Advertisement

notsobright

Follow

Comment history

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback pushes faith mentors for state prison inmates

Its called Eugenics. And like Planned Parenthood founder M. Sanger, I suppose you get to choose who you think should live and who should not. Let me guess. . . inner city minority, mentally handicapped, . . .

June 22, 2011 at 11:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback pushes faith mentors for state prison inmates

. . . "evaporated!" This is just plain stupid. I am on the ground with these real men and women- regularly. We have HARD statistics. . . Kansas IFI last year was 17% overall with under 5% for first time inmates. I am personal friends with the actual people and the actual man who collects the numbers. Nationally IFI last year was 12% over all. Good grief- so complain about +/- 5%. The typical recidivism is easily over 70%!!

Further- I can not believe that someone is going to complain that the 18 month integrated IFI system where men are educated, taught Microsoft skills, how to work, how to have goals and values, how to study, how to critically think, and in that community of 16 hour a day training they MUST abide by strict guidelines. And someone who knows so much about inmate reform is going to complain that some have been dismissed . . . .???

This is not about some individual claiming they have "found God." Anybody can say that. . . . lots of politicians say things like that everyday. . . "I am sorry for the people I have hurt. . . blah blah blah." Give me a track record.

The fact is that IFI demands a minimum 18 month track record. And people complain. . .?? I smell a biased closed mind again! Good grief.

June 22, 2011 at 11:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback pushes faith mentors for state prison inmates

Yup- that is what the coalition is all about. Mentors are ANY volunteer, from ANY walk of life. It is not even "faith-based"! The effort INCLUDES ANY/ALL "faith-based" and all others. Its called an "open-minded" open public square.

I find it ironic that those who express the greatest passion for secularization are actually the most closed minded.

I look forward to seeing all these people who are so interested here spending their personal time and resources on these efforts.

I have to admit, I am pretty redneck and dumb, but the blatant blind ignorance of these comments of such supposed intelligent people is staggering.

June 22, 2011 at 10:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback pushes faith mentors for state prison inmates

The ENTIRE state- the Public Square- was invited! It was not a closed conference. Look forward to meeting you at the next coalition conference and local meetings.

June 22, 2011 at 10:23 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback pushes faith mentors for state prison inmates

I was at the conference. Brownback did NOT suggest faith-based mentors! This is an initiative of the ENTIRE state; law enforcement, DOC, DCCCA, treatment centers, educational inst., county jails, etc. etc. . . . and every other stakeholder in the state. They were all there- they ALL conducted seminars! This is about a open public square coalition. These same coalitions have been developed in other states with great success. We all look forward to many of you coming to volunteer your time and money in this effort.

For what it is worth- typical recidivism for prison inmates is 70-80% and costs our society millions. (This next year in KS, 5000 inmates will be released- 4500 will return to crime and prison) However, nationwide (and here in KS), for those thousands of inmates who become part of the Inner Change Freedom Initiative (The Prison Fellowship 18 month Re-entry program) the recidivism is less than 10% with less than 3% for first time prisoners. That means- if we had 5000 prisoners go through the program. . . you do the math. The success with the "flying spaghetti monster" is pretty amazing. Not even anything at a close 2nd! Hmmmm Further, most of the mentoring and work is accomplished by inmates and volunteers. No tax money needed. WOW. How novel is that?

What a sham that dumb and arrogant "flying spaghetti monster" people take credit for 95% of the works and service with the establishment of public education institutions, the hospitals most attend, current Katrina recovery, Inner City Renewal, the International Human Slave Trade, Prison Reform, Inmate Rehab, etc. etc. . I am really dumb, but I think it is a shame that we do not recognize the many atheist organizations, many diverse religions, and particularly those who comment on posts such as these for their sacrifice of so much personal time and money in such a humble and inconspicuous manner. Most of us have never noticed! The FSM people can learn from you I am sure.

June 21, 2011 at 10:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Extremists are the real threat

The point began with a claim by Pitts that the problem is extremists. Almost immediately those holding to a naturalistic philosophy of life began to make a claim that it was the theists who were the "extremists." I found that ironic when it was naturalistic philosophy that was responsible for more deaths in the last one century than ALL other ideologies COMBINED in ALL of history. Who are the extremists?

The discussion of the naturalistic philosophy digressed as it revealed how utterly incoherent it is as some tried to philosophically debate that naturalism was not philosophy but science (go figure that one out!). It became more confusing as some wanted to debate whether Micheal Ruse, Phd in the Phil of Biology and atheist, is not qualified to recognize that modern science (like Dawkins) have went beyond the limits of science and entered the field of philosophy. One thing led to another to the point of revealing the "ridiculous game" that gets played under the guise of "science," all because naturalism is not science at all!

All of this reveals in the end who are the "extremists." One's who demand we accept a view, even if if is incoherent and can not answer the questions (I gave a few and never got one viable answer). Talk about extreme, it is even more amazing that this naturalistic philosophy has set up state-run structures that take our tax dollars to support their efforts and worship centers as their philosophy could never stand on its own. Brain washing is a scary thing. . . ask a few million Germans from the 1930-40s!

May 29, 2011 at 9:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Extremists are the real threat

Good to see you have come to the moral conclusions that it would be good to care for weak and less fortunate human beings. Gosh- there have been many in this discussion that have taken the naturalistic philosophical position for survival of the fittest- which was the basis that fueled the Gulags and the Holocaust. Very pleased to see you would stand against such extremists.

Also good to see you are pro-life instead of those who think that we should really live out "survival of the fittest" whereby we kill innocent children. At least you are being consistent compared to the many who have truly entered into something so irrational, that their arguments do not even align with reality.

I wish people would at least be consistent- either human life is to be protected simply because it has transcendent value as human life; or we believe that the strong should survive as espoused by the various extremist Eugenics movement held by extremists like Margret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood), Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, Hitler, etc. etc.

May 29, 2011 at 3:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Extremists are the real threat

EVERYTHING you are talking about IS philosophy. But that is the point- philosophy and science are two different things.

So here. . . you can easily clear it up for me. Seriously. Use the scientific method and show me how life came from non-life, or something came from nothing, or how you can cross an actual infinity, or how you determine what is moral. Maybe you will sway my view. I will wait to see it . . (hmmm. . .waiting with that cute tune from Jeopardy!) Let me save you time- The scientific method and evidence will not answer those things!

But this is exactly the point. Naturalism is NOT science- it is a philosophy with its presuppositions on origins, destiny, and its map based in a closed system. Dawkins is making a philosophical argument. That is not my opinion, it is a fact acknowledged by the world of scholars.

Some of you are absolutely amazing. In contrast to Ruse (one of your own atheists), Tolkien, Lewis, Flew, and thousands of other thinkers; you have arrived at something that ALL of us have missed. Wow. So, not to embarrass myself any further, I will hold off any more arguments until you can show me the scientific evidence and conclusions that will sway me. Seriously- the ball is in your court. I want to know what is true.

Good grief. . .I am not going to argue about Ruse being a biologist. Ruse is ten levels deeper than the everyday biologist- as he is a scholar in BOTH philosophy AND the sciences. Realize, I am just suggesting since he is an atheist and one of your own, perhaps you should convince him that he has made a terrible mistake in acknowledging that modern science has been commandeered by philosophical naturalism.

While you are at it with Ruse, you may want to argue with Copernicus, Bacon, Kepler, Galileo, Descartes, Newton, Boyle, Faraday, Mendel, Kelvin, Planck, Tolkien, Lewis (i.e. Pilgrim's Regress, The Abolition of Man, Mere Christianity, etc), A. McGrath, and Anthony Flew (who USED to debate for atheism until he also saw it as a failure!). I DO REALIZE that just because many of these men gave us the foundations for science while they were all theists, does not make the theistic worldview true. I am just suggesting that you study their writings and ideas instead of arguing with this not-so-bright-guy who only has 12 years of post secondary education and will not be known in history like those men.

Since naturalism is such an obviously superior intellectual philosophical system- it should not be hard to get them to abandon (or in history here show them as intellectual nincompoops) their theistic systems and move back to atheism/naturalism.

What do I know. . . I am not that bright as I am totally confused by your arguments.

May 28, 2011 at 7:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Extremists are the real threat

Liberty- Help me here- where is the experiment that demonstrates the beginning premise of the universe? Where is the experiment that demonstrates how life came from non-life? Where is the experiment that demonstrates how something came from nothing? Where is the experiment that shows how "Reason" came about by evolution?

What you are saying here is like someone telling me, with words, that words have no meaning. Read all the posts here. You ARE making a philosophical argument- and that is the point. Nothing you have given is science. Naturalism is a philosophy- NOT science! Dawkins, as his OWN atheistic comrade Michael Ruse admits, is NOT giving a science argument!!

I give! You go ahead and argue with Ruse, British world renown atheistic biologist, who agrees that modern science has went far beyond its limits. Like my name here suggests, I am just not bright enough to figure out how your philosophical arguments magically become scientific experiments because you demand they do.

May 28, 2011 at 7:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal )