User Profile: Modern_Cicero

Modern_Cicero

Member Since: June 01, 2012

CommentsDisplaying comments newest to oldest.

123 To page: Go
  • April 23, 2014 at 1:35pm

    This story falls into the common Progressive logic fallacy that either government has zero legitimate roles whatsoever or that any and every role is appropriate for government. The truth is that under the U.S. Constitution and individual State Constitutions government has a limited, delegated role primarily centered around protecting individual life, liberty and property and insuring equality of treatment under the law. When Progressives claim, “the U.S. military is a socialist paradise, if you accept it then you must accept Socialism!”, or, “Police and Firemen are Socialist!”, they are trying to infer that either government shouldn’t do anything or government should be unfettered to have absolute control over individuals. It’s a world-view that rejects the U.S. Constitution, the wisdom of the Founders, and any authority except for that which is subjectively wielded by all-powerful, master-mind social planners.

  • April 21, 2014 at 2:41pm

    FFRF needs to change their name. They don’t want freedom and protection. They want tyranny on behalf of only their world-view and persecution of all others.

  • April 21, 2014 at 2:06pm

    I think this is horrible advice. It runs against the Judeo Christian wisdom and values of personal integrity and self-sacrifice. Yes, choose a career in an area you love. ~And~ do what’s necessary to care for your family and others who depend on you, even if it’s unpleasant and involves short seasons of doing work you would otherwise not choose to do. ~And~ keep your word even if it hurts. The times when you will have to do this are few and far between, yet having character and integrity as a person will – in accomplishing these few, occasional things – open doors that will never otherwise open if you are always self-centric, always moving only in the circle of those who go along with you, always seeking only what’s pleasant and feels good.

  • April 19, 2014 at 1:57am

    Mr. President, you certainly have – through collusion with the Senate and the popular media – curtailed the House’s constitutional discretion to set the budget. You should not reference the Constitution. You should be a man of action; lies do not become the President of the United States. Yet as we know from a recent poll, Americans are smarter than you give them credit for and see through your lies.

  • April 18, 2014 at 3:34pm

    Home school your kids. Whatever it takes to make it happen. It’s that or lose them to totalitarian relativism.

  • April 18, 2014 at 3:02pm

    Welcome to the Obama administration. It’s not even safe to be a veteran any more.

  • April 17, 2014 at 2:14pm

    Freedom and faith are inseparable. Every time a secularist government arises, innocent citizens die, and dead people have no freedom. This is the major hamstring of libertarianism. It leads to a twisted concept of freedom which is actually a tyranny of relativism that strips the population of sanctity of life.

    Responses (1) +
  • April 17, 2014 at 1:42pm

    I find it amazing how people who claim the side of “science” always seem to be the first to come out with ad hominem, non sequitur and argumetum ad logicam arguments, completely divorced from logic. If you someone can refute a point I’ve made, clearly using logic or science, please do so. I’m all ears.

  • April 17, 2014 at 1:35pm

    The reason they disabled comments: The truth is that without the gun, evil people can come into your home and do the exact same thing ~to~ your child. That is what really happens “all the time”.

  • April 17, 2014 at 12:55am

    I wonder how these liberal administrators would react if a parent came to a meeting and started bullying them. If a parent cornered them, insulted them, maybe even physically hurt them or took some money from them. Do you think the administrator would consider the parent their friend, decide not to report them, take it as constructive feedback and laugh the incidence off?

    Responses (3) +
  • April 17, 2014 at 12:44am

    James, if you didn’t read my response to your comment then you’ve just proven what I said. Also, I dare you to disprove any scientific assertion I have made either in my original post or my response. You need to open your mind, man. You’re way too narrow minded.

  • April 16, 2014 at 4:32pm

    ConservativeAtheist (did you mean to misspell the word atheist?) the “1.7 million years old” rock tools are dated using arbitrary parent daughter isotope ratios established with the assumption that evolution is true and that the age of the earth is 3.8 billion years old (or whatever it’s supposed to be this year). The fossils are used to establish the parent daughter indices, which are then used to verify the fossils. Of course we’ve never observed phyletic gradualism in the lab, nature or the fossil record. And in the last couple of years the Cambrian Explosion has become a very big problem for the theory of evolution. Existing gene pools do have some genetic shift built into them, and we’ve never actually observed them produce a new genus despite decades of manipulating thousands of generations of bacteria and flies. Do what I did: Pull up any five white papers using radiometric dating, and check out how many of them discount the values derived as anomalies because the dates are randomly off from what was expected given the sample and the rock. You’ll probably find about two-thirds of the testing produces dates which are discarded because they don’t fit the theory. Seriously. Just do it.

  • April 16, 2014 at 4:17pm

    Leehweht, the main thing that makes me think there could be a gap is the fact that if the speed of light was faster in the past, then by the equation “energy equals mass times the speed of light squared”, either energy would have had to be relatively greater or mass would have had to be exponentially less in the past, and playing with the ratios of the three would mess with nuclear physics in stars. Observed redshift indicates expansion of the universe, different views of the universe from 190 million miles apart in the earth’s orbit every six months indicates great distances to stars (it take four minutes just for light from the sun to travel 94 million miles to the earth) and variations in cosmic background radiation indicate an amazingly fine tuned uneven dispersion of matter when God created, just so uneven to give us galaxies and stars rather than big clumps of black holes and nothing, or just finely dispersed dust. Of course we don’t know, but if God’s love is to last “a thousand generations” you’re looking at minimum 16 or 20 thousand years of human’s reproducing in history, not just 6,000 and then heaven where we are all like the angels and neither marry or are given in marriage. Just sayin!

  • April 16, 2014 at 2:22pm

    James, the “mountains of evidence” interpreted through blind faith assumption that “there is no intelligence” is not scientific, it’s inherently philosophical, just as blind faith in intelligence would be. SETI has been looking for a simple binary radio signal from space as proof of intelligence. It is a philosophical proposition to look at a four-based programming language capable of programming the human eye and say, “De facto, there was no intelligence involved in this.” Intelligence or non-intelligence is completely out of the equation at this point in terms of our understanding. For Naturalists to assume, “no intelligence!”, is a faith-based position that has no place in true science. At this point, belief is a self-creating universe is mythical. Every bit as mythical as any other religion known to mankind. Also, you probably know that relativity changes perceptions of time greatly. Dealing with a universe expanding at just the right rate to give us galaxies and stars and heavier elements – and mankind – deals with expansion near the speed of sound and with physics singularities in the inception. To make dogmatic statements about how time should or should not be reckoned is inappropriate for either side. Besides, many bible scholars believe in a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, and believe the word day can be taken as meaning an epoch.

  • April 16, 2014 at 12:39pm

    Doh, too much editing. Out of nothing = ex nihilo.

  • April 16, 2014 at 12:23pm

    Actually Cavallo many biblical scholars (myself included) believe in a gap in time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. But even with the gap many have a “truly” scientific position: At this point, we don’t know the age of the universe. The timeline of the apparent creative big bang is unknown, and aspects of such an event defy known physics. To take a dogmatic stand on it as many in popular science do these days – a dogmatic stand based on blind faith in an out of ex nothing, self-generating universe – is to believe in mythology. It’s the opposite of pursuing knowledge of the universe because it produces theories which are untestable (like infinite multiverse) to try to explain away the apparent design we see in the one and only universe that we do observe.

  • April 16, 2014 at 11:55am

    Perhaps you are wishing he was stupid enough to have blind faith in a self-generating universe and abiogenesis, neither of which have ever been observed? The origin of the universe and of life were singularities. Both show the earmarks of design, unless you want to believe that the random chance which resulted in the universe and life somehow hit the jackpot despite odds greater than the number of electrons that can fit in the known universe. You’re making assumptions about the dimensionality of the universe relative to time. You’re also relying on theories which exist not to explain what we observe, but to explain it away. We only observe one universe. If anyone one of a host of constants were off by more than 5% there would be no stars, and hence no life. We do not observe phyletic gradualism in nature, the lab or the fossil record. The gene pool shifting we observe in existing gene pools in existing species have never resulted in simply another genus. The theories of infinite multiverse and punctuated equilibrium are untestable and un-provable. They only exist to explain away the fine order and apparent design we observe. So I ask you again: Do you wish he was stupid in the form of having blind faith in a universe that creates itself ex nihilo and in life that come together despite insurmountable odds?

    Responses (6) +
  • April 15, 2014 at 4:41pm

    They seriously need to put her on national commercials.

  • April 7, 2014 at 4:50pm

    SCOTUS itself in this decision violates the clear wording of the 1st Amendment.

    Responses (1) +
  • April 5, 2014 at 12:04am

    Thank God. No Hillary for President now. Phew! This is a woman who spent a year in college writing a thesis on Saul Alinsky’s methods. Seriously. Look it up.

123 To page: Go