...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...

April 09, 2007

Right Wing Bloggers Poll

John Hawkins' latest poll.

Posted by annika, Apr. 9, 2007 | TrackBack (0)
Rubric: On The Blogosphere


What's the BFD, that he asked for your opinion? No surprises in the questions or answers.

Posted by: Casca on Apr. 9, 2007


Quite the poll. How does it feel to be in the midst of a group that thinks (2-1) the theory Evolution is not the best answer to the question of the differentiation of the species?

Only fools make up questions like these;simplistic,reductive; demanding a yes or know answer to a question that cannot be reduced to either or. Some of Darwins's conclusions are actively debated but there is no debate as to whether it is the BEST overarching explanation yet conceived by an eathling who isn't innoculated by the magical thinking demanded religious beliefs.

In the Iranian question he mixes missles and nuclear weapons in the same questionas if they were the same thing.

Abortion is two questions.

Generally a sloppy set of questions.

Posted by: strawman on Apr. 9, 2007

Geez Straw. Lighten up, dude. Save the passion for something worth the bother. This was just an amateur little on-line poll. And actually the group, 2 -1, SUPPORTS evolution. I think a guy like you would like the idea of a proportionate response....since you are always demanding it of the civilized world when the barbarians attack.

BTW, who stole question #3?

Posted by: blu on Apr. 9, 2007

Question #3 was "Do you think Annika has a right to grind her Journal to an abrupt stop, therefore creating a group of blogger homeless junkies?"

The results were:

99% No
1% Yes

(Annie clearly voted in this one)

Posted by: shelly on Apr. 9, 2007


Correct, 2:1 for. That means in a town of 30,000 there will be 10,000 pitchforks and torches coming up the drive to set things straight.

RIght, question #3.

Should the United States, regardless of the expense and duration, occupy Iraq until the Iraqi government can project it's power beyond the green zone?

Posted by: Strawman on Apr. 9, 2007

It is amazing to me that some people can't accept that evolution and the existence of God are not mutually exclusive.

Posted by: annika on Apr. 9, 2007

true dat, anni!

Posted by: blu on Apr. 9, 2007

Well, if you want to talk evolution. I always have to qualify the question. Do you mean what Darwin wrote, or what the loaded word has come to mean in our reductio ad absurdum culture?

Darwin simply observed what he saw. He definitely was a Christian, and his faith was not swayed. It was the Marxists who took his words, and twisted them into a rejection of faith.

Posted by: Casca on Apr. 9, 2007

The only guys with pitchforks and torches are the leftists enforcing their political correctness on everyone.

Posted by: kyle N on Apr. 10, 2007

Good thing we have high-power rifles, and all the military training.

Posted by: Casca on Apr. 10, 2007


WRONG, for a change.

Yes, Darwin was a christian and his faith in god did not waiver as a result of what he saw in nature. To him the grand plan and the details were all the work of the big guy. He was not, however, stopped from his expansive and wonderful examination by the literal "word" which is where the problem lies not with the Marxists may have tried to use the "Origin of Species" to argue against a belief in god but the real problem was the true believers who continue to insist that "Orgin of Species" is incompatable with the "word", that that Darwins work is deeply flawed and not to be examined other than to debunk it. No reasonable teacher of evolution tells his students or his friends that their belief in god is and should be shattered by Darwins work. The converse, however, is always preached by the biblical literalists. They, not those who wish to teach evolution, are the reason this issue is so heated. The believers in the "word" push very hard and must be resisted for all our goods.

The pope said the church is concerned with mens souls and evolution does not discuss this issue and further, it (evolution) appears to be the best explanation for the complexity of life on earth.

Posted by: Strawman on Apr. 10, 2007