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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (8371)	2/7/2012 1:03:27 PM
From: longnshort	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 85487

Your background changes a lot

To: koan who wrote (8371)	2/7/2012 1:23:37 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

You have said that before. Several times. And you failed to indicate that you read even one sentence of what I wrote.....again. I am not religious in any way. I believe that there is "something" out there. That's it....oh, and that "it" is benevolent. If you believe in statistics, I think you should probably re-examine your use of statistics regarding Republicans. Because most religious people may be republican (I would question this as well), does not mean that most republicans are staunchly religious. This is pretty much logic 101 here. But let's dissect your assertions here. Which religious group is most vocal about anti-abortion? would you say "catholics"? But which way did the Catholics vote in the last election? It seems to me that perhaps a bunch of anti-abortion people voted for Obama! GASP! But what does that do to your assertion about the republican party beinng the party of the religious community? Pretty much blows it out of the water, doesn't it? Now let's talk about stem cell research. Was Bush against all stem cell research? No. He was against embryonic stem cell research. The bill he vetoed was about using embryonic stem cells for tax dollar funded research. It's kinda like the whole abortion issue. I am pro-choice. Or more accurately, I don't believe that I can ever know the answer to when a fetus because an individual life and therefore I believe it is up to the Mother to make her decisions based on her beliefs. However, I am staunchly opposed to any tax dollars being used for abortions. I am also staunchly against forcing religious medical institutions to fund and/or perform abortions if it is against their beliefs. Perhaps you should have some scientists devote some time to determining when a fetus becomes an individual. Even you have to admit that it is some time before the moment the baby leaves the womb. And if that is the case, then there is a point where abortion becomes murder. and lagging other western democracies? that's an opinion. Frankly, I think the Euros are a pretty messed up bunch of people. and I think your 50% not believing in evolution is a crock. And global warming has been proven to be a crock....so the more people who dismiss it in a group, the more it is an indication of intelligence and critical thinking. The fact that many, if not most, Catholics voted along democrat lines, is proof that your assertions are basically fabrications.

To: koan who wrote (8371)	2/7/2012 1:45:43 PM
From: Alastair McIntosh	6 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

My background is in statistics. If your background is in statistics you know that in a representative sample each member of the population being sampled must have an equal chance of being sampled. The PEW research poll you referenced was selected from members of the AAAS, which is viewed as a left leaning organization. It is probable that right leaning scientists would be less inclined to support the AAAS. The survey was probably not conducted from a representative sample of scientists.