AstroProdigy

What's this mean? No we can destroy them any time they want' date=' but they can't do anything unless they have nukes. That's why them thinking its better we attack now than give them the choice of being open or being destroyed would make no sense. THAT'S THE THING! CHRISTIANS HAVE GOTTEN PAST THAT' date=' BUT MUSLIMS HAVEN'T! By the way, Jews were never the ones doing this. That's because the Christian world has set up a system that's much more of a deterrence of this than it was 500 years ago. Give them a chance and they'd do just as bad as the worst Christians have done. Kill in the name of religion and the only limit to the killing is how much you can kill.

I vote Switzerland.

OF COURSE IT'S A HOLOCAUST DENIAL CONFERENCE! WHEN YOU HAVE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE WHO DENY THE HOLOCAUST MAKING A CONVENTION WHAT ELSE CAN IT BE? You're not a power hungry cleric. You can't call someone a Nazi for that unless they're using it to actually gain power. I know you think it's the right thing to do and don't have a hatred of jews, but what you want to happen is just not practical in this world. Why not condemn other countries in the world? They did their fair share of persecuting their Jewish minorities. That doesn't mean Iran gets to play a part in it. Attacking the Jews isn't a sovereign right of a country. By the way, the vast majority of American Jews stayed here and people who left had left for religious reasons not because they lived in a country hostile to them. A theocracy is against ANYONE who isn't Shiite and even then I'm sure they hate moderates too. One representative in Parliament means they can't do anything to change politics anyway. It's more of a showing that they tolerate the Jews. The Jews are living in Iran as second class citizens. If they're happy with that then good for them. Iranians are moving towards racism when their government constantly goats them on for their own political purposes. Iran won't offer us that kind of deal as long as we are unable and/or unwilling to invade. The whole of the Muslim world is always pissed off. Get rid of Israel and they'll find something else to blow themselves up for. Millions of deaths? Where are these millions of deaths? You know how Iran made things worse? Try taking our emb!@#$%^&*y and taking the people inside hostage. Like I said. On condition that they have 100% transparency and we ship out the nuclear waste immediately then they should be allowed to have them. However we reserve the right to bomb them and cause countless deaths in the ensuing radiation poisoning if they suddenly decide to close off the power plants from outside observance. It's something I have no problem doing rather than letting them get nukes to destroy our major cities and kill off my family and friends. An extremist theocracy supports death and destruction? Do I even need to explain this? An extremist theocracy can "tolerate" people, but they'll never treat them as real people unless they convert to Islam. Scratch that. Shiia Islam. Look into the entire history of Islam. Christians and Jews are called protected minorities by Muslims, but this doesn't stop sporadic forced conversions and persecution. We live in a secular society that's not ruled directly from the Bible. Iran lives in a theocracy that is all about religion. Try to comprehend the difference. What do you have a crush on Admadinejad? He's more extreme than Bush. How can you support someone like that?

And you believe they will suddenly drop all of their leverage? The only reason they offered it was because they thought we were about to invade. I don't try to justify Bush's actions; he's re!@#$%^&*ed and he's managed to make things worse for us just about everywhere. However, Iran is an oppressive theocracy. Again I have responded to your point about the Jews in Iran. Read that and don't respond with the same thing as before. "Tolerated" just means they aren't killed. Muslim groups always recognize Christians and Jews as protected minorities, however this doesn't stop them from treating them like heathens that they need to convert. There is plenty of racism in Jews in general. It's exacerbated by the state of Israel, but this is an attempt by the government of Iran to garner support by using the Jews as the scapegoat. Sound familiar? The vast majority of Jews do not support simply wiping Israel off the map. Of course there are dissenting Jews, but they are a small minority. One Jewish Iranian cannot speak for the 3/4 of Jewish Iranians who have already chosen to leave for Israel. You're just nit picking at small little examples to try to prove the opinion you had before rather than trying to figure out what's right. That's why this argument is ridiculous. Anti-semitism existed before in the Muslim world. It's simply gotten worse and more organized. It says Jews in Iran in their worst days were better off than back when anti-semitism was raging in Europe. Does that make it right? In the US you're actually free to support communism or fascism now. Besides, a political ideology that results in death and destruction is not the same as a group of people that have been oppressed for 2000 years and didn't want to take it any more. By the time the oil runs out nuclear fission won't even be a good alternative. This is again another way they garner support from their people. Lack of trust came when an extremist theology conquered Iran claiming to make things better and made things worse. The United States prefers a dictatorship over a theology because dealing with a theology is harder than dealing with communists or fascists or anyone else. Honestly dude when a man who constantly denies the Holocaust holds a convention of people who deny the Holocaust what do you expect? It's extremely well proven that the Holocaust happens, but some psycho decides that he's going to deny it so that it justifies wanting to destroy Israel. There is no credible debate. It's like having a debate of whether smoking is bad for you. How many times have we had this debate. There's no good place for them to go. You can't just up and take them out of their country. Israeli's are very nationalistic. On an unrelated note doesn't Mahmoud Ahmadinejad remind you of George Bush?

We already know the United States doesn't speak to Iran and Bush obviously makes things worse everywhere. Iran is home to a tiny Jewish population next to the old one and the remaining population isn't allowed contact with the outside Jewish world and is thus stuck there. You can be proud of your Iranian culture. It doesn't change the nature of the Iranian governments policies. The Jews in Iran get second class citizen status, but have gone through it so long that it's a norm. The Iranian government wants Jews scattered in oppressed minorities worldwide rather than have their own country. They want the same for Christians. Do you not see how Christian and Jewish minorities have been treated in Muslim countries? As equals? Anti-semitism is a tool to get your people stirred up in your favor. The Iranian government does it just like the Nazis did it to get their people riled up. Comparing the extreme anti-semitism in the past in Europe and saying "well it's ok what Iran does as long as it's better as the worst that Europe has done." A few people specifically taken as dissenting views in Iran means what exactly? Here's a quote from there: "if you're not political and don't bother them then they won't bother you". So shutup and don't try to exercise freedom and you'll live. That sounds like the dream life. Some guy would be crazy enough to stay in Iran no matter what then let him be an idiot. As for nuclear power: Iran is one of the last countries that needs to develop nuclear power. IF things are completely transparent and all the weapons grade material are shipped out then they can be allowed to develop nuclear power, but this is on condition that they have to be completely transparent about their nuclear power and we reserve the right to bomb the !@#$%^&* out of them if they do not comply with the transparecy. No they can't be trusted otherwise. Not with this government. A handful of Jews are attending the Holocaust denial conference in Iran to call for the destruction of Israel? Wow well that's overwhelming evidence that Israel should be wiped off the map AND the Holocaust was a hoax perpetrated by the evil Zions to justify taking the country of the poor Palestinian ethnicity! There's always decent for anything in a group, so when .1% of Jews support the destruction of Israel we should take their opinion over the rest right? You strongly want Israel to be destroyed so you're willing to grasp at straws.

Didn't you know? Mongolia already runs the show.

I like how me and Sever disagree on certain issues while agree on others and the same with Aileron. Shows how bad a bipolar system is.

A millenium is a very long time in human history. The millenium before when Christianity didn't exist saw massive technological and scientific development. The half millenium after when things were being liberalized and the power of religion was waning saw a very dramatic change. The Middle Ages if anything prove that religion is the worst enemy of science.

It depends on your opinion of "far off". We will probably still be alive when it becomes efficient. Hydrogen is lying around everywhere on earth in the form of water. Solar power will eventually become efficient enough to take a portion of the slack of energy needs and combined with wind, hydroelectric, and fusion power we should be alright as long as we develop them fast enough and don't overuse fossil fuels. Also, solar power could help the global warming problem by absorbing some of the energy.

Galileo got off easy compared to a lot of the other scientists. When was his day job reading the stars to tell peoples' futures? He was a professor. Where'd you ever here of that? Galileo laid the foundation for Newton. Newton lived in a much more secular England than Galileo's religion controlled Italy. It was the lack of religious influence that allowed Newton to make his discoveries. It's not that the Church hates science persay. It's that they had a strict interpretation of the world and any dissent was strictly punished in the name of God no matter how wrong the Church was. Magic was more important during the Christian Dark Ages than before in a polytheistic Roman Empire. What does that say about Christianity? In the Dark Ages, people were uneducated and based all their "facts" on the Bible and what the Church told them. That's what was the big crutch to scientific progression. It was the Renaissance and the weakening of religious following that allowed for scientific progression. Science and religion do not compete? Have you every herd of Evolution vs Creation? When religion is not taken literally, but instead as a guide for life then it can coexist with science, but Christianity was the opposite of that back then. Your analogy at the end seems logical, but when you take a closer look you realize that the Church back then was about controlling EVERYTHING. Scientists weren't locked up for magical claims. They were locked up because the search for knowledge conflicts with religious dogma that has been set and stone based on whatever the writer thinks and cannot be changed or else you're called a heretic and tortured to death.

He forgot about trying to revive the zone and failing.

If the Christian world had fallen then so would any knowledge they had. Besides the knowledge of ancient civilizations doesn't just all disappear. Some of it remains and some of it is rediscovered. The Greeks and the Romans affected Europe up to the present day for example. No religion that I know of outlaws science specifically. I have no idea what you're referring to with magic. Technology offers any civilization a huge advantage even pre industrialization. How do you think the Romans built such a vast and long lasting empire? Magic is not real. Intellectuals can fall for magic, but progression and magic have no relation. Magic serves no contribution to society if science is present. Science and Technology progressed quite well without Christianity and Christianity was only a hinder to it as shown by a milennia of stagnation in Europe. Magic existed when Christianity was around. More scientists appeared because despite Christianity's negative influence on science, science inevitably progressed and with increased removal of Christianity from government and society science skyrocketed. I think it's pretty clear. The Muslim world became more extreme and then became stagnant. Country is a more modern ideal. Before it was empires and city states. The reason knowledge survived the collapse of a country BETTER is because the population was greater and improvements in technology combined with the knowledge already known and regained from older civilizations allowed it to extend beyond borders. During the dark ages I don't know of any astronomers. They were astrologers. There weren't chemists either to my knowledge, just Alchemists. The Church saw science as a threat and vehemently oppressed it, but couldn't manage to do so forever. That's why science has progressed, not because Christianity has provided some unintentional benefit to science. You're trying too hard to make this analogy stick. It really doesn't work at all.

Presidents before him knew the problems of fossil fuels. It's just that over time other forms of energy become more viable. It's simply coincidence. Hydrogen energy will take a long time to develop and by then solar energy will probably be efficient enough to provide a lot of energy. If it keeps Islamic extremists from getting their hands on nukes alone it's worth it.

Tell your receptionist to get off her fat !@#$%^&* and put the twinkie down and no I don't mean Lucy Liu.

Learjett: Most Republicans use conservative issues to gain votes. There used to be a large moderate Republican group in Congress, but that's been continually dwindling. The problem with your name calling is it's unfounded. Most Democrats are Christian, Patriotic, and definetely not anarchist since that directly conflicts in Democrat ideals. Aileron: Gotta get ready for class I'll read your post later.

It's not Bush at all...It's people needing alternatives to oil. Nuclear power is much less hazardous to the environment than all that oil that's taken at the cost of the environment and contributes to global warming, but hey hippies want what hippies want. Did you know the deal we made with the Russians is to take buy the uranium from their nukes? We're effectively providing power to the country and dismanteling the giant Soviet nuclear weapons stockpile that was built up over the years. Some good ideas you've stated. I was raised in an orthodox family. The Orthodox also observe lent, but I know lots of people who don't. The same thing goes with Catholics. Hinduism for the most part seems to be going further towards secularism and India is a democratic, secular state. The reason I wouldn't mind India being on top instead of China is that India has better long term economic and social indicators and I'll take a democratic country over an authoritarian one any day.

Republicans took a long time to distance themselves. They didn't do it when they saw some of the terrible things he was doing until enough moderates got fed up with it. "For every hyper-Christian Senator or Congressman, I'll give you a moderate one." Yeah it's called most of the Democrats and a small percentage of Republicans, most of which fall in line with the conservative agenda.

That doesn't make them not hypocrits.

Maybe people like the idea of doctor because it sounds easy once you're done with the schooling? It's also a lot more common job so people see it as less of a risk.

NBVegita: I know there are lots of Republicans who are not Christian, but the base of the party is and that's who they've been catering to recently. There are people who think of you as a fake Republican because you're not a conservative Christian. How many non conservative Christian Republicans are in Congress really? The president is definetely a conservative christian by any rational standard. L.C.: There's no evidence of your proposed conspiracy. Aileron: Incase you haven't noticed, 150 million people didn't even vote in the 2004 presidential election. Bush won by scaring his base into thinking gays could marry if they didn't go and vote for him while at the same time disenchanting Democrats by attacking John Kerry's war record and calling him a flip flopper even though congressional records would call pretty much all people in Congress flip floppers. Kuwait was a credible ally and Saddam was a dangerous and unpredictable dictator that we used to fight Iran with. Think of it as rewarding countries for their !@#$%^&*ets regardless of their actions and teaching the world to help us financially so they could do whatever they want. I never mentioned Saudi Arabia as an example. Saudi Arabia has little hope of change to a less extreme nation. We might as well get the oil we need from them if the alternative is worse. There are also no indigenous Christian groups left in Saudi Arabia that we could protect. Communism is the end result of Marx's theories of society. If it were possible to truly achieve Marx's communism then great, but it's impossible because of human nature. Real Communism means no government is required. Communism in practice such as in the Soviet Union is actually more like fascism. What if a master hacker hacks into the system and changes the whole interconnected system to gain his own rise to power? The problem with electronic voting is that it can be hacked and significant effects on the election can be achieved by a single person. Republicans hoped for the best with Bush and when they didn't get it they decided to close their eyes and ears and hope he'd fix his mess. Too bad that was just a fantasy.

Aileron: Christianity is based on plenty of traditions. For example, not eating meat for 40 days and nights. That doesn't mean everyone or almost everyone is suddenly following it. As for Hinduism, neither of us knows much about Hinduism, but considering the facts and the lack of proof you have to back up your claim and my inability to find your proof I'd see this is an !@#$%^&*essment you got from a biased source and need to update your research. NBVegita: If everyone knew how to negotiate the company would be forced to lower the wages altogether. How do you suggest people strive for high end jobs? High end tech and science degrees are harder and take more time than any other degree. There needs to be real incentive like high wages for careers that are harder to get to than medical or law degrees. What about the lack of respect people interested in these fields get before college. Public education needs to do it's part too. As of now it encourages mediocrity when it should strongly encourage excellence.

It's definetely a matter of conveniance in who gives us a greater economic/military advantage. That's why the Armenian genocide is denied recognition and the continued economic stranglehold Azerbaijan and Turkey hold over Armenia is ignored because Turkey provides us greater economic support and Azerbaijan can allow for pipeline access to Caspean Sea oil. The US also stood idly by while Turkey invaded the country of Cyprus not caring what they did. !@#$%^&*yrians are ignored because they have less of an impact than Kurds. True we favor Russia over Chechnya, but that's because Russia is much more economically beneficial. I guess it's a cost/benefit analysis which is great for a secular society, but for the group that claims to be "good" Christians they sure do seem to make all their decisions based on money. Fetuses are exactly what you said; fetuses. Heinous muderers are people. Although they should not be allowed to hurt people again, they're still people, whereas fetuses have almost no brain functions and cannot possibly even miss their existence in a non instinctual way. I agree that late term abortions should not be free choice, but when it threatens the life of the mother then it becomes necessary. Let me try a different addition to the list: Republicans came to power calling for smaller government and less government controls, but in the end only made government and it's control on freedom larger.

I'll start. The way Republican's claim to be the Christian Party, but always favor Muslims over Christians. They favor Israel over Palestine, but Israel is much more economically beneficial to us. That and the United States citizens surprisingly has a strong support for Israel.

I still got a minute!

Progressive does not mean moving closer towards the Bible. The Bible can be all true and good, but progressive is progressive towards more rights and equality for all (I don't mean no classes if you want to argue that next). It's true that much of the original goals of Republicans when they came to power can be viewed as progressive, the Republicans today are far from those of the early 90's. We've been closer to authoritarian after Bush than before; A lot closer. Equal rights for minorities was opposed 100 years ago by most of the white population. Case in point. For abortion, if it's so much of a hassle for Conservatives maybe we should leave it up to the states, but making abortion illegal nationwide would have a huge backlash. Military officers knew that we "the course" was a wrong one, but politics kept things the same and got generals who spoke out fired. Are you kidding me science didn't start advancing until Christianity? I'm Greek buddy and I know all about how the Greeks advanced Science. So did the Romans, the Chinese, and a wide variety of other people. Christians spent a millenium keeping things just about the same scientifically and burning people who tried anything with science at the stake. You're analogy makes no sense. Science progressed under Christianity whenever things became more secularized. Christianity was a hinder to science and nothing else. In other respects, however, you can be progressive and Christian. You can use Christianity as a call for greater human rights. However the politicized Christianity that has a hold over the Republican Party does not go in that direction anymore. As for economically, Christianity would actually support greater equality and Jesus would be disgusted with the greed of capitalism. I'm not saying revert to communism, I'm just saying if people are going to use the Bible as a political weapon it should not just be the things that are conveniant for them. Communism lasted for 70 years in the Soviet Union and it failed because trying to compete with the United States led to their downfall. If there was no compe!@#$%^&*ion with the United States it would still be around today. People were plenty connected under communism. The reason people are more connected today is because of all those advances of technology. Communism is nothing like tribalism. Communism failed because it was distorted to a totalitarian regime that controls everything and the corruption eventually wore down their economy and made them unable to compete with us, whereas actual communism means no government is needed. Anyways, actual communism is impossible in my opinion. Many of Republican ideas have been tried by Fascists. Who cares? Just because the whole system failed doesn't mean every single thing in it has to be wrong. Democrats today support a less authoritarian policy than Republicans except with regard to big business and the rich. While I agree the arts are overrated and sciences need much more promotion. I think society needs to develop to the point where scientific advancement is admired. The government can't just do this, but they can help it develop faster. However, the arts can't be ignored. I don't know about you, but a society with all science and no arts would scare me. Then again I'm setting up a straw man argument for this since I don't think you're making that point. With your generalization of where the parties have strength in the sciences, it's not sound as Republicans have plenty of higher level students and professors and Democrats have plenty of people with "professional jobs". The difference is more of a regional one than a career path one.