Michele Joined The Race, and Debated?

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2009
Michele Joined The Race, and Debated?
141
Tue, 06-14-2011 - 2:09pm

 

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2006
Thu, 06-16-2011 - 2:57pm

Exactly...in fact, ID starts with the Conclusion and builds a "theory."..bass ackwards... not a shred of scientific method in it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-27-2009
Thu, 06-16-2011 - 11:04pm
I'm not sure why you find my comment about the title being insulting. It had nothing to do with you. I said that reading the titles didn't help me. It seems that, at least from the first link, that there is nothing more that what is on the thomas website. There is very little text to the bill. I thought there would be more.
I realize that we see this different, but from what I'm seeing there isn't much to those bills at all. They seem to be for the purpose of protecting legislation or regulation in place for the most part.
It also seems to me that just as you feel those bills are Bachmann pushing her beliefs on others, that the opposite view point could be held by others if those bills had an opposing view. Seems like a two sided argument he said, she said type issues.
I'll keep looking for more information that supports your opinion that Bachmann is forcing her religious beliefs on others, but as I said, it won't be in the near future. I need to stay away from the computer not increase my time on it right now.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2006
Sat, 06-18-2011 - 2:16pm
I saw that but was too lazy to post it. Unfortunately she can make patently false statements like the following, quoted from the article:

"What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide. I don't think it's a good idea for government to come down on one side of scientific issue or another, when there is reasonable doubt on both sides."

and doesn't get called on them. In the above quote, she calls ID "science" and then says "there is reasonable doubt on both sides". No, it isn't, and no, there isn't...and we can't tell if she is too ignorant to know the difference (she's clearly not stupid) or if she's making these preposterous claims just to get elected and push her own agenda.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
Sat, 06-18-2011 - 2:51pm
Based on her other erroneous comments regarding science, I think she actually believes this stuff. Too stupid to be president, that's for sure.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-03-2009
Sat, 06-18-2011 - 7:22pm
I'm not sure she's "too stupid".

But she's definitely ideologically conservative: Women don't have the right to control their own reproductive choices but it's alright to have and use firearms. Go figure. For that alone, she would never get my vote.

There are thumbnail sketches and quotes at this link: http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/rep_bios.php?category=summary&rep_id=54464227

Jabberwocka

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-04-2011
Mon, 06-20-2011 - 3:44pm

*** No, it's not.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-04-2011
Mon, 06-20-2011 - 3:46pm

*** Exactly...in fact, ID starts with the Conclusion and builds a "theory."..bass ackwards... not a shred of scientific method in it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-03-2011
Mon, 06-20-2011 - 3:47pm
<>

I'm sure you'll be able to post links to that great body of research that shows that ID is a scientifically proven truth.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-13-2009
Mon, 06-20-2011 - 4:20pm
I thought Adam and Eve was a cautionary tale.

Am a Christian, but I don't believe in teaching it in school.

 

Pages