draggonlaady

The following blurbs are taken from Hard Truths For Soft Liberal Heads by John Hawkins. Feel free to peruse the whole text at http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17476

I haven't taken anything out of context here...the "article" is a string of single-point blurbs with no background, exploration, or explanation. Quotes from the article are indented.

If greenhouse gasses are indeed responsible for global warming, there is no practical way that exists, worldwide, to cut them by a margin large enough to make a real difference. So even if you think global warming exists and is caused by man, there's no real solution for the problem.

I'll let Winnett run with the science aspect on this one...but I'll tackle the logic. Because the problem is so big, the solution will be difficult to affect. Therefore, there's no point in even trying, and we may as well go about our business making the problem worse. That's what he's saying, right? Well, I for one am not quite so lazy as all that. Just because it's a big problem doesn't mean there's no hope--smallpox was a big problem, too.

Social Security is going to reach a "crisis" point and it'll start, not in roughly 40 years when the IOUs for the money we've already spent run out, but in about 10 years when the program starts taking in less money than it pays out.

I guess I missed the part where this became something the conservatives were throwing at the liberals--haven't the liberals been panicking about it for ages already?

Many of the people who claim to buy into evolution do so because it's used, by some people, as a litmus test for people's commitment to science. In other words, if you favor science over religion, you believe in evolution and if you favor religion over science, you don't believe in evolution. However, the real conflict isn't between evolution and religion, it's between evolution and science. Evolution is a poorly constructed theory that isn't supported by the fossil record, the existing evidence, or logic. It's hard to say exactly how all the different species we have on this planet developed, but it almost certainly wasn't via evolution.

I simply say...bullshit. I don't "claim to buy into evolution." I believe it happened, and is still happening. I also believe in both God and science. I find no conflict in that. The only conflict is what's thrown about by the people who claim to know what God is, what God thinks, and how God works...all of which I think are well beyond the scope of human understanding.

Taken beyond a certain level, tolerance changes from being a virtue to a vice.

Oh, come on! Jesus tolerated being nailed to a slab of wood and being stabbed in the side by a punk with a spear. What "certain level" of tolerance are you not willing to cross, John? "Tolerating" other people having opinions that conflict with yours? "Tolerating" homosexuality? How do either of those compare to the example set by your hero?

No nation we have ever fought has abided by the terms of the Geneva Convention. Since that's the case, and since we are unlikely to fight any nations that would abide by the terms of the treaty in the foreseeable future, the Geneva Convention is only an unnecessary inconvenience, which provides no protection for our troops.

Well. I'm not touching that.