Random Rants : Someone is wrong on the Internet

Status
Not open for further replies.
That would depend on how basic you need it to be. Are you looking for material on a high school level? College or university? Or something that pretty much starts at the beginning?

High school level. I passed the creationist biology BS class with a 98, so I know the stuff that wasn't BSed up.
 
Isn't creationist biology simply "God did it" or is there slightly more to it than that?
 
Wow!

I mean... that seems, to me, to be a really strange circumstance you find yourself in. Though I suppose it must be fairly typical for a lot of young Americans.

Sadly, I know a bit where he's coming from.
My parents (my mother especially) are fundamentalist Christian, and with all the conservative viewpoints that come with it; although my father is more to the left (but still solidly Republican, he believes in amnesty for illegal immigrants just because of the logistical challenge deporting all of them would entail)
I too was solidly conservative (anti-gay marriage, etc.) but the internet has changed me. I'm centrist now, and socially liberal (to use the American terms)
At least my pastor is
A) Funny
and
B) More focuses on the Bible rather than any politics.
Isn't creationist biology simply "God did it" or is there slightly more to it than that?
I'd say more "God did it" The author tried to find any possible connection to creation.
"So, proteins are formed by links of amino acids, and since there's a minuscule chance of amino acids linking up perfectly to form proteins ZOMG guys creationism is real because the horrible, Satan-loving abiogenesis theories couldn't have happened!"
Except abiogenesis doesn't work that way, but no one ever accused creationists at looking at the facts.
 
Got a free model haircut today (basically you are a guinea pig for training hairdressers) & they kept me waiting about 45 min & the haircut took forever. I knew I would be late for work afterwards so I took a cab which also took forever & cost me $34 with tip which is more than I made at work because my afterschool class ended early since it was the 2nd to last day of school & I only had one kid there.

Sometimes being cheap doesn't pay in the end. :(
 
Indeed. Sometimes it seems that the harder you try to hold onto that pesky lucre the more quickly it slips away from you.

I have found that being generous with the stuff (without playing the largesse card too obviously) can reap some really strange rewards.

But generally I just ignore the stuff. Somebody gives me some arbitrary sums of money and I, on occasion, pay out some equally arbitrary sums of money. I've given up caring about it almost altogether.

You'd think, with this kind of attitude, that I'd quickly go bankrupt, wouldn't you? In fact I seem to have more of the stuff floating about than ever. It's all very strange. But then I really don't have any ambitions to own any more stuff than I've got already. Apart from a few weekly groceries.
 
Over billions of years, blind chance can do some pretty amazing things.
 
Just like how evolution is just simply blind chance.

Evolution, as you well know, is about adapting to one's environment. Every living thing does it, almost every second of the day. Yes, even you.
 
I believe the vast majority of "evolution" was blind. Eyes only appeared about 550 "million" years ago
 
Which would be around the time of the mass explosion of life variety at the start of the Cambrian Era.
 
Got a free model haircut today (basically you are a guinea pig for training hairdressers) & they kept me waiting about 45 min & the haircut took forever. I knew I would be late for work afterwards so I took a cab which also took forever & cost me $34 with tip which is more than I made at work because my afterschool class ended early since it was the 2nd to last day of school & I only had one kid there.

Sometimes being cheap doesn't pay in the end. :(

PICTURES! I DEMAND PICTURES.

I just cut my own hair in the sink.
 
So, the news from the Supreme Court led to some really stupid statements over dinner tonight.

My father interpreted the marriage equality ruling as meaning that "monogamy is unconstitutional now." The slippery slope is apparently so steep that allowing two men to marry must mean that a three way marriage must be legally recognized too, and that somehow prevents traditional two way relationships from remaining exclusive. Incest has to be celebrated now too, apparently, at least among siblings of the same sex.

This time my sister was the one who suggested that legalizing gay marriage might cause a great many otherwise completely straight individuals to decide to become gay just because that is considered such a cool and progressive fad. (My father expressed such an opinion a few years ago not as a possibility but as an inevitability, which is clearly crazy.) My mother dismissed this, realizing that it would at most cause people who were already homosexual or bisexual to be open about their inborn preferences and pursue the sort of relationships they already wanted. She still considered that a bad thing though.

My sister questioned as to whether this might open the way to inter-species marriages, and my dad said it would not at all surprise him if a man marries a kangaroo within the next few years.

Both of my parents praised MLK's conservative daughter for heroically standing up to the gay agenda.

My mother said she thinks it is really sad how so many people in the LGBT movement are so hateful and intolerant of conservative Christians. She said they should not be so mean to people of faith who in no way wish them harm or want to take away any rights, but just want to preserve the sanctity of marriage by making sure no one can marry persons of the same sex.

My sister and father questioned whether churches would soon be forced to recognize such sinful unions.

My sister lamented the gays appropriating the word marriage, but clarified that she would really like the religious and civil aspects of marriage to be separated. She has no problem with gay couples having all the same tax benefits, visitation rights, etc. In fact she thinks those things should also be easy for platonic friends or siblings to get through a civil union which would not imply any sort of sexual relationship. She expressed that she would quite like to live together with me under such an arrangement (a prospect which I find unappealing). My parents agreed with her.




What most surprised me though was that none of these ridiculous statements were as emotionally charged as the reaction to yesterday's ruling on ObamaCare. They showed a sort of calm resignation to how society is falling apart, rather than any great surprise or passion to do anything to change it. Yesterday my dad was in awe that six justices could disagree on the facts of the case, thinking that "State" could refer to the Federal government rather than one of the several States of the union, and considered it a truly horrible thing for the legal traditions of this country to let judges rewrite laws like that. He said we still need to work to elect republicans to repeal and replace ObamaCare. At the same time though, he was also glad about the decision on a personal level because it saves us more than a thousand dollars per month. We happen live in a state that refused to set up an exchange, and are not currently in a position to afford insurance without subsidies.
 
He said we still need to work to elect republicans to repeal and replace ObamaCare. At the same time though, he was also glad about the decision on a personal level because it saves us more than a thousand dollars per month. We happen live in a state that refused to set up an exchange, and are not currently in a position to afford insurance without subsidies.

Naturally. People are notoriously self-defeating in such fashions.
 
So, the news from the Supreme Court led to some really stupid statements over dinner tonight.

My father interpreted the marriage equality ruling as meaning that "monogamy is unconstitutional now." The slippery slope is apparently so steep that allowing two men to marry must mean that a three way marriage must be legally recognized too, and that somehow prevents traditional two way relationships from remaining exclusive. Incest has to be celebrated now too, apparently, at least among siblings of the same sex.

This time my sister was the one who suggested that legalizing gay marriage might cause a great many otherwise completely straight individuals to decide to become gay just because that is considered such a cool and progressive fad. (My father expressed such an opinion a few years ago not as a possibility but as an inevitability, which is clearly crazy.) My mother dismissed this, realizing that it would at most cause people who were already homosexual or bisexual to be open about their inborn preferences and pursue the sort of relationships they already wanted. She still considered that a bad thing though.

My sister questioned as to whether this might open the way to inter-species marriages, and my dad said it would not at all surprise him if a man marries a kangaroo within the next few years.

Both of my parents praised MLK's conservative daughter for heroically standing up to the gay agenda.

My mother said she thinks it is really sad how so many people in the LGBT movement are so hateful and intolerant of conservative Christians. She said they should not be so mean to people of faith who in no way wish them harm or want to take away any rights, but just want to preserve the sanctity of marriage by making sure no one can marry persons of the same sex.

My sister and father questioned whether churches would soon be forced to recognize such sinful unions.

My sister lamented the gays appropriating the word marriage, but clarified that she would really like the religious and civil aspects of marriage to be separated. She has no problem with gay couples having all the same tax benefits, visitation rights, etc. In fact she thinks those things should also be easy for platonic friends or siblings to get through a civil union which would not imply any sort of sexual relationship. She expressed that she would quite like to live together with me under such an arrangement (a prospect which I find unappealing). My parents agreed with her.




What most surprised me though was that none of these ridiculous statements were as emotionally charged as the reaction to yesterday's ruling on ObamaCare. They showed a sort of calm resignation to how society is falling apart, rather than any great surprise or passion to do anything to change it. Yesterday my dad was in awe that six justices could disagree on the facts of the case, thinking that "State" could refer to the Federal government rather than one of the several States of the union, and considered it a truly horrible thing for the legal traditions of this country to let judges rewrite laws like that. He said we still need to work to elect republicans to repeal and replace ObamaCare. At the same time though, he was also glad about the decision on a personal level because it saves us more than a thousand dollars per month. We happen live in a state that refused to set up an exchange, and are not currently in a position to afford insurance without subsidies.

Now imagine if you were gay and coming out, or being found out by such a family.
 
What most surprised me though was that none of these ridiculous statements were as emotionally charged as the reaction to yesterday's ruling on ObamaCare.

This suprises me. Why do you think they care more about Obamacare than the sanctity of marriage?
 
I keep forgetting that it's a bad idea to wade into argumentative threads on the PI forums. Bad cybrxkhan, bad cybrxkhan! I must figure out an appropriate way to punish myself to discourage this kind of destructive behavior.


My sister lamented the gays appropriating the word marriage, but clarified that she would really like the religious and civil aspects of marriage to be separated. She has no problem with gay couples having all the same tax benefits, visitation rights, etc. In fact she thinks those things should also be easy for platonic friends or siblings to get through a civil union which would not imply any sort of sexual relationship. She expressed that she would quite like to live together with me under such an arrangement (a prospect which I find unappealing). My parents agreed with her.

Other than the fact that this was coming out of a homophobic thought process, I do find this an intriguing idea to have the economic benefits of marriages extended to other types of non-romantic relationships. I do have two cousins, for instance (one of whom is gay, coincidentally) who are currently living together and if they never end up getting married will likely continue to live together; my youngest aunt and youngest uncle on my dads side have both never married and likely never will and also live together for convenience (with my grandmother, as they are her main caretakers at the moment). Not so sure about platonic friends though, but whatever.
 
I keep forgetting that it's a bad idea to wade into argumentative threads on the PI forums. Bad cybrxkhan, bad cybrxkhan! I must figure out an appropriate way to punish myself to discourage this kind of destructive behavior.

play as Chimu while replacing all the random names with Byzantine ones to remind yourself how far away you're from Best Rome.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom