time, we'll be freeing our families and small businesses and states from the burdensome and costly federal government so those groups can create, innovate and succeed.
​


I believe in America. I believe in Her purpose and Her promise. I believe Her best days have not yet been lived. I believe Her greatest deeds are reserved for the generations to come. With the help and the courage of the American people, we will get our country working again.
​


​

God bless you and God bless the United States of America.

 

 

 
​


----------



## Jill (Aug 14, 2011)

And the video




:yeah





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSCiWQRtq4o


----------



## Pepipony (Aug 14, 2011)

Being in Texas, I see local news that isnt national, so its not odd that 'they' dont see what we do here. Perry 'balanced' the texas budget using stimulus money. He also used creative bookeeping, putting this years bills on the to pay list in a few years, so that this year shows balanced. The 'created' jobs are also in the gas/oil industry. Its not like he went out and courted companies to come here.

Most importantly, dont forget this is the 'Governor' who wanted to secede from the U.S. That in itself isnt something I would want in a President.


----------



## Jill (Aug 15, 2011)

Believe it or not, I'm actually a Texan (by birth)... I'm pretty near ready to order my Rick Perry bumper stickers


----------



## weebiscuit (Aug 16, 2011)

Jill said:


> Believe it or not, I'm actually a Texan (by birth)... I'm pretty near ready to order my Rick Perry bumper stickers


Jill, you seem like a smart and savvy lady, so I guess I'm just a bit stunned that you are all gaga over Perry. What is it, exactly, that you like about him? After hearing from people who actually lived in Texas during his reign as governor, and reading about the more negative sides of his political career, I find him to have a somewhat tarnished reputation and see him as a very slick politician, who is making promises that are all glittering generalities. Same thing Obama did in '08.


----------



## Jill (Aug 16, 2011)

I've heard so many positive things about Perry and support for him from other people living in Texas (just not through LB). I do really like him and have had him as a favorite hoping he'd run for about 8mos now. That said, though, we don't vote for over a year, so there's a lot of time to learn more and I am not going to miss any debates and am a news junky so will be reading, watching and listening. H, my mom, dad and I are all fans _at this point_. But eyes and ears remain open. My sister and her husband... urgh. Die-hard Obama supporters



A cross I must bear





What I want is a team of two candidates with business and job smarts and who are serious about National Defense. Handsome / Pretty / Likable / Good Public Speakers, too, because while that doesn't matter to me, it does matter in regards to elect-ability. This is small, small potatoes, but I loved how Perry really winged it on that speech. Didn't see him looking at his notes really and no teleprompters. That just _felt_ good and again, he said what I want to hear -- start to finish.

Of the other "top tier", I do like Bachmann a lot. Even when the liberal media slams her, once I hear what she said (even in their words sometimes, more often the full quote or the background information), I almost always agree with her.

I love Herman Cain. LOVE him, but was upset with his response to a question regarding Israel / right of return awhile back. While he quickly "learned up" and had a reply that was acceptable w/in a day, I don't think he understood the question the first time it was asked. I do not think Cain is viable at this point, but I personally like him.

Gingrich... Urgh. I don't think I'll vote for him and I don't think he'll get the nomination, however, each debate I've sat down pegging him as my least favorite but as the debate unfolds, I find that he has some of the best answers. So mixed feelings about him. I feel he debates very well, though most coverage after the fact doesn't indicate so. He's been the favorite between my family and friends for the debates (but none of us see ourselves voting for him). Just an odd combination from him and the feelings he's generated for "us".

Romney. Please, no.

Paul -- definitely open to him and support almost all of what I've heard him say as well.

Sarah Palin... I adore her and admire her. I hope she will not run, though. I think this woman has done so much good by firing up the conservative base and I feel she can do a lot of good for several more years doing just exactly what she's been doing. I think she'd made a good president, but I think she can continue to do a lot of good for our Nation doing what she does right now and maybe one day also serve as President. Though so many do not like her, I see her as a successful person and woman in every single way one can be -- spiritually, personally, professionally and politically.

The way I see it, we have a field of exciting and talented people. More than who's been debating, too, though these are some real "stars". I just hope the ticket is an exciting combination AND that there is room for most of this top tier to be involved with the Administration that takes office in 2013.

And, lastly, regarding Obama's promises and glitter... I just NEVER wanted what he was promising. I thought at the time Hope & Change was a sugar coated spin on socialism and I don't think our Nation needs to emulate a European model which I always thought Obama advocated. So while I thought Obama was "charming" personally (yet very phony), I never ever EVER wanted what he promised and it upset me that so many Americans would fall for a vision that at its very heart was so UN-American. I also thought Obama lacked the ability to lead. I think I was exactly right about all the concerns I had about Obama, and unfortunately so. The qualities / ideas / goals I thought I saw and think many of us now see in Obama include: unqualified, socialist ideals, a desire to transform our Nation into something it isn't supposed to be, arogant, anti-business and anti-American. I don't see a comparison between Obama's words and Perry's.


----------



## txminipinto (Aug 16, 2011)

I'm a Texan and support Perry. And that's even after he squished any hope of me getting a raise for the last 2 years being a state employee. Will I vote for him? Yes, if he's the Republican nominee. I'll vote for who ever is the Republican nominee at this point. Why? Because when I look back to the Bush era...things were good. People had jobs, even after 9/11, and we had a President I could believe in. One that stood up for this country in its greatest need at the time and didn't take any BS from ANYONE. What we have now is a slimeball. In his actions, he's turned his back on America yet speaks as if he has our best interest at heart. I'm worse off now than I was 3 years ago. You are worse off now than you were 3 years ago. Everyone is worse off now. He has done nothing but weaken this country and its time we put a true warrior back into the White House and get rid of this manure spreader. He was elected solely based on his race and that is just the God's honest truth. People who never voted before in their life time came out in droves to vote in the first African American president. While it was historical, and I am glad to have witnessed it, the greater good was very short lived. I'd vote for a purple man or woman if they can just get this country back on track and make it very clear to our enemies that we will not stand down.


----------



## ohmt (Aug 16, 2011)

Oh good grief. Yes, Bush was wonderful

(insert eye roll-i'm on my phone so can't use that cute little smiley)

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DUDC8pmfmYc4%26feature%3Dplayer_embedded&feature=player_embedded&v=UDC8pmfmYc4&gl=US

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/08/02/5-republican-facts-that-every-american-should-be-mad-about/


----------



## weebiscuit (Aug 16, 2011)

Jill said:


> I've heard so many positive things about Perry and support for him from other people living in Texas (just not through LB). I do really like him and have had him as a favorite hoping he'd run for about 8mos now. That said, though, we don't vote for over a year, so there's a lot of time to learn more and I am not going to miss any debates and am a news junky so will be reading, watching and listening. H, my mom, dad and I are all fans _at this point_. But eyes and ears remain open. My sister and her husband... urgh. Die-hard Obama supporters
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Jill, I really had to laugh, as my sister is married to my husband's brother, and they, too, are so liberal they wear bleeding hearts on their sleeves! And my husband and I are polar opposites from them. My brother is also totally liberal. Just not a comfortable family situation, because politics always comes up!

I agree with you about what we need in a candidate, and unfortunately, looks DO count, and that's one thing Ron Paul has going against him. Plus his age. But I like his ideas and he is so straightforward.

If Perry gets the nomination, then I will vote for him, because OBAMA MUST GO! I have never in my life been so disappointed and angry with a president as I am with him!

I liked Bachman before the debates, but I'm cooling towards her. Her main platform seems to be "Get Obama out of office and repeal Obama care." I haven't really heard anything concrete from her. The only thing I find positive about her is that if by some miracle she gets the nomination, then she would appeal to some women voters who may have voted democrat in the last election, because it made their little liberal hearts to feel so good in voting for a black man. Then their little liberal hearts can feel good voting for a woman.

I sort of feel that Herman Cain SHOULD be on the ticket, in order to get the African American votes. I just heard on the news that the Latino community is very upset with Obama and his immigration policy. They say he's done nothing to stop the arrest and deportation of illegals. Well, HELLO! They are flippin' ILLEGALS, for crying out loud. They SHOULD be deported.

I don't like Gingrich at all as he does not seem personable, but I agree that he says the right things. Time will tell, though. I think he would alienate too many independents and hurt the conservatives' chances in the election.

I like Sarah Palin a lot. I read her book and understood why she resigned from her job as Governor in Alaska. It was mainly due to huge legal fees from frivolous lawsuits, and she simply needed a higher income to pay for them. And a few other reasons, of course, but that was the main one. Sarah simply isn't the stupid bimbo the liberal press makes her out to be. She could never win the presidency, so I hope she doesn't run. But I really would like to see the conservative winner put her into a governmental job of some sort... Sect. of the Treasury, or something to do with finance, because I think she's got a lot going in that field.

Romney.. if he couldn't even win the nomination last time around, how do the conservatives think he could ever win the entire election?


----------



## Jill (Aug 17, 2011)

Sandy, you have me smiling and nodding in agreement with so much of what you said above!!!


----------



## Jill (Aug 20, 2011)

I read this article this morning and thought it was really clear and well written, and ties in obviously with the topic at hand. The article addresses a lot of the negative spin that has been put forth about Rick Perry's record (and very satisfactorily from my perspective). Well worth a read for those interested in the GOP candidates:

*The Texas Miracle Is No Myth: **It's Worth Looking Under The Surface* <<< link to the article


----------



## Flying minis (Aug 20, 2011)

This - along with his proposed changes to the Constitution - and the fact that he seems to think as President he can do so - are what concern me most about Perry (and Bachman).

*How much does it worry you if both Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry have ties to Dominionism?*

*FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:*

Forget about the separation of church and state... there's reason to believe that religion might have a whole new meaning for the next occupant of the White House.

The Daily Beast reports that two of the Republican candidates for president - Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry - are "deeply associated" with a theocratic strain of Christian fundamentalism that's called Dominionism.

For those of you who haven't heard of it before, and I was one who hadn't - stand by cause this is "out there."

The Daily Beast writes how Dominionists believe that Christians have a God-given right to rule all earthly institutions. Dominionism finds its roots in a small fringe sect called Christian Reconstructionism. People who advocate replacing U.S. law with the laws of the Old Testament, including the death penalty for homosexuality and abortion. swell.

The Daily Beast reports that both Bachmann and Perry appear to have ties to groups that support Dominionism.

Bachmann appeared in a documentary for one of these groups called "truth in action ministries." Also, she often praises or cites different religious leaders connected to such beliefs.

As for Perry, there's a group called "the new apostolic reformation" that sees him as their ticket to power. They talk about "taking dominion over American society" and hope that Perry can claim the so-called "mountain" of government. This group was also involved in Perry's prayer vigil in Houston a couple of weeks ago.


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 21, 2011)

Flying minis said:


> This - along with his proposed changes to the Constitution - and the fact that he seems to think as President he can do so - are what concern me most about Perry (and Bachman).
> 
> *How much does it worry you if both Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry have ties to Dominionism?*
> 
> ...






:yeah



BRILLIANT POST. If people don't wake up and smell the roses we're going to be more backwards than the middle east. My god this is the year 2011 - and people are still sticking their fingers in their ears and yelling "not true, not true". This SO scares me about these two and is THE number one reason I'd never vote for either.

Of course we may be okay because Michelle is a good submissive woman



and will have to have her husbands permission to rule the free world - maybe he'll say "He11 no".


----------



## kaykay (Aug 22, 2011)

> Of course we may be okay because Michelle is a good submissive woman
> 
> 
> 
> and will have to have her husbands permission to rule the free world - maybe he'll say "He11 no".


Spit my coffee out laughing over that one!!! Too funny!


----------



## Jill (Aug 22, 2011)

OH, yeah. I've noticed what a quiet little mouse Michelle Bachmann is



It's so hard to even know where she stands on these political issues...



Nothing like the liberal spin of the media


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 22, 2011)

Jill said:


> OH, yeah. I've noticed what a quiet little mouse Michelle Bachmann is
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They're not political issues - they're religious ones - unfortunately with Bachman and Perry they may become political


----------



## Jill (Aug 22, 2011)

Not for me, they won't. I have no problem with political leaders having deep religious beliefs.


----------



## Flying minis (Aug 22, 2011)

I don't have a problem with leaders having deep religious beliefs - as long as they don't believe THEIR beliefs should be the basis for the LAWS I have to respect. And as long as they can acknowledge that others have different beliefs, and can respect those also. A country based on old testament Christian law would be no more free than one based on Sharia law. . .


----------



## Jill (Aug 22, 2011)

Flying minis said:


> I don't have a problem with leaders having deep religious beliefs - as long as they don't believe THEIR beliefs should be the basis for the LAWS I have to respect. And as long as they can acknowledge that others have different beliefs, and can respect those also. *A country based on old testament Christian law would be no more free than one based on Sharia law. . .*


As a woman, in light of how Sharia law treats "the weaker sex", I really disagree! Under Sharia Law, women aren't even considered a full human.


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 22, 2011)

Jill said:


> As a woman, in light of how Sharia law treats "the weaker sex", I really disagree! Under Sharia Law, women aren't even considered a full human.


Have you ever read the bible Jill?

Are you aware of what the bible actually says about how women should be treated? You may want to enlighten yourself because along with Bachman being a good submissive woman she should also be following the biblical "rules" about women and should NOT be allowed to talk in church. Should NOT be allowed, as a woman, to be able to teach males.

You may want to brush up on what the bible actually teaches about women. Unless Bachman is like most religious people and picks and chooses the parts they want to be obedient to. I mean it's either gods book or it isn't. If you believe in god then you MUST believe in what he commands you to believe in, right?

Genesis 3:16

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

1 Corinthians 14:34-36

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Ephesians 5:22-24

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

Colossians 3:18

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

1 Timothy 2:11-15

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing.

Titus 2:4-5

Teach the young women to be ... obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

1 Peter 3:1

Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands

All of this based on a book written by (don't pass out with surprise here)...MEN lol. It wasn't written by a god - not one word of it, not one! If people want to believe this - hey more power to them, If it helps them sleep at night - go for it. But keep it out of politics. I no sooner want a christian as president forcing their beliefs than a muslim forcing theirs. This country was based on separation of church and state for a reason.


----------



## Jill (Aug 22, 2011)

Miniwhinny, I remember the things you've said over the years about faith and those who have it. If this is your inivation to a debate, I'm just going to say _"no,thank you."_


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 22, 2011)

Jill said:


> Miniwhinny, I remember the things you've said over the years about faith and those who have it. If this is your inivation to a debate, I'm just going to say _"no,thank you."_


Absolutely not! I have no desire to debate faith with you or anyone. The USA is based on separation of church and state and that's how I firmly believe it should remain.


----------



## Jill (Aug 22, 2011)

OK, miniwhinny.

For anyone following, to come back to the subject of Rick Perry, this is a VERY interesting video regarding him and the bias of the media. It's from this past weekend. I was happy to see it had been uploaded online:

*Rick Perry Getting Slanted Coverage? VIDEO LINK*


----------



## Flying minis (Aug 22, 2011)

I have faith, but I don't just blindly believe the writings of the bible, nor believe that ANY religion should have influence on political or legal issues. The old testament is just as harsh on women as Sharia law - that's part of what Sharia law is based on - remember, islam accepts the Old Testament too.

I have the same issue with Perry and the right wing as I do the left wing - inability to understand that another person's point of view was influenced by their life events, and can be different than yours and NOT BE WRONG just because it's different. I like to joke that actually, I usually like the right more than the left. The right at least aren't hypocrites - they admit their prejudices. The left say they are completely tolerant - but they aren't tolerant of the right!

Someone once told my brother (a Lutheran minister) that he lacks faith, because he questions the bible, religion, dogma, etc. His response? Of course I lack faith, otherwise it would be called certainty.

I have faith. And I'm pretty cynical of anyone who has certainty - whether it be religious or political. I don't understand how someone else can be SO sure they know and understand my needs without understanding or trying to understand my motivations and experiences. We all walk in different paths - why are some so certain that we can all do so in their idea of the perfect pair of shoes?


----------



## Jill (Aug 22, 2011)

Flying minis said:


> ...And I'm pretty cynical of anyone who has certainty - whether it be religious or political. I don't understand how someone else can be SO sure they know and understand my needs without understanding or trying to understand my motivations and experiences. We all walk in different paths - why are some so certain that we can all do so in their idea of the perfect pair of shoes?


I hear you. But on the flip side, I want political contenders to be CERTAIN (of where we are, of where we should be, and of how we can best get there). I want them to be confident. Obviously, I also want to agree with what they think and with their vision for our Nation... but who would vote for the guy who says _"I think the problem could be x, or y, or maybe z. There's a chance we could fix it by doing one of these half a dozen things... What do you all think?"_ Exaggerating to make the point -- the politicians have got to take strong stands and they have got to come out extremely confidently while campaigning if they want to have a chance at the nomination.

At any rate, in my opinion, one thing is very clear. *OMG* -- *O*bama *M*ust *G*o!


----------



## Flying minis (Aug 22, 2011)

I don't want them to be certain - confident, sure, but not certain. I want them to say "Look, there's a lot of reasons why we're where we are, and there are a lot of possible solutions. Here's what I think will work. Here's why. Some of you won't like that, but I also know I can't please everyone, so I'm going to do what I think is the best for the majority of people and for the country."

But that kind of truth, instead of the LIES of certainty, is not likely to be spoken by any politiian - nor is any politician who would actually say it electable.

I do however agree with you on one point - Obama Must Go! He to me is the epitome of misplaced certainty - "I know what's wrong, and I know what's best for all of you - no matter what you think."


----------



## weebiscuit (Aug 23, 2011)

Jill said:


> I read this article this morning and thought it was really clear and well written, and ties in obviously with the topic at hand. The article addresses a lot of the negative spin that has been put forth about Rick Perry's record (and very satisfactorily from my perspective). Well worth a read for those interested in the GOP candidates:


Jill, I read the article, and it's simply a conservative media comeback to the liberal media attacks. I really take anything I read from a biased reporter with a grain of salt. I also see that Lott failed to mention AT ALL that the greatest numbers of jobs in Texas were created because of the defense industry and many were NOT private sector jobs, while a great many other jobs were due to the oil industry, an advantage Texas has over other states.

there are many things which greatly bother me about Perry. One is the religious thing. (Every time I see him on TV I can't quite get it through my head if he's a politician or a televangelist). another thing was his support of Tarp, and he went so far as to send Nancy Pelosi a letter encouraging her to vote for it.

If he gets the nomination, I will most likely vote for him, as I want Obama out of office. But I would not be joyously casting that vote. I simply am not thrilled with any of the candidates, but I think Perry would definitely be a better choice than Bachman.


----------



## weebiscuit (Aug 23, 2011)

miniwhinny said:


> :yeah
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree, with was a brilliant post! And so was yours. I am scared to death of having the White House in control of religious zealots. Our Constitution guarantees a separation of church and state because in Colonial days many colonies taxed churches which were not the *official* church of the colony out of existence. There were fines for non-attendance at colonial sponsored churches. Our founding fathers for the most part were Deists, and realized that you simply cannot have a government controlled by religion.

I have no problem with saying "under God" in the Pledge. I have no problem with "In God We Trust" on our money. There *are* certain fundamental christian principles upon which our nation was founded, and I don't want our heritage destroyed, but on the other hand I believe religion should be a private matter between an individual and their god, whomever that god may be, and I can see a dangerous swing towards christian fundamentalism among many people that would bring that fundamentalist view into politics.


----------



## Jill (Aug 23, 2011)

I understand how you feel, Sandy. I don't mind the religious "feel", but I understand some people do. Actually, with Herman Cain, I really thought he sounds like a TV Preacher. I love him, but had wondered if that would get negative play if he was going to be a serious option.

Did you have time to watch the video clip? I think it says a lot, really not just about Perry, but it illustrates how the liberal media (which is 95% of the media) twists and edits things. Thank God for the sources that do show the full story and different perspectives. I think YOU get it and you know the impact of the liberal media, but the video illustrates very well just one (annoying) example.

And, like you, I will vote for the GOP ticket, no matter who is on it. Blindly supporting the GOP? Hardly. Supporting the party I firmly think has the best agenda for our Nation.


----------



## tagalong (Aug 23, 2011)

> the liberal media (which is 95% of the media) twists and edits things. Thank God for the sources that do show the full story and different perspectives


*Jill*, ALL the media twists and edits "things" - including Fox. Their latest glaring omission has been scant mention of the phone-hacking scandal involving Rupert Murdoch and his news agencies. And Fox (like other sources) does not give Ron Paul more than a passing mention even though he has done way better than many of their Chosen Ones/ex-employees. _Fair & balanced _is just an advertising slogan - not a mission statement.

ALL the media does this to some extent so it is important to use a wide variety of sources... no media can truthfully call itself fair & balanced.


----------



## Jill (Aug 23, 2011)

I truly think the NEWS coverage on Fox is the most fair and balanced on the air. Too many times, people do not separate their opinion (or the one they've been prescribed) of the NEWS coverage, vs the extremely popular _talking heads_ programs. Those are opinion shows, so of course they are slanted to reflect the opinion of those on the show. But when it comes to the NEWS programming, every day, I see the liberal and democrat perspective represented, in detail, on FOX. Makes me shake my head in disagreement far more often than not, but it *IS* shown and given significant air time on Fox NEWS.

Being a news junky, FOX is one of a dozen plus sources I rely on routinely for news every single day...

Of course, I'm not alone in my enjoyment of FOX, either. Its ratings are higher than ALL the other cable news outlets combined. That's been the case for years now.


----------



## tagalong (Aug 23, 2011)

*Jill *- even the News part is tweaked and edited. It always has been, It always will be. Thus the scant coverage of the phone-hacking mess. I do know thw difference between talking heads amd actual news coverage, BTW.



No need to shout.

On Fox & Friends they even uncomfortably referred to the fact that they (the News) were not going to deal with the Murdoch story much and laughed nervously about it. Fox NEWS (not talking heads) has whitewashed it, mentioned it very briefly, stepped around it etc. If it was CNN or MSNBC with links to such a huge phonehacking scandal, Fox would be all over it releentlessly... why? Because it is a big news story. But News Corp is involved, so _ssssshhhhhhh..._





The SImpsons get better ratings than any cable news. Fox is the only right wing blathering talkathon in the media "pie". So obviously they will be a bigger "piece" of said pie and do better against a wide range of blathering talkathons like NPR, CNN etc. that are all smaller pieces of that same pie. Add up all the smaller pieces, and the % would be more or less split down the middle, the same as the entire country is.


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 23, 2011)

weebiscuit said:


> I believe religion should be a private matter between an individual and their god, whomever that god may be, and I can see a dangerous swing towards christian fundamentalism among many people that would bring that fundamentalist view into politics.








The reason the forefathers came to this country was for religious freedom. It was their top goal in forming America. Most of the forefathers were not Christian, but deist, atheist and agnostic.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment *prohibits federal, state or municipal establishment of an official religion or preference for one religion over another, non-religion over religion, or religion over non-religion*. Christian fundamentalism is deeply rooted in both Bachman and Perry. You only have to watch them during their campaigns to see it. They're including it into their campaigns - just look at Perry's day of prayer. If they're not separating it at this point - they're not going to suddenly change if they get elected.

The problem is that this isn't scaring people because the majority of people in this country are christian - so are these candidates - but the principle of our foundations must be kept sacred. What if a few years from now the majority religion is Muslim, or Hindu etc. There's a reason we were founded with separation of church and state foremost in our laws.


----------



## Jill (Aug 23, 2011)

Tag, we probably won't agree, but that's what makes the world interesting in some ways! I do not consider "Fox & Friends" the news, but a show along the lines of Good Morning America, Today, and The Early Show. Fox & Friends is immensely more watchable imo, but it is not "the news".

When I think of "the news" on Fox, I mean the shows like American's Newsroom, Happening Now, America Live, Your World with Neil Cavuto and Special Report with Bret Baier. While I enjoy some of these shows, I do not consider this to be "the news" on Fox, but rather news and political opinion programming: The Five, Studio B, The O'Reilly Factor, Hannity, On The Record, Stossel and Red Eye.

In my opinion, you will not find any other TV news that comes close to presenting as balanced a report as you will on any of the Fox news programs (vs. news OPINION programs) I mentioned above.


----------



## tagalong (Aug 23, 2011)

double!!


----------



## tagalong (Aug 23, 2011)

Ummm.. I did not say Fox & Friends was the NEWS. Far from it. It is usually a gab session where they "high five" each other for what they think are very clever remarks - or assume a fake air of gravitas and The Sky Is Falling when talking in sombre tones about "the other side". I find it to be very staged.

What I actually DID say



was that even those types were saying that Fox News did not dare delve into the phone-hacking (a HUGE story everywhere else - worldwide!- except the magical glass bubble that is Fox News) - and then they hastily changed the subject.



Well, they should be pleased to know that repeating their tiresome advertising slogan so many times a day is working...





*NO media is fair and balanced. None. * Least of all any media that stridently claims to be so, plays to a specific demographic and cannot live up to their own hype & advertising... as they trip over their own slogan time and time again. Fortunately for them, their most devoted fans do not seem to care....


----------



## weebiscuit (Aug 23, 2011)

tagalong said:


> *Jill *- even the News part is tweaked and edited. It always has been, It always will be. Thus the scant coverage of the phone-hacking mess. I do know thw difference between talking heads amd actual news coverage, BTW.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is simply incorrect about Fox hushing this story up. I watch news and ONLY news on TV, constantly switching channels, and I'd say Fox NEWS programs did an excellent job of covering this story. As Jill said, "Fox and Friends" is not a "hard news" show but it more like "Good Morning, America." But the actual news programs on Fox, like Bret Baier (sp??) or Neil Cavuto, certainly covered every bit of it.


----------



## weebiscuit (Aug 23, 2011)

Jill said:


> Did you have time to watch the video clip? I think it says a lot, really not just about Perry, but it illustrates how the liberal media (which is 95% of the media) twists and edits things. Thank God for the sources that do show the full story and different perspectives. I think YOU get it and you know the impact of the liberal media, but the video illustrates very well just one (annoying) example.
> 
> And, like you, I will vote for the GOP ticket, no matter who is on it. Blindly supporting the GOP? Hardly. Supporting the party I firmly think has the best agenda for our Nation.


No Jill, I didn't watch the video. I honestly don't have time to watch videos. As it is I have very little time to even be on the internet. I am usually outside from sun up till sun down, and then I have to catch up with a few other forums, make dinner, get the place cleaned up, do laundry. I just don't have a lot of disposable time, unfortunately. In the winter, yes, but this time of year I don't.

I, too, will vote the GOP ticket this fall. However, I don't consider myself a Conservative. Certainly not a liberal, though, although 35 years ago when I was going to college I was a liberal. Aren't *most* stupid college kids liberal? Then you grow up, get out in the real world, and sometimes people's views simply change as they mature. I got so fed up with all the liberal handouts. And, being a student of history, it sort of dawned on me that the US was the greatest, most powerful, richest nation in the world a hundred years ago, and that's BEFORE we had social security, medicare, welfare, and not very many UNIONS!

We have been in a steady decline since FDR was president.


----------



## tagalong (Aug 24, 2011)

weebiscuit said:


> This is simply incorrect about Fox hushing this story up. I watch news and ONLY news on TV, constantly switching channels, and I'd say Fox NEWS programs did an excellent job of covering this story. As Jill said, "Fox and Friends" is not a "hard news" show but it more like "Good Morning, America." But the actual news programs on Fox, like Bret Baier (sp??) or Neil Cavuto, certainly covered every bit of it.


I watch it too - what, you think I pull this stuff out of thin air?




- and noted the very light treatment that MAJOR story received. They kept the entire story very low key and did not address it in any detail (and even suggested it was overblown and completely unimportant) until they had no choice and were called out on other networks. Then they suddenly became more "balanced".

Try looking up clips on YouTube. Even if a group you (or I) may not care for posted the clip, none of those clips are tampered with - they came right off the air. Time and time again, Fox commentators are playing the hacking down, or even suggesting that News of the World was hacked (and thus getting the entire story wrong or deliberately trying to muddle it up, I am not sure). There are many examples all over the place of the way they tried to diminish that story at first. If say, MSNBC had treated a story like that about their owners/management in a similar way, many here would be howling about the biased media. lamestream media etc. And they would be right to point out that hypocrisy.

The truth of the matter it is, it works both ways and it always has. Hypocrisy is rampant on all sides. Fox is not immune from it - nor is any other media source. There truly is no such thing as fair & balanced media. And that is why it is important to use a wide variety of sources to try and find some balance.


----------



## Jill (Aug 24, 2011)

Sandy, videos will be more interesting when it's cooler outside anyway (getting closer to the big event). I am just a junky when it comes to political news videos and make sure I find the time to catch the ones that are interesting to me. Plus, sort of like my "water cooler" time out between that stuff and LB, FB. It's not real easy to do that real time when you don't have peers at the office.

As to being more liberal when you're younger, same here! But I am absolutely a conservative when it comes to all issues important to me, and most of the ones that are of peripheral interest to me personally.

Tag, when it comes to cable news, imo firm and long held opinion, FOX is far and above the best... anyway. Did you hear Olbermann is on Al Gore's Current TV now? MSNBC must be glad both to be rid of him and to no longer be dead last in ratings. I think Current TV is enjoyed Nationwide in about 429 households (sarcastic exaggeration).


----------



## Carriage (Aug 24, 2011)

Has anybody done any research into Perry's financial investment in and protection of the porn industry in Texas? Nobody? Perhaps you're too busy admiring the lipstick job on the pig. That "conservatives" would vote for this person is troubling. That such a one could lead a "Prayer summit" and do so with a straight face, indicates that he is the perfect politician and pretty much the same as any other you have elected for the longest time. You know, the ones that have drug us to the bottom and down to their level.

Question, Where do you draw the line? Or do you keep making excuses and compromising yourself all the way to the bottom?

I saw a new label today for the fake tea party, "tea o cons". This perfectly describes what has become of the real and Constitutionally grounded tea party.

That they were co-opted by the neocons VERY early in the last cycle shows how afraid the "machine" is. Last time around I heard the Newt-miester's name brought up in the context of a tea party gathering, I knew that the co-opting of a pure party had begun.

If "fair and balanced" represents the best you have as news source, you are woefully misinformed.... I know, I know, just ignore him.......

Bobs Baubles

"Nose rings inserted while you wait"


----------



## Charley (Aug 24, 2011)

> Has anybody done any research into Perry's financial investment in and protection of the porn industry in Texas? Nobody? Perhaps you're too busy admiring the lipstick job on the pig. That "conservatives" would vote for this person is troubling. That such a one could lead a "Prayer summit" and do so with a straight face, indicates that he is the perfect politician and pretty much the same as any other you have elected for the longest time. You know, the ones that have drug us to the bottom and down to their level.


I would be interested to see what you have found through your research.


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 24, 2011)

Charley said:


> I would be interested to see what you have found through your research.


It's an easy google search.

I'm more concerned that he's against teaching evolution in schools as fact! My god did he think the Tooth Fairy waved her magic wand and "poof" we all appeared. Talk about the mass dumbing down of America.


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 24, 2011)

double post


----------



## horsehug (Aug 28, 2011)

I enjoy watching the PBS Newshour.

Many times they have two opposing opinions on an issue and they give them equal time.

Susan O.


----------



## CharlesFamily (Aug 28, 2011)

miniwhinny said:


> It's an easy google search.
> 
> I'm more concerned that he's against teaching evolution in schools as fact! My god did he think the Tooth Fairy waved her magic wand and "poof" we all appeared. Talk about the mass dumbing down of America.



Evolution as it applies to changes occurring in organisms is not what most object to being taught. That facet of evolution is most definitely observable and proven fact. The evolution that should not be taught as fact is origin of the species. It is a* theory* the same as creationism or aliens from outer space or the tooth fairy waving her wand. I have no problem with evolution being taught in school - as long as it is not put forth as 100% indisputable fact. It cannot be proven that we evolved from single-celled organisms.

Barbara


----------



## ohmt (Aug 28, 2011)

Barbara, no teacher or book in any school says that humans (well, everything) evolving from a single celled organism is fact. They all state that it is a theory. Primordial soup, evolution, etc-they are all theories just like creationism, as you have stated. What Perry (and some other Conservatives who would like to be our next President-google evolution quotes from Bachmann, it's sad...and maybe a little bit funny) is against is those theories being taught at all.


----------



## Jill (Aug 28, 2011)

Right with you, Barbara.


----------



## ohmt (Aug 28, 2011)

I agree with Barbara too about evolution not being taught as fact when it is only theory, but it is not being taught as fact (imagine how quickly that teacher would be reprimanded because of upset parents!) and that is not the issue that Perry and Bachmann have.


----------



## CharlesFamily (Aug 28, 2011)

Well, then, I cannot agree with them if they ONLY want Creationism taught - no more than I would agree with someone ONLY wanting evolution taught. As a conservative Christian, I know what I believe to be true. My children do, and also my husband who is a public school science teacher. But we will also not force someone else to believe what we do. That is exactly how Todd presents everything in his class - they are ALL theories and that they (his students) need to research and study and come to their own conclusion of what they believe based on the evidence they choose to look at.

Barbara


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 29, 2011)

Just want to clear something up about the word "theory" as it's used in science as opposed to how it's generally used in the English language. I pulled this straight off the web because the explanation is better than anything I could phrase myself. The "theory" of evolution is backed up be every single field of science.

Everything in science is called a "theory".

It has nothing to do with whether it is "proven" ... because *NOTHING* in science is ever considered "proven." You prove things in math, not in science. Scientists don't talk about "proof", they talk about *evidence*. Why do scientists think this way? Because they are forever on guard against the arrogance


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 29, 2011)

CharlesFamily said:


> Well, then, I cannot agree with them if they ONLY want Creationism taught - no more than I would agree with someone ONLY wanting evolution taught. As a conservative Christian, I know what I believe to be true. My children do, and also my husband who is a public school science teacher. But we will also not force someone else to believe what we do. That is exactly how Todd presents everything in his class - they are ALL theories and that they (his students) need to research and study and come to their own conclusion of what they believe based on the evidence they choose to look at.
> 
> Barbara


Barbara,

are you saying that your husband - as a public school science teacher - actually offers creationism as a scientific option when he's teaching science? I'm 100% in support of people's right to believe in anything they wish to believe but I'm truly thrown for a loop that a science teacher can offer the earth is 7000 years old and humans just line bred from two people during that time as a real scientific option.


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 29, 2011)

ohmt said:


> I agree with Barbara too about evolution not being taught as fact when it is only theory, but it is not being taught as fact (imagine how quickly that teacher would be reprimanded because of upset parents!) and that is not the issue that Perry and Bachmann have.


ohmt - I'm not sure that you're fully understanding what the word "theory" means in scientific fields. In the scientific world a "theory" is something that has achieved the highest level of scientific proof. In science there isn't anything above a "theory". It's not the same meaning that the word "theory" has in general usage.


----------



## Jill (Aug 29, 2011)

In science we have scientists falsifying research results and collecting federal grant money (global warming scandals for one example). So a scientific theory that negates God and / or creationism may or may not be meaningful, depending on who you ask. It serves no good purpose to (once again) ridicule faith, miniwhinny. Hope that's not the goal here.


----------



## ohmt (Aug 29, 2011)

I am absolutely aware of what the word 'theory' means as I am a microbiologist



You have stated exactly what I already said-a theory is not proven fact. Yes, science is based off of theory and that is as good as it gets. I think you believe I am confusing theory with hypothesis. There is a reason why I have to pay $300 for a new science book when I could borrow it from a friend who took the same class 2 years previous. Science changes every single day and I can't use that 2 year old science book because it has already been updated. It is why I LOVE science and will be continuing my education. Nothing is set in stone and I have an infinite amount of areas and subjects to do future research. Do I put more stock into science than religion? Yes and in fact, I am an atheist. But, I do not look down on those that believe in Creationism and in a country that is primarily christian, I think it is just fine that teachers give their students a view of Creationism as well as evolution, especially since evolution is not 100% proven fact (even though I, myself believe that it is fact).


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 29, 2011)

ohmt said:


> I am absolutely aware of what the word 'theory' means as I am a microbiologist
> 
> 
> 
> You have stated exactly what I already said-a theory is not proven fact. Yes, science is based off of theory and that is as good as it gets. I think you believe I am confusing theory with hypothesis. There is a reason why I have to pay $300 for a new science book when I could borrow it from a friend who took the same class 2 years previous. Science changes every single day and I can't use that 2 year old science book because it has already been updated. It is why I LOVE science and will be continuing my education. Nothing is set in stone and I have an infinite amount of areas and subjects to do future research. Do I put more stock into science than religion? Yes and in fact, I am an atheist. But, I do not look down on those that believe in Creationism and in a country that is primarily christian, I think it is just fine that teachers give their students a view of Creationism as well as evolution, especially since evolution is not 100% proven fact (even though I, myself believe that it is fact).


ohmt I'm 100% in agreement with you. I'm a scientist myself and have two sons in a well known research university. One is studying physics, the other chemistry. I'm also in full agreement that creationism is okay to teach. What I'm a little confused over is how it's taught as a science in HS. It's not a science it's a religious belief. If you look at your university science classes you won't find one class there (unless you're at a christian college) on creationism - you will find classes on evolution. Where you'll find creationism is in the school of religious studies. This is why (getting back on topic) Perry wanting to teach creationism and not evolution imo is wrong. Religion is private and personal but it's not based on fact it's based on faith - what if the predominate religion here was Hinduism? Should we be teaching our kids that cows are sacred (at places other than the Outback Steak House



) Or what if it were Scientology? There's a place for religion and there's a place for education. I'm 100% in favor of people wanting to believe anything they want to believe which is why we have so many churches in the USA.


----------



## Flying minis (Aug 29, 2011)

Miniwhinny you stated my exact thoughts - creationism according to whom? It's not a science, it's a belief, and should not be taught as a science, as creationism (by any religion) does not withstand the testing of science and the scientific method.

Here's something that scared me today . . . in the year 2011, I can hardly imagine that a major political candidate could believe that a naturally occuring weather or geologic event could be a message from God??? Seriously??? That's right up there with some of the fundamentalists I've talked to who believe homosexuals are really just possessed by Satan. Unless you're hard-core fundamentalist, I can't imagine how you could conceivably even say that 1 - a hurricane or earthquake is a message from God, and 2 - that the specific message is against current spending in Washington DC?

http://www.washingto...ivine031851.php


----------



## CharlesFamily (Aug 29, 2011)

miniwhinny said:


> Barbara,
> 
> are you saying that your husband - as a public school science teacher - actually offers creationism as a scientific option when he's teaching science? I'm 100% in support of people's right to believe in anything they wish to believe but I'm truly thrown for a loop that a science teacher can offer the earth is 7000 years old and humans just line bred from two people during that time as a real scientific option.



No, he does not. He teaches Life Science, so one of the topics taught is evolution. Naturally, because students understand what a "hot button" topic this is, they always ask him questions about evolution as it relates to origin of the species. He tells them that evolution is the scientific theory of origin of the species, but that other people have different theories and beliefs often based on religion. Of course, then he is always asked what he believes. As a public school teacher he is ALLOWED to tell them his belief IF A STUDENT ASKS and he makes no secret of the fact that he is a Christian. So, no, he does not teach it as a scientific option, but when asked he will discuss the different theories - evolution and creationism - if he is asked.

Barbara


----------



## tagalong (Aug 29, 2011)

> Unless you're hard-core fundamentalist, I can't imagine how you could conceivably even say that 1 - a hurricane or earthquake is a message from God, and 2 - that the specific message is against current spending in Washington DC?


Ah, but her "people" have now scrambled to do some damage control and say she was just kidding around... riiiiight.


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 29, 2011)

CharlesFamily said:


> No, he does not. He teaches Life Science, so one of the topics taught is evolution. Naturally, because students understand what a "hot button" topic this is, they always ask him questions about evolution as it relates to origin of the species. He tells them that evolution is the scientific theory of origin of the species, but that other people have different theories and beliefs often based on religion. Of course, then he is always asked what he believes. As a public school teacher he is ALLOWED to tell them his belief IF A STUDENT ASKS and he makes no secret of the fact that he is a Christian. So, no, he does not teach it as a scientific option, but when asked he will discuss the different theories - evolution and creationism - if he is asked.
> 
> Barbara


Thanks for clearing that up ... no longer confused


----------



## miniwhinny (Aug 29, 2011)

tagalong said:


> Ah, but her "people" have now scrambled to do some damage control and say she was just kidding around... riiiiight.


Tag - you took the words right out of my mouth. I noticed now they are scrambling to let everyone know it was a "joke". I don't believe it was a joke, and if it was - wow, bad taste considering people have died during this storm.


----------

