US AG Barr on the importance of religious liberty

_{kairosfocus

October 14, 2019

Academic Freedom, Atheism, Defending our Civilization, News Highlights, Religion}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Here (as updated):

Money clip:

The imperative of protecting religious freedom was not just a nod in the direction of piety. It reflects the framers’ belief that religion was indispensable to sustaining our free system of government . . . ”

Food for thought. END

F/N, U/D: Prepared text, found. I think he mostly read the speech, let us clip and discuss below.

PS: First, a different view on political spectra (than where one sat in the French legislature 200 years ago or thereabouts):

Next, Aquinas on law, as summarised:

Third, Schaeffer’s line of despair analysis, as adjusted and extended:

Let’s add on straight vs spin

Comments

Ok so you two have a history going , I love u both, can we get a cease fire (big grin) Vividvividbleau_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:56 PM
8
08
56
PM
PDT}

ET
The CONTENT does that, Ed
Fair enough. Let’s examine some of that CONTENT.
Nick Matzke is a putz, a loser and a grand equivocator. EvoTARDs are such an ignorant lot they think their ignorance is an argument. Alan is such an ignorant ass he thinks that Eric Holloway's easily refuted trope about ID is meaningful. Alan is such a loser that he tells people to scroll past all of the posts refuting Eric. Faizal Ali is a mental case for a psychiatrist. Peaceful Science is overrun by willfully ignorant assholes. Timothy Horton is a pathetic excuse for a human. Joshua Swamidass is a clueless ass.
You’re right. The CONTENT puts it all into the intellectual context in which it belongs. Again, my apologies to KF. This will be my last comment to and about ET.Ed George_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:49 PM
8
08
49
PM
PDT}

Ed's cowardice for avoiding the questions in comment 634 has now reached the typical meltdown stage. Typical, but still pathetic.ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:32 PM
8
08
32
PM
PDT}

The CONTENT does that, Ed. The CONTENT of those posts expose the liars. It isn't my fault that you and your ilk are babbling liars. I don't have to sit back and just take it. People need to stand up to liars, bluffers and equivocators. Especially when their lies, bluffs and equivocations permeate science.ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:30 PM
8
08
30
PM
PDT}

Hazel I merely acknowledged what u said LOL “Hazel “Why are we still going over this, I wonder? Vividvividbleau_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:29 PM
8
08
29
PM
PDT}

ET
The nature of that blog is to expose the liars and demonstrate that ID is scientific.
Really? How do these OP titles do that? This is KF’s thread. Do you really think that he would be proud of someone who writes these things supporting his position?
Nick Matzke is Still an Equivocating Coward Alan Fox- Scientifically Illiterate asshole Faizal Ali is a Pathetic LIAR and Cowardly Equivocator Jordan Mantha is a Clueless Ass John Mercer, Molecular Biologist and Clueless Ass Timothy Horton is an Ignorant LIAR Joshua Swamidass- Proud to be an Ass Timothy Horton is a LIAR and Ignoramus Faizal Ali is an Ignorant Ass and Liar- Peaceful Science is full of Liars John Harshman is an Imbecile Patrick Trischitta is a Pathetic Liar Patrick Triscitta is an Ignorant Ass and a Cowardly LIAR Mikkel R Rumraket is a Willfully Ignorant Asshole
My apologies to KF for the language above, but I think it is important that he understands the nature of the person he defends.Ed George_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:26 PM
8
08
26
PM
PDT}

Ed George is too afraid to answer my questions in comment 634. And to distract from his cowardice he says:
STUFF is a polite way to describe the vile nature of that blog.
Only cowardly liars who have been called out for their cowardly lies would call that site "vile". The nature of that blog is to expose the liars and demonstrate that ID is scientific. Only an evo would think that is vile. And Ed, I am still very comforted by the fact I could easily eviscerate you in a debate on science. If my blog has a "vile nature" it would only be due to the vile people I expose.
I had another word in mind, but it also starts with “S”.
Science :razz:ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:10 PM
8
08
10
PM
PDT}

Hazel
re 650: My goodness, that’s a lot of stuff. But I do recognize the style.
STUFF is a polite way to describe the vile nature of that blog. I had another word in mind, but it also starts with “S”. :)Ed George_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:06 PM
8
08
06
PM
PDT}

Re 656- hazel and Eddie in a pom-pom fest. How quaint. My style is to call out liars, bluffers and equivocators. And, unlike evos, I actually make my case, each and every time.ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:02 PM
8
08
02
PM
PDT}

Ed George:
I never said I was an ID supporter.
Liar. You used to talk about how "we" had to convince the rest that ID is science. That "we" had to improve "our" arguments. You are so pathetic and twisted you can't even remember what you post. That is what lying does, though.ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:01 PM
8
08
01
PM
PDT}

re 650: My goodness, that's a lot of stuff. But I do recognize the style.hazel_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
08:00 PM
8
08
00
PM
PDT}

hazel:
Neither takes me as a serious participant, although to be fair, I have quit being very serious here for the most part.
So there was a time when you were serious here? Really...ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:58 PM
7
07
58
PM
PDT}

ET
My only complaint with you is that you are a liar and you came here pretending to be an ID supporter,...
I never said I was an ID supporter. I said that I wasn’t an atheist. Which is true.Ed George_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:56 PM
7
07
56
PM
PDT}

Ed, YOU have no idea. But thank you for proving that you are the epitome of the narcissistic syndrome. You are just upset because I expose you as an uneducated poseur. I understand...ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:56 PM
7
07
56
PM
PDT}

Vivid did write about me, "To top it off she ends in what I can only think is someone who is delusional ( or just a troll haven’t figured it out yet) with the comment that basically says “I am in a state of wonderment”" So I'm either delusional or a troll. Neither takes me as a serious participant, although to be fair, I have quit being very serious here for the most part.hazel_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:55 PM
7
07
55
PM
PDT}

Vivid
Where on this thread have I complained about you or Hazel commenting here and where have I called you or Hazel a troll?
My apologies. You are correct.Ed George_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:53 PM
7
07
53
PM
PDT}

Hazel
I see. That’s a history I know nothing about.
You have no idea. Here is a link to ET’s blog. Peruse a few of his OPs and make up your own mind about his sanity. https://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/?m=1Ed George_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:51 PM
7
07
51
PM
PDT}

Ed the narcissist says:
JaD,VB, ET and others keep complaining about us commenting here, and calling us trolls, but the easiest way to shut us up is to stop responding to us.
My only complaint with you is that you are a liar and you came here pretending to be an ID supporter, when in fact you are a known troll. We respond only because you post nonsense that is always easily refuted. To let you get away with your nonsense would make it seem like you said something no one could counter. It is very telling you either avoid or run away from threads that discuss science. Your ignorance of the flagellum was very entertaining, though.ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:48 PM
7
07
48
PM
PDT}

“JaD,VB, ET and others keep complaining about us commenting here, and calling us trolls” Where on this thread have I complained about you or Hazel commenting here and where have I called you or Hazel a troll? Vividvividbleau_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:44 PM
7
07
44
PM
PDT}

hazel:
When I look up “equivalent”, I see lots of definitions which start with “equal in amount”, which obviously wavelength and frequency are not.
Learn how to read:
The 630 meter (or 600 meter) amateur radio band is a frequency band allocated by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to amateur radio operators, and it ranges from 472 to 479 kHz, or equivalently 625.9 to 635.1 meters wavelength.- wikipedia
Frequency OR EQUIVILENTLY wavelength.ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:42 PM
7
07
42
PM
PDT}

Ed George:
For a year and a half ET was trying to defend a simple miS-statement when he stated that Frequency = Wavelength.
Liar. My statement was under the context of the questions I posed above, in comment 634. In that context is was not a misstatement. The person I was having the discussion even understood what I was saying. It was some other loser moron that quote-mined me and ran with it like a extra in "World War Z".
Then he started talking about “context” and “interchangeable under certain circumstances” to avoid having to admit a mistake.
So now having to explain it to little morons is some sort of avoidance? Really? The fact that it had to be explained is proof that you are useless when it comes to discussions. You weren't even part of the discussion in the first place. And you didn't add anything to the discussion when you interrupted.
This narcissistic symptom has been going on for over three years.
This, meaning Ed's, narcissistic symptom has been going on for over three years. Ed's refusal to answer my questions proves that he knows he is wrong and cannot defend his quote-mining. It is also very telling that I have provided references to support my claim and Ed has provided his socks.ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:40 PM
7
07
40
PM
PDT}

I see. That's a history I know nothing about.hazel_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:32 PM
7
07
32
PM
PDT}

For a year and a half ET was trying to defend a simple miS-statement when he stated that Frequency = Wavelength. Then he started talking about “context” and “interchangeable under certain circumstances” to avoid having to admit a mistake. This narcissistic symptom has been going on for over three years. Or maybe I am thinking about some other sock. Possibly Joe, or Frankie, or Virgil, or Sharon.Ed George_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:21 PM
7
07
21
PM
PDT}

First, ET, I don't understand why this issue came up, or why it's important, but I guess I see that you are using "equivalent" to mean something other than "equal to". When I look up "equivalent", I see lots of definitions which start with "equal in amount", which obviously wavelength and frequency are not. But if you mean, "being two different ways of describing an aspect of something that can easily be converted into each other", then perhaps equivalent is an OK word to use. For instance, we say that x + 5 = y and x = y – 5 are equivalent expressions. So I suppose saying that wavelength and frequency are equivalent is OK as long as you are clear they are not equal quantities. But still if you didn't properly distinguish them on one of my tests, or used the wrong one of them in a formula, you'd be wrong.hazel_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:09 PM
7
07
09
PM
PDT}

@Hazel: I don't think bandwidth for this site could cost very much.DerekDiMarco_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
07:08 PM
7
07
08
PM
PDT}

Hazel
I wonder what would become of this place? Would traffic die to the point that it wasn’t economical for Barry to maintain it?
640 comments because our “swarm” has commented. JaD,VB, ET and others keep complaining about us commenting here, and calling us trolls, but the easiest way to shut us up is to stop responding to us. But does anyone really think that ET could do that?Ed George_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
06:59 PM
6
06
59
PM
PDT}

hazel, clearly you have reading comprehension issues. And you wish to add something to the discussion that is irrelevant.
Sure you can refer to a wave’s wavelength or its frequency, but they are not equivalent.
The wave is not equivalent to itself? If two scientists are examining the same EM wave and one reports on its frequency and the other on its wavelength, are they discussing the same wave or two different waves?ET_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
06:54 PM
6
06
54
PM
PDT}

Hmmm. Ed, Sev, Derek and perhaps myself: that's a pretty small swarm! :-) However, I agree with JAD, perhaps, that if those who have different views that the majority here would get tired of this (as I mostly have) and quit posting, I wonder what would become of this place? Would traffic die to the point that it wasn't economical for Barry to maintain it?hazel_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
06:23 PM
6
06
23
PM
PDT}

Sure you can refer to a wave's wavelength or its frequency, but they are not equivalent. w = 1/f or vice versa, but w does not equal f.hazel_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
06:22 PM
6
06
22
PM
PDT}

The latest tactics by the trolls: swarming and shaming using mockery and ridicule. What’s wrong with the typical pretension and posturing and smug condescension? You’re bored with that? To be honest with our trolls, your predictable worn out tactics are not working. I suggest you try a tactic real activists on the political left have perfected, the boycott. Yeah try that. The way you know how to coordinate that shouldn’t be difficult to organize. A boycott would for sure shut down UD, don't you think? So have at it. It's at least worth a try, isn't it? PS Let me apologize for the above. I’m a hypocrite for violating my own standards to not waste any more of my time on this nonsense. BTW that’s an apology to myself and nobody else.john_a_designer_{November 7, 2019
November
11
Nov
7
07
2019
06:04 PM
6
06
04
PM
PDT}

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 … 25 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply