<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Bit of Political Science for a Change</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/01/a-bit-of-political-science-for-a-change/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/01/a-bit-of-political-science-for-a-change/</link>
	<description>TalkingScience is a non-profit organization focus on educating the general public on science through new media.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:08:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jenni M</title>
		<link>http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/01/a-bit-of-political-science-for-a-change/comment-page-1/#comment-27907</link>
		<dc:creator>Jenni M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 20:57:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.talkingscience.org/?p=3484#comment-27907</guid>
		<description>I made a grammatical in my post. I should have said, &quot;Or why places like Haiti, that already suffer so much, are hit by devastating earthquakes that kill over 100,000 people.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I made a grammatical in my post. I should have said, "Or why places like Haiti, that already suffer so much, are hit by devastating earthquakes that kill over 100,000 people."</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jenni M</title>
		<link>http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/01/a-bit-of-political-science-for-a-change/comment-page-1/#comment-27863</link>
		<dc:creator>Jenni M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 04:40:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.talkingscience.org/?p=3484#comment-27863</guid>
		<description>I completely agree with you here. I think the main reason so many Republicans are quick to embrace religion and quick to reject science is that they are scared. Since the beginning of humanity, people have been looking for reasons that explain why humankind is here in the first place. Science does not allows provide emotional comfort to people whereas religion does. People have been asking these questions for ages: Who are we? Why are we here? How did we get here? What is our purpose in life? Since there was little technology and tools thousands and thousands of years ago, people looked to God for explanations of what our existence is all about. Religion comforts people. They like believing in an all-powerful being, and they like believing that this being is there to make sure that we are never alone. God is also people&#039;s way of explaining why the unexplainable happens. For example, why on earth a beautiful, talented 17 year old would die and be taken from the world? Or why good people die of cancer at a young age while people who are evil, malicious and greedy live to be 100? Or why places like Haiti, who already suffered so much, was hit by a devastating earthquake that killed over 100,000 people? Since these things are SO unfair and painful, people look to God to explain why things happen. They want to feel comfortable with death, and the only way for them to feel comfortable is believing in a place called Heaven. 

Religion is also a way for some people to live inside a tightly closed box for their entire life. It is the excuse of some people in the religious right to not be accepting and understanding of people who are different than they are, it allows them to feel superior to others on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion. The bible states that homosexuals are sinners, slavery is acceptable and that women are inferior to men.  A person I know who will remain nameless has told me countless times that since the bible and his pastor claim that homosexuality is a sin, he too believes it is a sin. I do not disrespect religious people, but I will say that many things in the bible have no factual scientific basis behind them. It is a book that was written by men expressing their opinion on different things thousands and thousands of years ago. Do some of these stories have valuable lessons for humankind? Absolutely. But there are some that I take a lot of offense to.  Some say the bible stories are the &quot;words of God,&quot; but I for one don&#039;t believe that God actually comes and talks to anyone. There are a huge number of atheists out there who would state the same thing.

Scientific fact, on the other hand, is, as it states in the term, backed up by FACTS. Scientists have concluded through intense research that there is a gene that causes homosexuality, and that homosexuality is a BIOLOGICAL condition. this means that a person who is homosexual cannot help being that way. It is simply who they are and they are never going to change. Scientists have also compared the male and female brain and realized that even though the two genders have distinct differences, one gender is not smarter then the other. A book that was written thousands of years ago by people we know little about tells us that women came from men. This claim is not based with any scientific fact. When men claim that they are superior to women, they are simply saying it to feel more powerful and keep up with past traditions, despite the fact that scientist have proven that one gender is not smarter than the other. 

Scientists also have strong evidence in favor of the concept of evolution. It simply makes sense that mankind evolved from apes, since apes have the closest set of genes to humans and they were here before humans. We didn&#039;t just pop up out of nowhere, we had to come about somehow. That is the case with many different animals. Whales at one point were large dog-like creatures who roamed around land. They looked completely different than whales do nowadays. Humans nowadays are different than they were even 200 years ago. Our heights, weights, and lifetime expectancies have all grown. Evolution just makes the most sense because it is supported by evidence and fact.

People fear change and they cling to tradition. What is ridiculous about people fearing science is that science allows us to live better lives. It shouldn&#039;t be something we are afraid of. I don&#039;t think that humans have a pre-destined fate; instead I believe that we are in control of our own destiny, and that developments in science give us greater control of who we are. While it is good to sometimes not be in control and remember that all of us are just a very small part of a much greater picture, control allows people to live the life they have always dreamed of. 


Allaboutthetruth.org claims that the bible was &quot;Written over more than 1,500 years ago by vastly different writers, yet every book in the Bible is consistent in its message. These 66 books talk about history, prophecy, poetry, and theology. Despite their complexity, differences in writing styles and vast time periods, the books of the Bible agree miraculously well in theme, facts and cross-referencing. No human beings could have planned such an intricate combination of books over a 1,500-year time span.&quot; Um yes, humans very much could have written a book that was that intricate. And you know why it was consistent over the years? Because consistent messages of &quot;God&#039;s word&quot; were drilled into people&#039;s heads. And even though there are many differences among human beings, all of us really have more in common than we think we do. We all want to be happy, healthy, and successful, and unless you are a deranged psychotic person, we all tend to have similar morals and values when it comes to the way human beings should be treated. Since religion was a common thread among people throughout the time the bible was written, it is easy to believe that people wrote stories with similar messages that contributed to the intricacy of the bible.


The bible is a book that its believers can follow purely based on faith, not on fact. I quite frankly do not have a large amount of respect for the bible since it separates people and does not promote the idea that we are all equal and that we all have the right to a lifetime filled with opportunity and happiness.  

I could go into a whole discussion of why the separation of church and state is necessary, but this comment is already ridiculously long and I have already written a blog post concerning that topic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I completely agree with you here. I think the main reason so many Republicans are quick to embrace religion and quick to reject science is that they are scared. Since the beginning of humanity, people have been looking for reasons that explain why humankind is here in the first place. Science does not allows provide emotional comfort to people whereas religion does. People have been asking these questions for ages: Who are we? Why are we here? How did we get here? What is our purpose in life? Since there was little technology and tools thousands and thousands of years ago, people looked to God for explanations of what our existence is all about. Religion comforts people. They like believing in an all-powerful being, and they like believing that this being is there to make sure that we are never alone. God is also people's way of explaining why the unexplainable happens. For example, why on earth a beautiful, talented 17 year old would die and be taken from the world? Or why good people die of cancer at a young age while people who are evil, malicious and greedy live to be 100? Or why places like Haiti, who already suffered so much, was hit by a devastating earthquake that killed over 100,000 people? Since these things are SO unfair and painful, people look to God to explain why things happen. They want to feel comfortable with death, and the only way for them to feel comfortable is believing in a place called Heaven. </p>
<p>Religion is also a way for some people to live inside a tightly closed box for their entire life. It is the excuse of some people in the religious right to not be accepting and understanding of people who are different than they are, it allows them to feel superior to others on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion. The bible states that homosexuals are sinners, slavery is acceptable and that women are inferior to men.  A person I know who will remain nameless has told me countless times that since the bible and his pastor claim that homosexuality is a sin, he too believes it is a sin. I do not disrespect religious people, but I will say that many things in the bible have no factual scientific basis behind them. It is a book that was written by men expressing their opinion on different things thousands and thousands of years ago. Do some of these stories have valuable lessons for humankind? Absolutely. But there are some that I take a lot of offense to.  Some say the bible stories are the "words of God," but I for one don't believe that God actually comes and talks to anyone. There are a huge number of atheists out there who would state the same thing.</p>
<p>Scientific fact, on the other hand, is, as it states in the term, backed up by FACTS. Scientists have concluded through intense research that there is a gene that causes homosexuality, and that homosexuality is a BIOLOGICAL condition. this means that a person who is homosexual cannot help being that way. It is simply who they are and they are never going to change. Scientists have also compared the male and female brain and realized that even though the two genders have distinct differences, one gender is not smarter then the other. A book that was written thousands of years ago by people we know little about tells us that women came from men. This claim is not based with any scientific fact. When men claim that they are superior to women, they are simply saying it to feel more powerful and keep up with past traditions, despite the fact that scientist have proven that one gender is not smarter than the other. </p>
<p>Scientists also have strong evidence in favor of the concept of evolution. It simply makes sense that mankind evolved from apes, since apes have the closest set of genes to humans and they were here before humans. We didn't just pop up out of nowhere, we had to come about somehow. That is the case with many different animals. Whales at one point were large dog-like creatures who roamed around land. They looked completely different than whales do nowadays. Humans nowadays are different than they were even 200 years ago. Our heights, weights, and lifetime expectancies have all grown. Evolution just makes the most sense because it is supported by evidence and fact.</p>
<p>People fear change and they cling to tradition. What is ridiculous about people fearing science is that science allows us to live better lives. It shouldn't be something we are afraid of. I don't think that humans have a pre-destined fate; instead I believe that we are in control of our own destiny, and that developments in science give us greater control of who we are. While it is good to sometimes not be in control and remember that all of us are just a very small part of a much greater picture, control allows people to live the life they have always dreamed of. </p>
<p>Allaboutthetruth.org claims that the bible was "Written over more than 1,500 years ago by vastly different writers, yet every book in the Bible is consistent in its message. These 66 books talk about history, prophecy, poetry, and theology. Despite their complexity, differences in writing styles and vast time periods, the books of the Bible agree miraculously well in theme, facts and cross-referencing. No human beings could have planned such an intricate combination of books over a 1,500-year time span." Um yes, humans very much could have written a book that was that intricate. And you know why it was consistent over the years? Because consistent messages of "God's word" were drilled into people's heads. And even though there are many differences among human beings, all of us really have more in common than we think we do. We all want to be happy, healthy, and successful, and unless you are a deranged psychotic person, we all tend to have similar morals and values when it comes to the way human beings should be treated. Since religion was a common thread among people throughout the time the bible was written, it is easy to believe that people wrote stories with similar messages that contributed to the intricacy of the bible.</p>
<p>The bible is a book that its believers can follow purely based on faith, not on fact. I quite frankly do not have a large amount of respect for the bible since it separates people and does not promote the idea that we are all equal and that we all have the right to a lifetime filled with opportunity and happiness.  </p>
<p>I could go into a whole discussion of why the separation of church and state is necessary, but this comment is already ridiculously long and I have already written a blog post concerning that topic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aleks</title>
		<link>http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/01/a-bit-of-political-science-for-a-change/comment-page-1/#comment-27819</link>
		<dc:creator>Aleks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 07:01:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.talkingscience.org/?p=3484#comment-27819</guid>
		<description>The stupid religious republicans purged the socially liberal yet fiscally conservative Republicans out in 2000-2004, they have f#$ked up the party. I totally agree that the religious right is wrong coming from a Republican. Luckily we are purging those Hubble opposing SOB&#039;s as we speak with Tea Parties.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The stupid religious republicans purged the socially liberal yet fiscally conservative Republicans out in 2000-2004, they have f#$ked up the party. I totally agree that the religious right is wrong coming from a Republican. Luckily we are purging those Hubble opposing SOB's as we speak with Tea Parties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: holycow</title>
		<link>http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/01/a-bit-of-political-science-for-a-change/comment-page-1/#comment-27659</link>
		<dc:creator>holycow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 01:31:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.talkingscience.org/?p=3484#comment-27659</guid>
		<description>The teacher who made the allegation testified under oath in a hearing that he did hear Mr Freshwater say this in class. He also stated an article that prompted Mr Freshwater to make this statement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The teacher who made the allegation testified under oath in a hearing that he did hear Mr Freshwater say this in class. He also stated an article that prompted Mr Freshwater to make this statement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mountvernon1805</title>
		<link>http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/01/a-bit-of-political-science-for-a-change/comment-page-1/#comment-27646</link>
		<dc:creator>mountvernon1805</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:30:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.talkingscience.org/?p=3484#comment-27646</guid>
		<description>Jesse M. S. wrote: &quot;For example, in a recent story in The New York Times, an Ohio science teacher named John Freshwater was quoted as saying that because according to the Bible homosexuality is a sin, scientists must be wrong in their claim to have isolated a gene that causes homosexuality.&quot;

The allegation regarding talking about the issue of homosexuality in class: This is an allegation made by just one person—Jim Stockdale. Freshwater’s response to it was that he never made the statement that Stockdale credited to him about gays; Stockdale may have overheard a conversation Freshwater had with other teachers regarding a magazine article about the gay gene. (See my article “John Freshwater: Investigation Didn’t Follow Contract.”)

http://www.accountabilityinthemedia.com/2009/12/john-freshwater-investigation-didnt.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jesse M. S. wrote: "For example, in a recent story in The New York Times, an Ohio science teacher named John Freshwater was quoted as saying that because according to the Bible homosexuality is a sin, scientists must be wrong in their claim to have isolated a gene that causes homosexuality."</p>
<p>The allegation regarding talking about the issue of homosexuality in class: This is an allegation made by just one person—Jim Stockdale. Freshwater’s response to it was that he never made the statement that Stockdale credited to him about gays; Stockdale may have overheard a conversation Freshwater had with other teachers regarding a magazine article about the gay gene. (See my article “John Freshwater: Investigation Didn’t Follow Contract.”)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.accountabilityinthemedia.com/2009/12/john-freshwater-investigation-didnt.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.accountabilityinthemedia.com/2009/12/john-freshwater-investigation-didnt.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RBH</title>
		<link>http://www.talkingscience.org/2010/01/a-bit-of-political-science-for-a-change/comment-page-1/#comment-27643</link>
		<dc:creator>RBH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:07:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.talkingscience.org/?p=3484#comment-27643</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;There was a group of Christian Republicans who demanded that the Hubbell Space Telescope be taken down. Their rationality: the photographs it was producing contradicted the Bible. Let me reiterate the key word in that sentence: photographs.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I hadn&#039;t heard that one.  Got a reference/citation/link?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>There was a group of Christian Republicans who demanded that the Hubbell Space Telescope be taken down. Their rationality: the photographs it was producing contradicted the Bible. Let me reiterate the key word in that sentence: photographs.</p></blockquote>
<p>I hadn't heard that one.  Got a reference/citation/link?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

