jsteele
Post 08/22/2012 13:41     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:nutty eastern intellectuals don't even realize that the existence of homosexuals disproves evolution and natural selection as homosexuality would be the first trait eliminated from the gene-pool.


Why do you believe this to be the case?
lack of sex frequency.


I admit that biology is not my strongest subject, so can you explain what you mean by this? I know gay people whose frequency of sex would put most hetros to shame.
sodomy isn't sex scientifically. lol.. you fell into that one


So, you agree with President Clinton that he didn't have sex with that woman?
I don't recognize that name...if you are referring to the Predator in Chief. Technically, yes. the sperm ended up on the dress missing the target for procreation just as sure as if it was a reservior of reproductive mateial lying dormant in the bowels of an adult male homosapian.


I will bet our mutual annual salaries that the target was not procreation.

But, if I understand you correctly, "sex" refers only to acts aimed at reproduction. Without sex, a gene will be eliminated from the gene pool? Is this correct? It's interesting that you are onboard the "homosexuality is genetic" bandwagon rather than being in the "it's a lifestyle choice" camp. Very progressive of you.

Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 13:34     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:nutty eastern intellectuals don't even realize that the existence of homosexuals disproves evolution and natural selection as homosexuality would be the first trait eliminated from the gene-pool.


Why do you believe this to be the case?
lack of sex frequency.


I admit that biology is not my strongest subject, so can you explain what you mean by this? I know gay people whose frequency of sex would put most hetros to shame.
sodomy isn't sex scientifically. lol.. you fell into that one


So, you agree with President Clinton that he didn't have sex with that woman?
I don't recognize that name...if you are referring to the Predator in Chief. Technically, yes. the sperm ended up on the dress missing the target for procreation just as sure as if it was a reservior of reproductive mateial lying dormant in the bowels of an adult male homosapian.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 13:31     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
So, you agree with President Clinton that he didn't have sex with that woman?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You beat me to it.
jsteele
Post 08/22/2012 13:25     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I just do not understand how individuals can rise to levels of success and power through spouting complete nonsense and completely rejecting basic science. I don't understand how someone can graduate from college and believe that a woman can't get pregnant if she is raped. Perhaps they don't believe this and are just saying it in the hopes that there are people out there without a high school education who will believe it, however, they should be absolutely shamed into resigning not given a vice presidential nomination.

I don't object to individuals being pro-life. While I do not agree with this position, the general position itself has legitimacy as a position. However, there should be no place for making up science, lying, or trying to harness stupidity.


Ok, so Ryan believes what - a woman cannot get pregnant if raped? This thread is so ridiculous.

If you want to go down that road, then i suppose that because Obama Hussein was born and raised as a muslim, I guess he believes lots of things that are not mainstream in the U.S., like women are inferior to men, it's okay to kill christians (like the rebels he supports in the middle east right now are doing), jihad, dog eating, etc. Oh, wait, he did attend that racist all black church here in the U.S. for a decade or two, so he switched to an anti-white racist crew I suppose? Is THAT what your man believes? This is all so stupid. More spinning the foci around and around anywhere but on something of imminent and major importance, e.g., jobs, unemployment, the deficit, the budget, medicare, social security, the devaluing of the U.S. dollar. . .


Have you been living in a cave for the past two days? I don't know if Ryan believes that a woman cannot get pregnant if raped. I have no evidence to believe he does. But, Representative Akin, a current Senate candidate, does believe that. This is not a rumor from a conspiracy website. That's something he said with his very own mouth and there is video proof of him saying it.


jsteele
Post 08/22/2012 13:20     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:nutty eastern intellectuals don't even realize that the existence of homosexuals disproves evolution and natural selection as homosexuality would be the first trait eliminated from the gene-pool.


Why do you believe this to be the case?
lack of sex frequency.


I admit that biology is not my strongest subject, so can you explain what you mean by this? I know gay people whose frequency of sex would put most hetros to shame.
sodomy isn't sex scientifically. lol.. you fell into that one


So, you agree with President Clinton that he didn't have sex with that woman?
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 13:20     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
Anonymous wrote:I just do not understand how individuals can rise to levels of success and power through spouting complete nonsense and completely rejecting basic science. I don't understand how someone can graduate from college and believe that a woman can't get pregnant if she is raped. Perhaps they don't believe this and are just saying it in the hopes that there are people out there without a high school education who will believe it, however, they should be absolutely shamed into resigning not given a vice presidential nomination.

I don't object to individuals being pro-life. While I do not agree with this position, the general position itself has legitimacy as a position. However, there should be no place for making up science, lying, or trying to harness stupidity.


Ok, so Ryan believes what - a woman cannot get pregnant if raped? This thread is so ridiculous.

If you want to go down that road, then i suppose that because Obama Hussein was born and raised as a muslim, I guess he believes lots of things that are not mainstream in the U.S., like women are inferior to men, it's okay to kill christians (like the rebels he supports in the middle east right now are doing), jihad, dog eating, etc. Oh, wait, he did attend that racist all black church here in the U.S. for a decade or two, so he switched to an anti-white racist crew I suppose? Is THAT what your man believes? This is all so stupid. More spinning the foci around and around anywhere but on something of imminent and major importance, e.g., jobs, unemployment, the deficit, the budget, medicare, social security, the devaluing of the U.S. dollar. . .
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 13:19     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:nutty eastern intellectuals don't even realize that the existence of homosexuals disproves evolution and natural selection as homosexuality would be the first trait eliminated from the gene-pool.


Why do you believe this to be the case?
lack of sex frequency.


I admit that biology is not my strongest subject, so can you explain what you mean by this? I know gay people whose frequency of sex would put most hetros to shame.
sodomy isn't sex scientifically. lol.. you fell into that one
jsteele
Post 08/22/2012 13:16     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:nutty eastern intellectuals don't even realize that the existence of homosexuals disproves evolution and natural selection as homosexuality would be the first trait eliminated from the gene-pool.


Why do you believe this to be the case?
lack of sex frequency.


I admit that biology is not my strongest subject, so can you explain what you mean by this? I know gay people whose frequency of sex would put most hetros to shame.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 13:13     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
Anonymous wrote:nutty eastern intellectuals don't even realize that the existence of homosexuals disproves evolution and natural selection as homosexuality would be the first trait eliminated from the gene-pool.
Another great example of how conservatism begets scientific moronism.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 13:12     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:nutty eastern intellectuals don't even realize that the existence of homosexuals disproves evolution and natural selection as homosexuality would be the first trait eliminated from the gene-pool.


Why do you believe this to be the case?
lack of sex frequency.
jsteele
Post 08/22/2012 13:09     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
Anonymous wrote:nutty eastern intellectuals don't even realize that the existence of homosexuals disproves evolution and natural selection as homosexuality would be the first trait eliminated from the gene-pool.


Why do you believe this to be the case?
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 13:08     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
nutty eastern intellectuals don't even realize that the existence of homosexuals disproves evolution and natural selection as homosexuality would be the first trait eliminated from the gene-pool.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 11:49     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
East coasters and other sophisticated urban areas need to wake up: there are legions and legions of nutty evangelicals out there. They hate the "so-called elites." We're not talking thousands of loonies...there are millions of them and they vote!

They are bible-thumping neanderthals and won't let science incovenience them in their strongly held beliefs. I wish I could just laugh Akin off, but he still might win Missouri!
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 11:43     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
Anonymous wrote:I just do not understand how individuals can rise to levels of success and power through spouting complete nonsense and completely rejecting basic science. I don't understand how someone can graduate from college and believe that a woman can't get pregnant if she is raped. Perhaps they don't believe this and are just saying it in the hopes that there are people out there without a high school education who will believe it, however, they should be absolutely shamed into resigning not given a vice presidential nomination.

I don't object to individuals being pro-life. While I do not agree with this position, the general position itself has legitimacy as a position. However, there should be no place for making up science, lying, or trying to harness stupidity.


They draw conclusions based on want they want to believe and reverse-engineer science to fit their beliefs.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2012 11:42     Subject: Ryan-Aiken social conservatism and anti-science
I just do not understand how individuals can rise to levels of success and power through spouting complete nonsense and completely rejecting basic science. I don't understand how someone can graduate from college and believe that a woman can't get pregnant if she is raped. Perhaps they don't believe this and are just saying it in the hopes that there are people out there without a high school education who will believe it, however, they should be absolutely shamed into resigning not given a vice presidential nomination.

I don't object to individuals being pro-life. While I do not agree with this position, the general position itself has legitimacy as a position. However, there should be no place for making up science, lying, or trying to harness stupidity.