Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (14344)	3/7/2000 3:56:00 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Steven, res- <<If Gore went into a meeting with Earth First, emerged with an endorsement he had not previously carried, and refused to say what he had promised in return, I would say that this was a matter for concern.>> I don't believe GW came out of the meeting with Pat Robertson with his endorsement. I heard yesterday on the major news media's that Pat Robertson was awaiting the Super Tuesday election before determining who he would support. If the news reports are true. It looks like you and E have jumped on an incorrect assumption (probably read on a thread) which really never existed. So the entire basis of your concern appears wrong. res- <<Real threats to the environment exist. They can be studied by legitimate scientists. The work of those scientists can be subjected to peer review. A very considerable degree of verification can be achieved, and an intelligent attempt made at developing policies that weigh environmental concerns of the short and long term against the anticipated effects of measures intended to alleviate those concerns.>>> I couldn't agree more. However, you will never see an attempt from Al Gore or his religios followers attempting scientific enquiry with regard to issues such as "Global Warming". They require no objective evidence, verified by independent sources. And what makes it worse, they change laws forcing us all to pay for their religion. I haven't seen Pat Robertson forcing anyone to pay for his church. I have seen people voluntarily give money to the organization. Which contrast rather dramatically with the environmental religios organizations. I also haven't witnessed, like I recently did with regard to environmental religios worshipers, any fundamentalist preachers teaching their scriptural doctrine to my child in the public school system. res- <<<Given those constraints, it is singularly inappropriate for government to place the temporal power of its endorsement behind any religious sect.>>> I also couldn't agree more. And I don't believe anyone has argued otherwise. Which reinforces my point that we should be much more concerned about the religios environmental movement, then the comparatively innocuous fundamental christian movement. Michael