Comments on: Palin comparison

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:33:39 +0000

So Phil

you are a proponent of critical thinking, except when it comes to politics?

That’s disappointing.

By: MH

MH — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 18:00:19 +0000

Jeez, the illiteracy of some people…

Sarah Palin will set the woman’s movement back 300 years. So that takes us back to 1707.

THIS JUST IN: a ‘megachurch’ is not exactly equal to one thousand regular churches! AND a millipede does not actually have one thousand legs! And the Superdome is not actually located above another dome! Stop the presses, someone call the president, pope, and Morgan Freeman!

…welcome to the world of figurative language*. Have a nice stay.

*note: This post should not be construed as suggesting that there is literally a place called ‘Figurative Language.’

I am not insane or stupid enough to have that make sense

Don’t sell yourself short, champ!

By: wonky73

wonky73 — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:47:09 +0000

So let me try and wrap my brain around this insanity. Sarah Palin will set the woman’s movement back 300 years. So that takes us back to 1707. At that time, women were often traded and treated as property. In many places they could not own property. They were excluded from most business ventures could not attend most forms of education. And were not allowed a voice in government. Now Sarah Palin has fought her way to a position of much power and she has been nominated for the second most powerful governmental position in the most powerful country in the world. She epitomizes the success of the women’s movement. But because she is against future women being slaughtered in the wombs of their own mothers she sets the woman movement back 300 years. I am not insane or stupid enough to have that make sense

By: Fernando

Fernando — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:18:24 +0000

SORRY
iT IS NOT A FRAKKING POLITICS WEBISITE!!!!!!!!!!

By: Fernando

Fernando — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:14:06 +0000

What is about this forum/website? Science or Reps and Dems bashing each other? IT IS NOT A FRAKKING POLITICAL WEBSITE₧!!!!!!

By: Grand Lunar

Grand Lunar — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 00:17:27 +0000

@bad politics,

Well, if you don’t like it, then skip the political posts.

By: Doug

Doug — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 23:11:35 +0000

I rarely join in these discussions, but so much of what is being said is old garbage (usually repeated from ignorant sources) or new garbage (coming from ignorant posters). Unfortunately, this is a very touchy subject, so that’s what always happens.

Phil obviously makes these posts because he has strong feelings on these political matters. It’s his blog: get over it. I wish he would turn off comments on these subjects simply because of the stupidity that follows. Normally I think he’s a very level-headed guy that makes sense with almost every word — but this time I think he wrote before thinking, making his post a bit ignorant. Regardless, most of this is directed towards the other commenters:

Yes, Palin is a woman. Get over it. Yes, choosing her is meant to bring in women voters. Get over it. But bringing in “disenfranchised women who wanted Hilary?” You have got to be kidding me. Simply making that comment is an insult to MY intelligence! There will be some that vote for her because she’s a woman, just like there will be plenty that vote for Obama because he’s black — if anything, this simply provides a small offset to the simple-minded voters. She brings so much more to the ticket — but so many Democrats can’t get past her gender that its easy to see who the reals sexists are.

Ok, now to tackle the abortion issue. According to science, should abortions be allowed? … (crickets chirp in the distance) … Nobody? That’s right — a scientist can only say what the effect will be on the mother, child, and society, but not whether its “right” or “wrong.” Scientific knowledge only helps us make an informed decision. So why the heated debate? It’s become a fight between “Life” vs “Choice,” two moral ideals that cannot both be satisfied (at least, so it seems with abortion).

Hear this, hear this! Both “Pro-Life” and “Pro-Choice” are right — and the moment you try to say that the other side is morally inferior you have only proven your own ignorance on life.