[dda]

Originally Posted by WallBiter

First, a woman's right to choose is simply that. Taking that right away, be it local, state or federal law is what I oppose. And it depends on where you live as to when the line of life is drawn as it pertains to a gamete, zygote, embryo, or fetus under the law. I support a woman’s right to chose, with knowledge of all the options. I am not pro-abortion or anti-life, and I don't believe I mentioned RvW. I have counseled friends and relatives, I have formed my own decisions, and I don't believe the outcomes of those sessions are in any way the government's business or yours... and that is my point. Courage of conviction is one thing, but campaigning to impose your convictions on others is not something I admire.

So if an initiative were place on the ballot in your state to end abortions or seriously restrict them, you would not campaign against its passage?

If you feel something is wrong, how is it wrong to be supportive of attempts to end that wrong?

Isn't all politics an attempt to impose one groups convictions on another?

I have been in academic science (Molecular Biology, Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Cellular Biology) since graduating with my Bachelors Degree. I am currently working on a Masters degree. Every year I have seen the immediate effects of the budget cuts, on individuals, labs, departments, schools and entire institutions. Over the last 6 (And I’ll stick to my window of personal knowledge) the cumulative effects are dramatic. If you don't believe me just use Google.

Now, linking the budget cuts to creationist beliefs is not all that farfetched seeing as we have an Executive branch that firmly believes they are on a divine mission (not just while invading sovereign nations). I also link poor science education (and, really debatable, but wth, education in general) with leaders that would rather stick by their beliefs than allow children to learn the beauty of the evolutionary process (in favor of *POOF!* there was a chicken and God said "it is good."), or that procreation is something you can chose to be a part of only by abstaining from it (it works so well!). If you want to make a mandatory theology/ philosophy series of courses, I am all for it... teach children to think, not only of the beliefs of their ancestors, but of the others that surround them, and chose their own.

There doesn't seem to be any support in your answer for the supposition that creationists are responsible for drops in educational level.

Sadly, I blame lawyers and self-righteous educators. Layers for scaring everyone in the educational community by constantly suing over everything regardless of how trivial or silly.

I can remember, even 40 years ago, that it was often not in my best interests to express a political opinion which was contrary to that of certain teachers/professors. This appears to be something which has gotten worse, not better with time.

I think we agree on that, but possibly not on this: religion (any religion) should be kept as far from a government based on freedom of religion as possible. Since you are an atheist, I hope you can agree that morality and good judgment are not solely claimed by those with (a) certain spiritual dogma (s). If you cannot, I respect that as well.

I do agree that morality is not the sole possession of any one group. However, I am occasionally annoyed by those who do things which can only annoy others to make small points. Wanting to keep Christmas trees out of any governmental space. Wanting to take "In God We Trust" off of money. Doing so only annoys and stirs up the other side.

Really? Sentient talking snakes? I am so there! If there was anything more I needed to convince my childhood best friend that I am now the anti-Christ’s favorite chef, it would be a sentient talking snake.

Oh, and Prover: Yes, of course I have an active interest in scientific policy... it is where my rice comes from. But I am also a person with my own spiritual beliefs. They are also none of the government's business or yours.

As for my post, if I had continued with every issue important to me, not just a couple important ones and a social issue (that when it comes down to I wish I hadn't used b/c it detracts from conversations), my post would have been so long that few could have gotten through it (including myself to check for spelling errors).

I don't know who I am voting for. I do know that I have a significant problem with both VP candidates, not to mention a few with the Presidential ones. Most important to me is Education, followed (in no particular order) by International Policy, The Economy, The Environment, Healthcare, maintaining the Bill of Rights in a Responsible fashion, Tax Reform, Social Security Reform, and a myriad of other issues. Science, and scientific research funding, is important if only b/c it is involved in at least half of these, not just due to my livelihood.

I agree with you as to the important issues, in no particular order. What I was concerned with was what appeared to me to be an emotional rather than an intellectual attack on Gov. Palin. I have been surprised by the level of animus which has been directed toward her. Much of it has a very irrational tinge. I am pleased to see that this was not the case with you.