Comments for AcademicFreedomBlog http://academicfreedomblog.org An opportunity to discuss the interface of faith, science, and culture Tue, 07 Feb 2012 09:08:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 Comment on Religious Freedom Day–Another Christian Holiday by Roger W Hancock - PoetPatriot.com http://academicfreedomblog.org/2007/01/15/religious-freedom-day-another-christian-holiday/#comment-49152 Roger W Hancock - PoetPatriot.com Sun, 25 Dec 2011 15:27:45 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2007/01/15/religious-freedom-day-another-christian-holiday/#comment-49152 Religious Freedom Day at PoetPatriot.com http://www.PoetPatriot.com/holidays-religious-freedom-day.htm Two rhymes on the subject. Religious Freedom Day at PoetPatriot.com
http://www.PoetPatriot.com/holidays-religious-freedom-day.htm

Two rhymes on the subject.

]]> Comment on What about the Platform? by Mike McCants http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/02/09/what-about-the-platform/#comment-48318 Mike McCants Thu, 01 Dec 2011 04:47:35 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/02/09/what-about-the-platform/#comment-48318 "Science has nothing to say about meaning and purpose in the world" Why not? What is "science"? Science is about the natural universe. People are part of the natural universe. Therefore purpose and meaning are part of the natural universe. "Religion is about meaning and purpose in the world" Why should religion be given this privilege? What does the "worship of a god" have to do with "meaning and purpose" unless a mis-guided individual chooses that path? Why cannot "do unto others" be used by non-religious people? "different questions" Nope. Simply different acceptance of the source of answers. “Science has nothing to say about meaning and purpose in the world”
Why not? What is “science”? Science is about the natural universe. People are part of the natural universe. Therefore purpose and meaning are part of the natural universe.
“Religion is about meaning and purpose in the world”
Why should religion be given this privilege? What does the “worship of a god” have to do with “meaning and purpose” unless a mis-guided individual chooses that path? Why cannot “do unto others” be used by non-religious people?
“different questions”
Nope. Simply different acceptance of the source of answers.

]]> Comment on The Problem with My Spouse by Dave Miller http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/11/06/the-problem-with-my-spouse/#comment-47501 Dave Miller Tue, 08 Nov 2011 02:18:03 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/11/06/the-problem-with-my-spouse/#comment-47501 Well, I'm sorry AcademicFreedomBlog, but I'm going to have to disagree with you about this one. I'm in favor of those who identify themselves as homosexual having the same privileges as those of us who identify ourselves as heterosexual. What's sacred, I think, is the commitment one person makes to another on account of love. This is the same glue which binds God to God's people, I believe. My own denomination recognizes this. Frankly, I've seen homosexual couples honor who this bond more sincerely than some heterosexual couples (e.g., Kim Kardashian). In my belief system, anyone who aspires to the same level of commitment which God made to Israel (cf. what Paul has to say to the Corinthians) deserves our respect. I don't honestly see how same-sex couples who make and honor this commitment can possibly detract from opposite-sex couples who do the same. Do you? I'd be interested in your thoughts on this, Dr. Mc. Well, I’m sorry AcademicFreedomBlog, but I’m going to have to disagree with you about this one. I’m in favor of those who identify themselves as homosexual having the same privileges as those of us who identify ourselves as heterosexual. What’s sacred, I think, is the commitment one person makes to another on account of love. This is the same glue which binds God to God’s people, I believe. My own denomination recognizes this.

Frankly, I’ve seen homosexual couples honor who this bond more sincerely than some heterosexual couples (e.g., Kim Kardashian). In my belief system, anyone who aspires to the same level of commitment which God made to Israel (cf. what Paul has to say to the Corinthians) deserves our respect.

I don’t honestly see how same-sex couples who make and honor this commitment can possibly detract from opposite-sex couples who do the same.

Do you? I’d be interested in your thoughts on this, Dr. Mc.

]]> Comment on About Being Basically Good by Mike McCants http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/06/01/about-being-basically-good/#comment-47396 Mike McCants Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:45:30 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/06/01/about-being-basically-good/#comment-47396 "Well. that is paramount to saying God is wishy-washy about His own standard." Or else that there is no such "standard". And claims that there is such a "standard" are to be rejected. "to begin with a definition of God" And no one can agree on such a definition. So that's just ridiculous. "a payment for our shortfall must be made" Starting from a false premise, any conclusion is meaningless. "break any part of God’s law" There is no such thing, so your statement is meaningless. "There is only one religion where God pays" Meaningless word salad. “Well. that is paramount to saying God is wishy-washy about His own standard.”
Or else that there is no such “standard”. And claims that there is such a “standard” are to be rejected.
“to begin with a definition of God”
And no one can agree on such a definition. So that’s just ridiculous.
“a payment for our shortfall must be made”
Starting from a false premise, any conclusion is meaningless.
“break any part of God’s law”
There is no such thing, so your statement is meaningless.
“There is only one religion where God pays”
Meaningless word salad.

]]> Comment on The separation problem by Mike McCants http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/04/27/the-separation-problem/#comment-47395 Mike McCants Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:38:25 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/04/27/the-separation-problem/#comment-47395 "Correction begins with deciding whether God is real in my own life." Correction??? You are only one person. You have very little influence on "society". "government is taking away our basic religious freedoms" What a silly thing to say. The math test always fails the first time? “Correction begins with deciding whether God is real in my own life.”
Correction??? You are only one person. You have very little influence on “society”.
“government is taking away our basic religious freedoms”
What a silly thing to say.
The math test always fails the first time?

]]> Comment on Mind Brain Controversy by Mike McCants http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/10/23/mind-brain-controversy/#comment-47393 Mike McCants Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:34:43 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/10/23/mind-brain-controversy/#comment-47393 Such a silly attempt at sophistry. Such a silly attempt at sophistry.

]]> Comment on How Old Is The Earth? by Mike McCants http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/08/26/how-old-is-the-earth/#comment-47391 Mike McCants Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:33:21 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/08/26/how-old-is-the-earth/#comment-47391 Nope. You have the opportunity to learn about the wisdom of your elders. After you have been out in the world for 20 years, then you can start to think about "thinking for yourself". Nope. You have the opportunity to learn about the wisdom of your elders. After you have been out in the world for 20 years, then you can start to think about “thinking for yourself”.

]]> Comment on The Problem with Embracing All Religions by Dave Miller http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/07/31/the-problem-with-embracing-all-religions/#comment-44302 Dave Miller Sun, 31 Jul 2011 21:05:34 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2011/07/31/the-problem-with-embracing-all-religions/#comment-44302 Dear Dr. Mc: Why not go to see a psychologist? I see that you have a doctorate; I'm guessing that you place a high value on training and education. Psychologists in nearly every state are required to have doctorates (and internships and residencies) before putting out a shingle. Many would include a recommendation for light therapy as an adjunctive treatment. It has empirical validation for treating depression. If the only label a provider uses is "therapist," I would be inclined to avoid them. That term requires no licensing or certification; anyone can use it. Honestly, this therapist sounds like they might be just a bit "out there." I hope you can get the help you're seeking. Dear Dr. Mc: Why not go to see a psychologist? I see that you have a doctorate; I’m guessing that you place a high value on training and education. Psychologists in nearly every state are required to have doctorates (and internships and residencies) before putting out a shingle. Many would include a recommendation for light therapy as an adjunctive treatment. It has empirical validation for treating depression.

If the only label a provider uses is “therapist,” I would be inclined to avoid them. That term requires no licensing or certification; anyone can use it. Honestly, this therapist sounds like they might be just a bit “out there.” I hope you can get the help you’re seeking.

]]> Comment on Fairness Doctrine v. Fairness by S. Ruder http://academicfreedomblog.org/2007/07/07/fairness-doctrine-v-fairness/#comment-43970 S. Ruder Fri, 22 Jul 2011 18:06:55 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2007/07/07/fairness-doctrine-v-fairness/#comment-43970 In response to John Wallace. Perhaps reinstating the Fairness Doctrine is not the answer. It is, however, naive to think that journalists are not censored. I believe there is more censorship today than ever before. With most of the major media owned by a few powerful corporations, any news or opinions that are contrary to the viewpoint / agenda of the corporation does not get reported. In fact, the news media can now distort the truth or even report lies without repercussions. Is it to the benefit of the United States to hear new that only a few powerful individuals deem appropriate? If reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, eliminates these practices than I would be in favor of such an action. In response to John Wallace. Perhaps reinstating the Fairness Doctrine is not the answer. It is, however, naive to think that journalists are not censored. I believe there is more censorship today than ever before. With most of the major media owned by a few powerful corporations, any news or opinions that are contrary to the viewpoint / agenda of the corporation does not get reported. In fact, the news media can now distort the truth or even report lies without repercussions. Is it to the benefit of the United States to hear new that only a few powerful individuals deem appropriate? If reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, eliminates these practices than I would be in favor of such an action.

]]> Comment on Avoidance of Talent by Coach Outlet Stores Online http://academicfreedomblog.org/2009/11/24/avoidance-of-talent/#comment-43349 Coach Outlet Stores Online Sat, 09 Jul 2011 09:07:03 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2009/11/24/avoidance-of-talent/#comment-43349 Thanks for taking this opportunity to discuss this, I feel fervently about this and I like learning about this subject. one is dangerous and the other is not? Thanks for taking this opportunity to discuss this, I feel fervently about this and I like learning about this subject.
one is dangerous and the other is not?

]]>