Advertisement

adversary96 (Josh Brumm)

Follow

Comment history

Do you support the building of a mosque and Islamic cultural center a few blocks from the site of ground zero in New York City?

Before you get ahead of yourself at how barbaric they are compared to us, I have 3 words for you:

Abu Ghraib prison.

August 23, 2010 at 6:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Defense Secretary Robert Gates ordered a review Tuesday of a Pentagon policy banning media from taking pictures of flag-draped coffins of military dead. Should the media be allowed to photograph the coffins?

c_dubya I have 2 things for ya. First, aren't those links to the infamous "flawed intelligence" that got us into this desert quagmire? You know, the ones that also said Saddam was hiding WMDs all over the place?Secondly, none of the terrorist organizations you listed had anything to do with 9/11. At all. The villains who attacked our country were based in Afghanistan and have now moved (mostly) into Pakistan. As a preemptive FYI, AQI isn't Al Queda proper (though it is horrible and all their members need a grenade up the pooper), and it didn't even exist until after we had started to topple Saddam's regime.I'm not saying we shouldn't do a thorough mop-up in Iraq, nor am I saying we should let the terrorists play freely. But not using our heads and doing proper research before we started bombing everything is pretty much the direct reason for us STILL being in Iraq, and for having far too many of our bravest and finest coming home crippled or in a box. Prosecuting a war without having a clear understanding of what you're getting into is an insult to anyone who's ever served in wartime.

February 11, 2009 at 9:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sex education? It's a snap...

I would've responded earlier, but I had that whole "work" thing that needed to be done. The landlord does like it when I pay the rent.Bondmen (and various others), the reason I support teaching evolution in science class is because it's science. That's it. Creationism, Intelligent Design, or whatever name it has this month isn't. No one has yet to come up with a way to recreate or test (via experiments or through theory and computer models) the first few chapters of Genesis. If someone ever does, more power to them. But since we can see the byproducts of Evolution via Natural Selection (fossils, similarities in DNA from lots of different types of creatures, etc) it is so far the best and strongest argument for how life on earth came to its present state.Education up through High School is supposed to be broad, and not deep. The reason for that is to expose students to many different possible career paths. Evolution via Natural Selection is an integral and essential part of scientific knowledge, just as important as the theory of relativity or Newtonian laws of physics. As such it has an important place in the curriculum so that children that will go into scientific careers will have the basic foundation to build their professional lives upon.There will be plenty of kids who aren't interested in a career in science, but still might find that knowledge useful in some way. And it has long been considered acceptable practice for parents to pull their kids out of class or school activities temporarily when material they find objectionable is taught (evolution, condoms and sexual safety, and so on). This practice has so far been the least disruptive, and least intrusive to the students and school staff. To advocate or demand the complete removal of material that relatively few find objectionable shows a lack of respect for the school, the other students, and the community and does a great disservice to the education of our children when that material is censored.

August 4, 2008 at 1:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sex education? It's a snap...

Actually, Bondman, the complexity is taught in science class. Or at least it was when I was in school in the mid-90s. The thing is that Natural Selection takes sooooo looooong that it's hard to grasp. Most people can easily understand 100 years, because of experience with their elders. They can understand 1000 years because of written history. But it's difficult to understand a millions of years, which is the time-frame that Natural Selection works in.Now as far as teaching that sex is most intense between married man and women is something I think schools shouldn't touch with a 40 foot pole. While my sex-ed class was very brief (about 2 months) I think it was structured well. We were taught what sex was, what risks of having sex was, what the long term ramifications of those risks were, and how to minimize those risks. Oh, and part of that minimization lesson was that people who wait to have sex with only they married drastically reduced the risk to themselves and those they loved, since it severely cut down on the number of sexual partners they would encounter.But that was over a decade ago. I wouldn't be surprised if after being constantly harassed by religious fundamentalists the sex-ed program has been removed and the science curriculum has been altered. Because we wouldn't want schools to actually, you know, teach something that would cause your kid to question anything.

August 4, 2008 at 6:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Next