• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How can this possibly be constitutional?

Ganondagan said:
There is evidence, it's all around you, you just refuse to see it.
Click to expand...
I can "see" shapes and patterns in clouds or other things. But it's still just a cloud. Seeing things that aren't there is imagination at best and delusion at worst.
Ganondagan said:
For me, it's a matter of spiritual experiences, reason, and faith. And before you even go into your insulting replies know that I don't care if you disagree.
Click to expand...
Experiences and such is subjective and anecdotal and does not constituents valid or reliable evidence. That's why assertions based on nothing but that can and should be dismissed.
No, I am not interested in religious BS. "Religious context" does not explain reality or establishe the veracity of evidence. It's nothing more than making things up or along the lines of "because i say so." Its still subjective and anecdotal nonsense.
"Religious context,"
 
Ganondagan said:
Gordy is being ignored.
Click to expand...
In other words, you cant answer questions posed, much less refute points made against your BS! But that's ok, it just means my points and arguments continue to go unrefuted.
 
Prove there's something beyond the physical! Otherwise your assertions are baseless.
 

It is. The culture of the population of America, both before and after the Constituion was adopted, lived in a culture created by Judeo-Christian values. Adopting a Constitution doesn't change that.

And again, in case you missed it, the government is not the nation, the citezenry are the nation.
 

This is becoming a major problem in education. Reliance on search engines and AI to make an argument for a person. Instead of researching for oneself and thinking about things and constructing an argument people are just asking for others to do the work. That also means that those using AI are also leas equiped to understand what AI's conclusions are... because the "student" didn't do any thinking or researching or comparing or analyzing... it is a real problem and one that your post illustrates.



.
 
Ganondagan said:
It is. The culture of the population of America, both before and after the Constituion was adopted, lived in a culture created by Judeo-Christian values. Adopting a Constitution doesn't change that.
Click to expand...

Like the Protestants and Catholics that were killing each other for 500 years?

This means... what version of Christianity are you referring to... and since all were in line with Islam and Judaism, not to mention the Native American religions and the African Religions and the newly arriving Asian religions... well, I know better than to keep owning your argument as you never actually show any evidence that the Constitution is based off of Christianity. LOL




Ganondagan said:
And again, in case you missed it, the government is not the nation, the citezenry are the nation.
Click to expand...

You have a fundamental misunderstanding about what a nation is. You show lack of understanding regarding what the Social Contract it, what the Enlightenment is and what Secularism is. Anyway, you have been thoroughly trounced in this debate.



.
 
Big Bang theory offers no explanation for the universe before the explosion. The theory of evolution requires step wise random mutation. Both insist on random chance.
 
The same was said about calculators. Nothing was said in that post that I wouldn't have said if I'd taken the time to type it out one finger at a time. AI is nothing more than a labor saving device.
 
Last edited:
Ganondagan said:
Science will eventually have to admit that there is a creator, many great scientists already have. There is more to that creation than the material world they play in.
Click to expand...
Indeed, Darwinists vigorously oppose even the suggestion of an intelligent design mechanism driving adaptation as heresy.
 
AZRWinger said:
Indeed, Darwinists vigorously oppose even the suggestion of an intelligent design mechanism driving adaptation as heresy.
Click to expand...
I could understand if they just took a position of agnosticism but so many just flat out refuse to consider the possibility.
 
AZRWinger said:
Big Bang theory offers no explanation for the universe before the explosion.
Click to expand...
No one said it did. The BB explains the inflation of the universe.
AZRWinger said:
The theory of evolution requires step wise random mutation. Both insist on random chance.
Click to expand...
While mutations can be random, they can also be caused by other factors. Whats the issue with random chance anyway?
 
AZRWinger said:
Indeed, Darwinists vigorously oppose even the suggestion of an intelligent design mechanism driving adaptation as heresy.
Click to expand...
There is no evidence for design. That is just religious fantasy. Creationism with a different wrapping.
 
Last edited:
Gordy327 said:
No one said it did. The BB explains the inflation of the universe.
Click to expand...
So then science offers no explanation for creation of the universe. Genesis does but it's fobidden by the open minded Leftists.
Gordy327 said:
While mutations can be random, they can also be caused by other factors. Whats the issue with random chance anyway?
Click to expand...
You have gone from denying science relying on random chance to admitting it. Thanks for the conformation.
 
AZRWinger said:
So then science offers no explanation for creation of the universe. Genesis does but it's fobidden by the open minded Leftists.
Click to expand...
Genesis is just a story, one of many ro explain the creation of the universe. But a story is all it is and has zero supporting evidence. You might as well say the universe was created by fairies, leprechaun, or gnomes. Same difference and equally as valid as Genesis.
AZRWinger said:
You have gone from denying science relying on random chance to admitting it. Thanks for the conformation.
Click to expand...
Specify where I denied it! Your bad faith posting does you no favors. You still haven't explained what the issue is with random chance. Are you going to dodge that question too, like you do with so many others?
 
AZRWinger said:
So then science offers no explanation for creation of the universe. Genesis does but it's fobidden by the open minded Leftists.

You have gone from denying science relying on random chance to admitting it. Thanks for the conformation.
Click to expand...

Scientists couldn't explain Thunder either... so they said it was caused by Thor. Pretty stupid eh? Or, do you contend that they may be right?
 
Bodi said:
Scientists couldn't explain Thunder either... so they said it was caused by Thor. Pretty stupid eh? Or, do you contend that they may be right?
Click to expand...
People in their ignorance believed thunder and lightning was caused by angry gods. Fortunately, science eventually discovered the answer and dispelled such ignorance, as it does. The more science discovers and learns, the smaller the box where gods reside becomes. Science for the win!
 

But at least we know what causes tsunamis... Neptune, Lord of the Seas.

He got really angry and unleashed the Boxing Day Tsunami in 2004 after some quack started talking about Plate Tectonics as a source.

.
 
Bodi said:
But at least we know what causes tsunamis... Neptune, Lord of the Seas.

He got really angry and unleashed the Boxing Day Tsunami in 2004 after some quack started talking about Plate Tectonics as a source.

.
Click to expand...
Of course. Everybody knows that.
 
Bodi said:
Scientists couldn't explain Thunder either... so they said it was caused by Thor. Pretty stupid eh? Or, do you contend that they may be right?
Click to expand...
Which so-called scientists?
 
Now you attempt to skip over "scientific" reliance on random chance to explain the pre Big Bang universe and Evolution. Random chance for the win.
 
AZRWinger said:
Now you attempt to skip over "scientific" reliance on random chance to explain the pre Big Bang universe and Evolution. Random chance for the win.
Click to expand...
Still waiting for you to specify where I denied random chance. You get more dishonest with each post!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…