One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
How can you explain the Universe without a Creator?
Page <<first <prev 23 of 29 next> last>>
Jan 21, 2016 00:02:39   #
PeterS
 
Anigav6969 wrote:
We're waiting for your answers....your " selective outrage" is obvious.


Yeah, but these weren't Americans. It doesn't matter if a president gets non US citizens killed (unless he is a democrat)--just so he doesn't get those loyal to the red white and blue killed. Man Ani--get your priorities straight! Next you are going to say Muslims have the same rights as Americans. Boy!

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 00:23:16   #
son of witless
 
PeterS wrote:
There was no active WMD program--how much more specific can you get. And if you don't understand that--no active program means that of all the WMD programs he had been pursue NONE were being pursued at the time of the war. That's what Bush was selling us--ACTIVE programs producing fresh WMD that he could either use himself or pass on to terrorists. The WMD Saddam did have was all produced in the 80's and early 90's and most likely forgotten that it was there. The whole thing was a con that led to 4,500 dead, 30,000 plus critically wounded, and trillions expended and even more just to care for those needlessly wounded in a pointless war.

As for sending aid when aid was available??? What do you want to do? If you aren't going to hold Bush responsible for the admitted mistakes he made why are you trying to hold Obama and Hillary accountable for a crime much less devious? We aren't talking about 5 needlessly dead but 4,500 and 30,000 plus critically wounded! Does the enormity of that crime not sink in? I am not trying to diminish the loss of Stevens and those around him but the only reason this is an issue for the right is that you want to use it as a weapon to try to defeat Hillary. If 4,500 and 30,000 wounded doesn't make an impact on you don't sit there and try to sell the death of 5 and wounding of...???...as reason to be all upset. Christ man, conservatives are the worst kind of pimps--trying to use the deaths of hero's to get equally bad policy makers as Bush elected once again as president. This nation, and this world, has had enough of conservative foreign policy! Shame, shame--conservatives really shouldn't complain how others wipe their ass until you learn to wipe your own...
There was no active WMD program--how much more spe... (show quote)


What did you not get? You are litigating the whole Iraq War. I am discussing individual events. It is not about how many died. It is about how many died waiting for help.

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 00:36:03   #
PeterS
 
son of witless wrote:
What did you not get? You are litigating the whole Iraq War. I am discussing individual events. It is not about how many died. It is about how many died waiting for help.

And why is it about how many died waiting for help? Isn't the purpose of your promise to lay blame? Well, I've done the same. And if it's not about how many died tell that to the families of those who made the ultimate sacrifice....

Reply
 
 
Jan 21, 2016 02:11:59   #
Harpooner1
 
RWNJ wrote:
The simple fact is that you can't. Scientists have all kinds of half-baked theories, but no answers. And they never will be able to provide an answer.

There is no end to the amount of evidence for a Creator. Take mathematics, for example. Why does it even exist? It is not something that was created by man. It was discovered. Who created the laws of mathematics? Who created all of the universal physical constants that define how the universe, and everything in it, behaves?

How did life begin? Scientists haven't got a clue. They really don't. Once again, they have nothing but half-baked theories. Nothing more. In fact, the more we learn about genetics and micro-biology, the weaker the case for a naturalistic origin for life becomes. Some people actually believe that something that was lifeless actually became alive all by itself. Without any help from anyone, least of all a Creator.

So, how do you explain the Universe without God? You can't.
The simple fact is that you can't. Scientists have... (show quote)


The phrase, "can't see the forest because of the trees.." comes to mind.
There is a reason about the Earth, it works to perfection. Science is a great study, but, it cannot explain HOW everything is in place to form this great planet, Earth. It is what it is. A rarity in the universe we know. Perfectly placed and orbiting a sun with a regularity that we take for granted, the Earth has sustained millions of years without fail. The inhabitants have lived....and died here. Home of thousands of different species of living things, the Earth has given haven to all sorts of life. I have no doubt evolution takes place.....That is part of the design.
Human beings are the exception to many rules in "nature".
We have a brain much more complex than any other species. We are far more fragile, but, we adapt. This is no accident.
That we have different skin colors or languages is part of the evolution of mankind. It's not that we will all become one. Perhaps it is not the prospect of a "God" that people fear. It is the prospect of accepting a notion that we are created. Yes, this explains a lot, creation, but, it takes away the power of self. This is the circle of thought.
Now, we humans do some nasty shit to each other. We do. This is what free will has to offer. We feel guilt, love, passion, greed, envy....
the whole host of emotions that lead us to great things and undesirable things. Do animals do this? No, they go by instinct. Human beings are not so different....But, we have this brain that is always thinking. And, there is no end to this. It get's us in trouble, and it also figures out how to improve our lives. That is our doing. Nature does it's thing without fail. We fail, as humans.
What is a perfect person? You won't find anyone. Folks, we are a long way from Utopia. Just be a GOOD person. That is all you need to do.
Our human society is here, and we are but children. Forget about race and religion and figure this out. Religion is a man made dogma. Protect your self and family, help your friends and do a little bit more.
The sun WILL rise tomorrow.....guarantee it.

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 08:21:21   #
payne1000
 
Anigav6969 wrote:
We're waiting for your answers....your " selective outrage" is obvious.


Don't forget the 3,000 killed on our own soil by someone other than Muslims . . .



Reply
Jan 21, 2016 10:44:35   #
She Wolf Loc: Currently Georgia
 
RWNJ wrote:
The simple fact is that you can't. Scientists have all kinds of half-baked theories, but no answers. And they never will be able to provide an answer.

There is no end to the amount of evidence for a Creator. Take mathematics, for example. Why does it even exist? It is not something that was created by man. It was discovered. Who created the laws of mathematics? Who created all of the universal physical constants that define how the universe, and everything in it, behaves?

How did life begin? Scientists haven't got a clue. They really don't. Once again, they have nothing but half-baked theories. Nothing more. In fact, the more we learn about genetics and micro-biology, the weaker the case for a naturalistic origin for life becomes. Some people actually believe that something that was lifeless actually became alive all by itself. Without any help from anyone, least of all a Creator.

So, how do you explain the Universe without God? You can't.
The simple fact is that you can't. Scientists have... (show quote)


What amazes me is, we who believe in a Creator are ridiculed because we accept this on faith. Yet, those who believe in theories without proof are also accepting this on faith. Science accepts evolution but can not produce their missing link.

Call me what you will. I believe in my God. If you choose to call me naive or stupid doesn't bother me in least. I will pray for you. How anyone can look at the beauty of this world and believe it all happened by cosmic accident amazes me.

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 13:50:58   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
son of witless wrote:
What did you not get? You are litigating the whole Iraq War. I am discussing individual events. It is not about how many died. It is about how many died waiting for help.


The way I see it, the 3000 to 4000 who died in Afghanistan died waiting for America to come to her senses, or rather, the warmongers to come to theirs. They were certainly waiting for rescue from a wasted and useless effort which in no way, form or fashion was a fight to protect American freedom.

To go to war over false pretenses is worse than not responding to those who needed help, it is out and out murder. The lives of the military are not pawns to be trifled with.

Reply
 
 
Jan 21, 2016 13:58:08   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
She Wolf wrote:
What amazes me is, we who believe in a Creator are ridiculed because we accept this on faith. Yet, those who believe in theories without proof are also accepting this on faith. Science accepts evolution but can not produce their missing link.

Call me what you will. I believe in my God. If you choose to call me naive or stupid doesn't bother me in least. I will pray for you. How anyone can look at the beauty of this world and believe it all happened by cosmic accident amazes me.


++Science accepts evolution but can not produce their missing link. ++

Such a statement is absurd. There are literally hundreds of transitional fossils; missing links. This one statement proves you lack the knowledge to even begin to criticize science for it's lack of evidence.

I'm sorry, but there is a back ground of knowledge needed to understand the science of evolution and you won't get it from the creationist websites.

What is amazing to me and many others is the invention of a deity to explain things not yet understood, rather than continue to search. And the deity has total immunity from doing anything that would be considered evil or wrong by rational beings.

It's so simple; God just is, always has been and always will be. It's all because of God. God did it. That explains it. Nuff said?? Get real.

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 18:23:18   #
Anigav6969
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
The way I see it, the 3000 to 4000 who died in Afghanistan died waiting for America to come to her senses, or rather, the warmongers to come to theirs. They were certainly waiting for rescue from a wasted and useless effort which in no way, form or fashion was a fight to protect American freedom.

To go to war over false pretenses is worse than not responding to those who needed help, it is out and out murder. The lives of the military are not pawns to be trifled with.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 20:09:28   #
son of witless
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
The way I see it, the 3000 to 4000 who died in Afghanistan died waiting for America to come to her senses, or rather, the warmongers to come to theirs. They were certainly waiting for rescue from a wasted and useless effort which in no way, form or fashion was a fight to protect American freedom.

To go to war over false pretenses is worse than not responding to those who needed help, it is out and out murder. The lives of the military are not pawns to be trifled with.


Your fellow isolationists were speaking of the Iraq War. Now you mention the Afghanistan War. I am guessing that you are even more ignorant than they are.

Why would attacking our enemies in Afghanistan not be worth the effort? This is barely worth mentioning, but President Obama said that the war in Afghanistan was on " the right battlefield " and " has to be won. "

So are you a racist that you dare contradict our first African American President? Well?

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 20:26:20   #
son of witless
 
PeterS wrote:
And why is it about how many died waiting for help? Isn't the purpose of your promise to lay blame? Well, I've done the same. And if it's not about how many died tell that to the families of those who made the ultimate sacrifice....


Are you not able to understand simple concepts? The Benghazi disaster occurred because of incompetence, and lack of caring from Secretary of State Clinton and President Obama. Why is it wrong to hold them accountable?

I can argue, what the hell did Obama and Clinton send Americans into a cesspool like Libya for? However, that is not my point. Hillary and her boss did send them in. Like President Bush sent Americans into Iraq and Afghanistan.

The security beforehand was a joke in Benghazi. The response from Hillary and Barak once the attack was made known to them would be a crime if a death by incompetence law was actually enforced.

Once a President sends Americans into danger he owes them every protection he can give to them. If you want to cite specific instances during Bush's Presidency where he failed in that duty then go ahead.

Reply
 
 
Jan 21, 2016 20:42:39   #
PeterS
 
son of witless wrote:
Your fellow isolationists were speaking of the Iraq War. Now you mention the Afghanistan War. I am guessing that you are even more ignorant than they are.

Why would attacking our enemies in Afghanistan not be worth the effort? This is barely worth mentioning, but President Obama said that the war in Afghanistan was on " the right battlefield " and " has to be won. "

So are you a racist that you dare contradict our first African American President? Well?


You're the one who dismissed Iraq so you were given a comparison within the narrow parameters you, yourself, gave. The actual war was Afghanistan yet Bush was frittering away his efforts in Iraq. Stevens and his group died while waiting for enough reinforcements to beat their attackers. The same applies to those who died in Afghanistan while waiting for Bush to send enough troops to fight the Taliban and al-Qaeda who were their attackers. This is the direct correlation that you demanded.

My guess is that you just don't want to address the failure that was the Bush presidency. He abandoned Afghanistan to fight a pointless war in Iraq. As such, those who died in both wars at this time likely died for no reason--or wouldn't have died if he had focused on fighting those who attacked and aided and abetting those who attacked us.

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 21:03:58   #
PeterS
 
son of witless wrote:
Are you not able to understand simple concepts? The Benghazi disaster occurred because of incompetence, and lack of caring from Secretary of State Clinton and President Obama. Why is it wrong to hold them accountable?

I can argue, what the hell did Obama and Clinton send Americans into a cesspool like Libya for? However, that is not my point. Hillary and her boss did send them in. Like President Bush sent Americans into Iraq and Afghanistan.

The security beforehand was a joke in Benghazi. The response from Hillary and Barak once the attack was made known to them would be a crime if a death by incompetence law was actually enforced.

Once a President sends Americans into danger he owes them every protection he can give to them. If you want to cite specific instances during Bush's Presidency where he failed in that duty then go ahead.
Are you not able to understand simple concepts? Th... (show quote)

Is the only way you can debate is through denigrating others? Simply because someone doesn’t buy you very narrow argument doesn’t mean they are ignorant, stupid, on have any mental deficiencies. Stop trying to deflect and address the arguments being made—since you just stated they are about incompetency they are equivalent—or do you not have the mental capacity to understand that!

If you are making an argument on incompetency what greater example is there than a man so starts a pointless war that leads to 4,500 totally unnecessary deaths. There is nothing, including Benghazi, in Obamas presidency that comes close to that level of incompetency. 9-11 was the single worst event to befall our country since the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and Bush complete bungled the response and the conduct of the ensuing war. An equivalency would be if FDR had sent a detachment to attack Japan while the bulk of the US military invaded Mexico! The idiocy of the action aside it reeks of incompetency. My question is how on earth could your or any other republican support Bush—and a greater question is how on earth did you come away with a feeling of being more secure?

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 22:17:45   #
son of witless
 
PeterS wrote:
Is the only way you can debate is through denigrating others? Simply because someone doesn’t buy you very narrow argument doesn’t mean they are ignorant, stupid, on have any mental deficiencies. Stop trying to deflect and address the arguments being made—since you just stated they are about incompetency they are equivalent—or do you not have the mental capacity to understand that!

If you are making an argument on incompetency what greater example is there than a man so starts a pointless war that leads to 4,500 totally unnecessary deaths. There is nothing, including Benghazi, in Obamas presidency that comes close to that level of incompetency. 9-11 was the single worst event to befall our country since the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and Bush complete bungled the response and the conduct of the ensuing war. An equivalency would be if FDR had sent a detachment to attack Japan while the bulk of the US military invaded Mexico! The idiocy of the action aside it reeks of incompetency. My question is how on earth could your or any other republican support Bush—and a greater question is how on earth did you come away with a feeling of being more secure?
Is the only way you can debate is through denigrat... (show quote)


My apologies. One of your fellow liberals had told me to drop dead and in the heat of the discussion I projected her insult onto you. I try to not go beyond what ever level of animosity the other participants operate at.

Since you insist on shifting the argument from an episode to an entire policy, I can play ball. I am nothing if not adaptable.

The Iraq War was voted on and supported by Democrats until things got tough and it became politically profitable to be against the War.

Bush made a decision, which I believe will be vindicated by history. 911 occurred not just because Osama bin Laden was able to put together a team of extraordinary terrorists. 911 did not happen in a vacuum. It happened because under Bill Clinton the US did not follow up on it's commitments and threats to our enemies.

If you recall President Bush did not attack Iraq out of the blue. Saddam Hussein had not honored his commitments from the first Gulf War. He was given ample warning and time to comply.

He chose to call America's bluff. Unfortunately for him this was Bush, not Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter or Barak Hussein Obama. Attacking evil and killing murders is never a bad thing.

Reply
Jan 21, 2016 22:20:58   #
son of witless
 
PeterS wrote:
You're the one who dismissed Iraq so you were given a comparison within the narrow parameters you, yourself, gave. The actual war was Afghanistan yet Bush was frittering away his efforts in Iraq. Stevens and his group died while waiting for enough reinforcements to beat their attackers. The same applies to those who died in Afghanistan while waiting for Bush to send enough troops to fight the Taliban and al-Qaeda who were their attackers. This is the direct correlation that you demanded.

My guess is that you just don't want to address the failure that was the Bush presidency. He abandoned Afghanistan to fight a pointless war in Iraq. As such, those who died in both wars at this time likely died for no reason--or wouldn't have died if he had focused on fighting those who attacked and aided and abetting those who attacked us.
You're the one who dismissed Iraq so you were give... (show quote)


I dare you to give me a comparable incident in Afghanistan under Bush to the Benghazi fiasco. You give me generalizations against a specific event. You are arguing apples against my oranges.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 23 of 29 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.