Another Good Quote

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction."
 -Blaise Pascal

Intelligent Design?

Witness: 'Intelligent Design' doesn't qualify as science By Martha Raffaele ASSOCIATED PRESS 8:39 a.m. September 28, 2005 HARRISBURG, Pa. – The concept of "intelligent design" is a form of creationism and is not based on scientific method, a professor testified Wednesday in a trial over whether the idea should be taught in public schools. Robert T. Pennock, a professor of science and philosophy at Michigan State University, testified on behalf of families who sued the Dover Area School District. He said supporters of intelligent design don't offer evidence to support their idea. "As scientists go about their business, they follow a method," Pennock said. "Intelligent design wants to reject that and so it doesn't really fall within the purview of science." Pennock said intelligent design does not belong in a science class, but added that it could possibly be addressed in other types of courses. In October 2004, the Dover school board voted 6-3 to require teachers to read a brief statement about intelligent design to students before classes on evolution. The statement says Darwin's theory is "not a fact" and has inexplicable "gaps," and refers students to an intelligent-design textbook for more information. Eight families are trying to have intelligent design removed from the curriculum, arguing that it violates the constitutional separation of church and state. They say it promotes the Bible's view of creation. Proponents of intelligent design argue that life on Earth was the product of an unidentified intelligent force, and that Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection cannot fully explain the origin of life or the emergence of highly complex life forms.

This is going to shock alot of people here, but I agree whole-heartedly. I don't think we should teach creationism in schools. It hasn't been proven, and therefore, is not a confirmed fact. Belief in The Creation is a matter of faith, of which I have. It doesn't need to be in a textbook for me to believe in it. It's already in the greatest textbook the world has ever known: The Holy Bible.

The facts, though, are a double-edged sword. Darwin's Theory of Evolution is ALSO not a proven fact. This being the case, it should be represented by the faculty for what it is, a THEORY, NOT fact.

Where the problem arises is when members of the faculty teach Darwin's Theory as fact. They never represent to students that there are, in fact, other theories out there that directly refute/contradict Darwin's theory. Being a product of American schools, I can confirm this (teachers representing this as fact) to be true.

I believe in The Creation. I don't believe in Darwin's Theory.

Also, can someone point out to me where "Seperation Of Church and State" is mentioned in the Constitution? I've looked and looked, and can't find it anywhere.

Quote:

Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

From what I am to understand, Congress is forbidden from prohibiting the free exercise of religion. I looked and looked...no mention of seperation.

Well, couldn't you consider Creationism, or Intelligent Design, or whatever you want to call it, in the same realm as Darwin's Theory? Think about it...both are unproven, and both could be classified as "Theories".

Just a thought.

Either way, I'm glad my parents sent me to a private Christian school for 9 years. My son will attend the same.

If your parents want you to learn Darwin's theory, then THEY should teach you. You should treat every theory equally, since they are both unproven.

Why would you say "well, we can't teach THIS one (creationism), because it might offend some people, but we will teach THIS one, because it offends MORE people (remember, 70% of Americans identify themselves as Christians) but it sounds more "politically correct".

Quote:

81% of American adults identify themselves with a specific religion: 76.5% (159 million) of Americans identify themselves as Christian. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm

Why would you alienate the majority of people's beliefs to accomodate the beliefs of a very small percentage of people? I suppose you COULD argue the Equal Protection Clause, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protection, but people take things too far.

For Example:
If I wanted to take Equal Protection to the extreme, we could say that since there are more "thin people" fashions being sold in America, then "Hefty People" aren't getting the same equality, because they don't have the same selection or availibility of clothing.

Thankfully, we don't have to take it to QUITE that extreme, because the Equal Protection Clause was written to protect equal rights as they pertain to legislation, not "hurting people's feelings".

I think the ACLU has helped to completely water down the strong beliefs (yes, I'm sorry, but they are Judeo-Christian beliefs) this country was founded on.

Not all science is theoretical. The vast majority of Scentific theories have been proven. Evolution, however, has not.

Is it so bad to require the Education System to "Stick To The Facts", as opposed to speculate and mislead people into accepting theories AS facts?

To identify oneself as a Scientist doesn't necessarily mean that you believe in Darwin's Theory and are offended by Creationism.

Quote:

I t is true that during the 20th century, many scientists accepted Evolutionism, in part or in whole. As secular science writer Richard Milton recently observed: "An important factor in bringing about the universal dominance and acceptance of Darwinian evolution has been that virtually every eminent professional scientist appointed to posts in the life sciences in the last 40 or 50 years, in the English-speaking world, has been a convinced Darwinist. ...These men, as well as occupying powerful and important academic teaching positions, were also prolific and important writers whose influence has been widespread in forming the consensus." 1 These names include such men as Gavin de Beer, Julian Huxley, J.B.S. Haldane, C.H. Waddington, Ernst Mayr, Theodosius Dobzhansky and George Simpson. Despite strong pressure to accept evolutionism, many intelligent and experienced scientists either openly or secretly dismiss Evolution as highly unlikely or impossible. In the 1980s, researcher and lecturer David Watson noted an increasing trend that continues today, disturbing those who want evolutionism to be perceived as the accepted scientific consensus: "...A tidal wave of new books... threaten to shatter that confidence - titles like Darwin Retried (1971), Macbeth; The Neck of the Giraffe: Where Darwin Went Wrong (1982), Hitching; The Great Evolution Mystery (1983), Taylor; The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution (1984), Fix; Darwin Was Wrong - A Study in Probabilities (1984), Cohen; Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth (1987), Lovtrup; and Adam and Evolution (1984), Pitman. Not one of these books was written from a Christian-apologetic point of view: they are concerned only with scientific truth - as was Sir Ernst Chain when he called evolution 'a fairy tale'." 2 As Science Digest reported: "Scientists who utterly reject Evolution may be one of our fastest-growing controversial minorities... Many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science." 3 One example is the late Dr. Arthur E. Wilder-Smith, an honored scientist with an amazing three earned doctorates. He held many distinguished positions. 4 A former Evolutionist, Dr. Wilder-Smith debated various leading scientists on the subject throughout the world. In his opinion, the Evolution model did not fit as well with the established facts of science as did the Creation model of intelligent design. "The Evolutionary model says that it is not necessary to assume the existence of anything, besides matter and energy, to produce life. That proposition is unscientific. We know perfectly well that if you leave matter to itself, it does not organize itself - in spite of all the efforts in recent years to prove that it does." 5 Secular researcher Richard Milton summarized the current world situation: "Darwinism has never had much appeal for science outside of the English-speaking world, and has never appealed much to the American public (although popular with the U.S. scientific establishment in the past). However, its ascendancy in science, in both Britain and America, has been waning for several decades as its grip has weakened in successive areas: geology; paleontology; embryology; comparative anatomy. Now even geneticists are beginning to have doubts. It is only in mainstream molecular biology and zoology that Darwinism retains serious enthusiastic supporters. As growing numbers of scientists begin to drift away from neo-Darwinist ideas, the revision of Darwinism at the public level is long overdue, and is a process that I believe has already started." http://www.christiananswers.net/q-e...scientists.html

The article goes on to name various reknowned scientists with some pretty impressive credentials, plus links to more sources. I invite you to read the article.


References:
First Article:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/...tiondebate.html

1st Ammendment:
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1

Another Good Quote

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing."
-Edmund Burke (1729-1797)

I May Not Be The Sharpest Tool In The Shed, But...

...Ok, so I'm watching Fox News this evening, and Bill O'Reilly (who I don't really like all that much, by the way) has Charlie Rangel on (a Congressman from New York).

Anyway, Ol' Charlie is ranting and raving about everything from the Bush Tax cuts to the number of impoverished (poor) people going UP.

I started to get a little frustrated. It's SO easy for these guys to tell a lie, with numbers. For example:

1. Myth: The Bush Tax cuts cut taxes for only rich people.

Truth: The Bush Tax cuts were across the board. Yes, they helped rich people a LITTLE more than they did the poorer people, but you really can't "help" the poor people when it comes to taxes. Why? Because poor people don't pay NEAR the same amount in taxes as rich people do. For example: if a rich guy pays $25,000 in taxes, and you give him a tax break, so he only has to pay, say, $20,000, you've cut his taxes by 20%, right? But a poor person, who doesn't pay taxes to start off with... it won't effect them at all. What you are doing by cutting taxes is empowering people to invest and spend more, increasing your revenues. Why do you think we have more money pouring into the government than we EVER did during the Clinton era? An added benefit was that middle income people ALSO had more money to spend and invest. Right now, more middle-income people are investing than at any other point in American History. Pretty remarkable, huh?

2. Myth: There are more poor people since President Bush became president.

Truth: This, believe it or not, is actually true.To a point. Remember, the population of the United States rises every singe day. Example: if there were 290 million people in the United States in 2001 when President Bush was sworn in, and 29 million are poor, that's 10% of the population that's impoverished.(it's actually lower than that, but I'm proving a point here). Now, in 2005, let's say, for the sake or arguement, that there are now 295 million people in the United States. If 29.5 million of those people are poor, then we still have the original 10%, BUT, we've GAINED 500,000 poor people! OMG! It's a national disaster!!! Let's break it down to something even simpler: Let's say you have 100 people in a room, and one of them has a cold. that's 1%. Now lets say you have 200 people in the same room (add 100 people), and you have TWO people that have a cold. You've DOUBLED the amount of sick people! OMG! You've got an epidemic on your hands!!!! See how easy it is to lie with numbers?

Anyway, that Charlie Rangel guy really made me sick with his numbers spinning.

Honor and War

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made so and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." - John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873)

Parenting

I don't think Cortez will say "No". I had a very strict upbringing. I was never spanked or hit or anything like that. There are other effective ways of discipline that do not require force.

I think the key is to instill morals and discipline at a young age, and those values will remain for life. I have one younger brother. There are only two of us in the family. We never did drugs, or get in any serious trouble, or anything crazy like us. We were both very well disciplined, and as a result, very successful, well adjusted, happy children. We both did extraordinarily well in school, we were both Boys Staters (an American Legion sponsored program. One boy is chosen every year from each high school in Texas to set up and run a "model government", debating bills and legislation in the state capitol. Selection is based on merit.), both athletes, we both were high school cross examination debaters, and as a result, both of us graduated in the top ten of our respective high school classes. I think the values our parents instilled in us drove us to join the Army, and neither one of us ever regretted the decision.

The worst thing we do in our generation is make excuses or take a soft hand with our children. Everyone wants to be so "politically correct", and not be the "bad guy". Everyone wants to be thier child's "bud", and be "cool", but very few people actually do what is in the best interests of thier child's moral and mental health. Babying will turn children into grown up babies.

If you really want to know, the absolute worst punishment we ever endured from our parents was for either one of them to say they were disappointed in something we did. To me, I think I would rather be beat. To this day, It would break my heart to disappoint either one of my parents, and as a result, I always do my best to do the right thing, even when no one is looking. Those are the same values Esther and I hope to teach our son - Responsibility for your own actions, and self-reliance.

September 11th

Today marks one of the most solemn anniversaries in American history. On September 11th, 2001, cowardly terrorists hijacked planes and flew them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and attempted to crash a fourth into a Washington, D.C. landmark. The fourth airline was diverted from its target when the passengers aboard put up a fight against their captors. Sadly, the flight crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.

Some people think that September 11th bears significance by referring to a famous battle in 1683, when a Christian Army under the command of the King of Poland decimated the Muslim forces of the Ottoman Empire in the Battle of Vienna. This victory was the beginning of the end of the Ottomans.

I think the significance is well placed. September 11th, 2001 is the beginning of the end of Islamic Extremism. The facts speak for themselves:

• The nation of Afghanistan is now a free and democratic society, after the United States assisted in the overthrow of the extremist Taliban government, who offered refuge, as well as financial and operation
  al aid to the worldwide terrorist organization Al'Qaida.
• Osama Bin-Laden is running for his life, living in caves like some wild animal, as he is being hunted like a rabid dog. And we all know how to get rid of a rabid dog. Osama's days are numbered. He has been left ineffective, and serves only as a symbol to his followers, who are also being eliminated or brought to justice.
• High-Level Al-Qaida operatives are being eliminated as fast as they can be promoted. The nations of the Middle East (with a few notable exceptions, Syria and Iran) have cracked down on Islamic Extremism. The Saudis in particular have killed several high-level leaders of Al-Qaida.
• The nation of Iraq takes bold steps towards Democracy, having held their first elections earlier this year. As they develop a Constitution to bring before their citizens, the United States continues to assist Iraqi Forces to maintain security. Even faced with the cowardly tactics of their enemies (roadside bom
  bs, suicide bombers, mortaring innocent civilians, etc...), they continue to hunt down and kill terrorist forces operating in Iraq.
• Egypt holds free elections with more than one political party.
• Libya abandons WMD programs, vowing to work better with the West, and abandoning terrorism.
• The citizens of Lebanon kick out the Syrians back to their own country, bringing an end to their negative influence on the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.
• The terrorist Yasser Arafat is dead of a mysterious disease (AIDS?), closing yet another tie between the Palestinians and terrorism.
  

September 11th, 2001 was a tragic day in the history of our country. But September 11th, 2001 marked the beginning of the end of the for the Islamic Extremist (read: TERRORIST) cowards.

Sources:
1: http://www.infoplease.com/spot/taliban-time.html
2: http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/n...20-attack01.htm
3: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003...ain560618.shtml
4: http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4118
5: http://www.electionworld.org/egypt.htm
6: http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/africa/12/20/libya.main/
7: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4313029.stm
8: http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/10/arafat.obit/

New Orleans

I know the media is beating this New Orleans thing to death, but I have to put in my two cents:

• 1. Those people were told to EVACUATE.
• 2. President Bush is obviously the target of a racist attack when a no-talent schmuck like Kanye West says he "hates black people".
• 3. Ditto the above statement, except substitute "Al Sharpton" for "Kanye West".
• 4. Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton attack on cue, immediately after the tragedy, and before the rescue/relief effort is even complete. No honor whatsoever.
• 5. The Governer of Louisiana is obviously a moron. Fetid water and disease, and she overrides the order of the Mayor to evacuate.
  
• 6. Looters: Why would someone need a plasma TV to survive? You can be damn sure that was the first thing to be stolen.
  
• 7. How many looter apologists do we have to see on Fox News? Does anyone really take these guys seriously?
• 8. Why the HELL was there a huge parking lot of school buses UNDERWATER?
  

Bottom line: The city and state government was SCREWED UP and completely unprepared. The Federal government shoulders a small amount of blame, but nowhere near what the city/state should bear. They are talking about people getting fired, but I disagree. The Mayor and Governer should be facing criminal charges for negligent homicide.

Someone told me something funny today. It's all President Bush's fault. He started the hurricane. He was out, in a rowboat, in the middle of the Gulf of Mexico with a fan and a stirring spoon. And Karl Rove was the guy rowing the boat. The point is, this is getting ridiculous. If you wanna blame a President, blame that moron Clinton for not doing anything about the 1998 report that predicted exactly what happened when New Orleans was hit with a Category 4-5 storm. Just like he did nothing when he was given the opportunity to do something about terrorism. How long before he weasels his way on television and says "Well, I told the Bush administration they shoud look into that. I didn't get to it when I was in office..."

Yeah, Slick Willie. You were really busy. In the Oval Office, right?

Just a few more days...

Esther and the Baby will be flying into Houston on Monday. Thank God. I have been bored out of my mind ever since they left. I got to knock out some pretty cool projects, namely an entertainment center for Esther:

This is me starting the Entertainment Center:

This is me and my brother after we put it together:



This is what it looked like when we started putting in the components and the TV:



This is what it looked like after I put up the 2 paintings I made for my wife:



This is the final product, all the DVD's put in the Entertainment center, and the Xbox changed locations:

Like I said, it's not beautiful or anything, but I think it looks alot better and more organized from when I started.