Running as a Republican for 29B

Footballfreak

New Member
Tonio said:
My views seem to be libertarian with a small L, with my social views somewhat more liberal that Reagan's. Reagan wasn't part of the religious right, but I didn't like the views of some of the people in his administration, like James Watt and Pat Buchanan. I definitely believe that both parties have become more extreme since 1980, which is one reason I don't belong to either party.

Tonio

I am probably a little more libertarian with my social views as well, but the Reagan idea of smaller government and less taxes is what I have gravitated towards. I think we all can agree when the incumbent delegate votes for a billion dollar tax increase then turns around and votes against the slots because he said that billion dollars in revenue would bloat the budget, we have someone out of step with their district. He sees the taxpayer as the sole revenue source of government.
 

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
Footballfreak said:
Tonio

I am probably a little more libertarian with my social views as well, but the Reagan idea of smaller government and less taxes is what I have gravitated towards. I think we all can agree when the incumbent delegate votes for a billion dollar tax increase then turns around and votes against the slots because he said that billion dollars in revenue would bloat the budget, we have someone out of step with their district. He sees the taxpayer as the sole revenue source of government.
Excellent point. My point was I apply the small government principle to social issues as well as fiscal issues. I see bans on gay marrage as big government interfering in people's personal lives. I see FCC's recent crackdown on obscenity as big government with a nanny-state mentality, which assumes that parents can't or won't take responsibility for monitoring what their children see and hear. (I think Dennis Miller had a good point--if my kid is capable of being pushed over the edge by anything Gene Simmons has to say, I'm not doing my job as a parent.) I see the teaching of "intelligent design" as big government imposing one religion's dogma.
 

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
Tonio said:
I see the teaching of "intelligent design" as big government imposing one religion's dogma.
And what of the theory of evolution? Big government imposing atheist dogma?
 

itsbob

I bowl overhand
2ndAmendment said:
And what of the theory of evolution? Big government imposing atheist dogma?
What does Atheism have to do with Evolution?? Are you saying scientists are all Atheists?
 

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
itsbob said:
What does Atheism have to do with Evolution?? Are you saying scientists are all Atheists?
I see evolution as religion-neutral, not athiestic. Some believers insist that evolution contradicts their religions' dogma, and I can understand their point. As I see it, faith is more important than dogma.
 

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
itsbob said:
What does Atheism have to do with Evolution?? Are you saying scientists are all Atheists?
I am saying that evolution is a theory. It is not proven fact. The believers of evolution are believers through faith just as believers of Divine creation are believers through faith.
 

itsbob

I bowl overhand
2ndAmendment said:
I am saying that evolution is a theory. It is not proven fact. The believers of evolution are believers through faith just as believers of Divine creation are believers through faith.
Evolution is not a theory, evidence of evolution is all around us, in the animals we see, the bones that are found, DNA evidence.. now the other choice does not rank into even a Theory, and there is NO evidence to support it.

You probably also believe that man has one less rib then a woman??

I know for some it's hard to grasp the reality, but evolution is indeed a fact.
 

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
itsbob said:
Evolution is not a theory, evidence of evolution is all around us, in the animals we see, the bones that are found, DNA evidence.. now the other choice does not rank into even a Theory, and there is NO evidence to support it.

You probably also believe that man has one less rib then a woman??

I know for some it's hard to grasp the reality, but evolution is indeed a fact.
Wrong. It is called, "The Theory of Evolution".

And I and many others see the evidence of divine creation all around us. Sorry for your blindness.
 

itsbob

I bowl overhand
2ndAmendment said:
Wrong. It is called, "The Theory of Evolution".

And I and many others see the evidence of divine creation all around us. Sorry for your blindness.
..and the one less rib??
 

FromTexas

This Space for Rent
Damn my not having time to check the forums during the day! My PMer is now full! :tantrum

And no FDDog... titties do not make an appropriate Republican banner. However, your submission will be reviewed thoroughly by the candidate.
 

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
itsbob said:
..and the one less rib??
Eve was made from Adams rib. My wife was not made from mine. Adam and Eve were created. All humans after them were born of woman. All but one, Y'shua (Jesus), were born as the result of sexual relations or artificial insemination.
 

Toxick

Splat
2ndAmendment said:
And I and many others see the evidence of divine creation all around us.

While I don't believe in the literal 7 Day Creation story, I do believe in Divine Creation - i.e. I believe that God used evolution as a tool.

I just can't buy "The Devil created fossil records to confuse us". And there's simply too much evidence to discount evolution out of hand.


2ndAmendment said:
Sorry for your blindness.

Not fair. You are willfully ignoring multitudes of scientifically quantifiable evidence, while you selectively accept other forms of evidence because it supports your faith: and then you cite blindness in others.

If you ignore half the evidence, you only know half the story.

Selective blindness is no better on one side than the other.
 

Hessian

Well-Known Member
Here's a fun simple question

every time the science channel, national geographic, smithsonian..projects a date on an object: ASK what method was used to date the object (many times they won't list it)...and if they do list dating technique, ask the scientific question: was it verified by a second method?

This really does perturb scientists who place all their faith in evolution...its a little comical when they can't verify their dating techniques.

(the main reason is because of too wide of a variance of responses,...too small of a sample...conflicting data,...or the artifact was found outside of context (non situ). :buttkick:
 

Tonio

Asperger's Poster Child
I'll start a thread in the Religion section about faith and spirituality versus dogma and doctrine.

Back to the election, it would be interesting to see the candidates hold an moderated debate on the Forums. I imagine a thread where only the moderator and the candidates can post, with questions submitted via e-mail or PM during the debate.
 

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
I do not ignore the fossil record. I do not accept the age of the fossil record. Carbon dating and argon dating and uranium dating often give vastly different results on the same sample, and we are talking orders of magnitude.

I believe that man and the dinosaurs were contemporaries and that the dinosaurs died out like many species have, many in our own lifetime or recent past. Dinosaur tracks have been found that have human foot prints in them indicating that they were made at roughly the same time. Of course this evidence is rejected by those that believe in evolution and an old universe because it does not fit their belief system. Larger animals generally have longer gestation periods. If a population of large animals were killed by hunting or disease or habitat change or loss, it does not recover quickly and sometimes does not recover at all.

Archaeologists and paleontologists says an artifact is a certain age because it is found in a certain rock layer. Geologists say that certain rock layers are a certain age because of the artifacts found in it. That is circular reasoning and proves nothing.

Of course this will not change your mind and what you post will not change mine. We both have our faith. My faith is in God and the Bible yours is in whatever you have faith in. I believe in 6 days for creation as the Bible states. I may be stupid, but I would rather be stupid for God than trust in man's "wisdom" which is so often proven false; flat earth, earth at center of universe (religiously held too); everything made from four elements, fire, earth, air, and water; humans would not survive the air pressure of traveling faster than a horse could gallop. The list of human scientific "wisdom" that has become false goes on.
 
Last edited:

2ndAmendment

Just a forgiven sinner
PREMO Member
Tonio said:
I'll start a thread in the Religion section about faith and spirituality versus dogma and doctrine.
Don't bother. Faith is something that no debate will ever change.
 

Dymphna

Loyalty, Friendship, Love
Pete said:
I am forming an exploratory committee with the intent for running as the Republican candidate for Delegate to the Maryland House for District 29B.
Will you support me if I run for State Senate in Dist 29?

(psst, if someone better doesn't turn up, I just might, for real)
 
Top