eyeball Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 A political alchemist? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
benny Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 A political alchemist? "Man is by nature a political animal" (Aristotle) Quote
Argus Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Why do you keep lying? Major branches of Christianity do not debate the reality of evolution. Nor did the minister, nor did he bring it up. So why did the Globe bring it up, and why are you lefties so all fired excised over his religious beliefs? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 So we find your line in the sand. It's okay for a science minister to disbelieve evolution because of his religious beliefs, but inappropriate for someone who believes women are inferior because of his religious beliefs to hold any cabinet position. And you see these opinions as synonymous, do you? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Yet the Islamic world once gave us many innovations - particularly in the areas of mathematics and navigation - only to become insular and anti-scientific. What might explain this transformation? Uhm, that would be a guy named Muhammed. All those things the "muslim world" gave to us came about before the "muslim world" was Muslim. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 notwithstanding Alta4ever's misunderstandings & "bigot" labeling... or Argus' overwhelming need for a left/right polarization...a refreshing National Post smackdown! Then I'm sure you'll appreciate This attack on Goodyear needs to be put into context. There is no workplace in Canada where an employee can be grilled — let alone belittled, or have their competence questioned — on the basis of their religious beliefs. Imagine walking into the office of your employer’s VP for research and development. You open the door and say, “Hey Joan, are you a member of a church?” Which you follow up with: “What? So you believe in God and all that crap? Are you serious? Maybe you should go and find another job, because none of us around here have time for religious nutbars.” Joseph McCarthy would have approved of the Globe’s methods. Will the newspaper’s reporters now approach candidates for office with the question “Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of a religion that has creationist values?” The Liberal War on Faith Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 How true. Religious beliefs always need to be taken into consideration in my opinion. So you'd be in favour of questioning every potential cabinet minister on their personal religious beliefs, and then rejecting them from cabinet based on what you like or don't like about their religion? Is that seriously what you propose? Or is only when they're Tory cabinet ministers? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Actually, that's quite false, at least as far as the Vatican is concerned. You get back to me when the Vatican says Genesis was wrong. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 A person can be devoutly religious and believe in evolution. My parents are both devout Catholics, yet they still believe in evolution. It was a science question to determine how much he understands about rudimentary science. That's beside the point. I doubt the Globe and Mail asked this question of the last minister, or any minister. The Globe targeted him because of his religious beliefs, and asked questions designed to ridicule his religious beliefs. They never would have done it were he a member of any other religion. I have never heard about Ujjal Dosanjh, but if they are not a medical doctor then I don't think they should be in that position. The minister of anything should have a background in that subject or they hold absolutely no credibility. Well it's too bad you are so unfamilair with how things are done in this country. In general, we try and ensure the Finance Minister has a lot background in finance, and the Justice minister is usually a lawyer - mind you, most MPs are lawyers anyway. But that's about it insofar as matching talents to job history goes. It's actually quite rare that an incoming minister has any knowledge of the ministry he or she is to take over. That does occasionally lead to mismatches where a PM wants a minister because of his loyalty or geographic location but has nowhere to actually put him. Perhaps the worst example of this was when Mulroney named Marcel Masse as minster of defense. Masse was an efete wine and cheese loving type who liked to go to opera and gallery openings and delighted in associating with the arts crowd (he had previously been in charge of culture). He was an appallingly bad minister without the slightest interest in anything remotely connected to military affairs. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
guyser Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 This attack on Goodyear needs to be put into context. There is no workplace in Canada where an employee can be grilled — let alone belittled, or have their competence questioned — on the basis of their religious beliefs. Imagine walking into the office of your employer’s VP for research and development. You open the door and say, “Hey Joan, are you a member of a church?” Which you follow up with: “What? So you believe in God and all that crap? Are you serious? Maybe you should go and find another job, because none of us around here have time for religious nutbars.” National Post is correct. One is not allowed to ask what church they attend (or at all). National Post is incorrect to assert the same was asked. But thats okay, the attempts to muddy the waters is fun to watch. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 National Post is correct. One is not allowed to ask what church they attend (or at all).National Post is incorrect to assert the same was asked. But thats okay, the attempts to muddy the waters is fun to watch. Did some art work and decorating once on the Magna compound. I learned what their corporate policy was - It was a must that you were an atheist - There was a piece of art I wished to sell and one executive loved it but was not allowed to purchase it - because there was a hallo on one of the prime figures - It was not really a religious piece but they thought that it was - If you want to work for Magna International - within their upper archy - Never let them know you believe in God or you will not get the job - Frank is God - and the corporation is the church.. Quote
M.Dancer Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 You get back to me when the Vatican says Genesis was wrong. Can you show where the Vatican maintains that the account of Geneses is literal? Today, almost half a century after publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory. -Pope John Paul II http://www.christusrex.org/www1/pope/vise10-23-96.html Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
M.Dancer Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Nor did the minister, nor did he bring it up. So why did the Globe bring it up, and why are you lefties so all fired excised over his religious beliefs? I'm not a lefty....yet I think that perhaps he is okay to be minister of science....nothing in the past says a minister need understand or believe in his ministry, but our expectations that a minister understand and believe are simply wishful thinking... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Oleg Bach Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Actually, that's quite false, at least as far as the Vatican is concerned. It has made several clear statements that evolution is not incompatible with Christian doctrine, and that Creationism and Intelligent Design are inherently bad theology. Remember, the Church fundamentally believes that there is no difference between Divine Truth and Natural Truth, that, inherently Scripture cannot be in defiance of natural law. What do you suppose the point of quoting St. Augustine was?Other major churches, such as the Anglican Church, have also made positive pro-evolutionary statements, and have rejected Creationism. Evolution is not incompatible with Christian doctrine..they go that right - but what about excepting with blind faith and no proof what so ever that there are little green men inhabiting the stars - Vatican says that's fine too..So lets forget this unprovable existance of God - and just start worshipping shinny flying saucers the way crows worship shinny spoons. Maybe that Pope had better re-edit the bible and toss out that crap written by Paul - Paulism is Christianity and he was the first great social engineer - who never laid eyes or ears on the Christ - makes you wonder. Quote
madmax Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 (edited) I think this thread, the hype, and the bashing of Gary Goodyear is over the top and downright wrong. Even if, Even if, he is a creationalist, being "Scientifically Wrong" in one field, isn't the end of the world even for a Science Minister. What would be wrong is if he was directly responsible for KILLING FUNDING to the Scientific community based upon his religious beliefs. While I would like to see Gary Goodyear tossed out as an MP, he has been re elected many times. He does have a health background. He is technically minded, and while I disagree with his policies on trade and capital global investment, which are causing alot of industrial destruction in his region, at least his is not as bad as many politicians that are simply empty headed. I have worked with others in the scientific community who embraced creationism. I recall having great difficulty understanding that when I first ran into this trend in the late 80s. How could someone with so much knowledge believe in something that will not be supported with scientific evidence. These were University Grads. The fact is, everyone is entitled to their beliefs. If it doesn't affect their day to day activities and positions or places their beliefs upon others, then it is no ones business. I don't like the look of this from the get go. It is a drive by smear. If there are cuts to Science, then those issues must be highlighted. (We are supposed to be a technical Society ). Not someones private religious beliefs. IIRC we had a Prime Minister that talked to ghosts. Edited March 19, 2009 by madmax Quote
Drea Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 So you'd be in favour of questioning every potential cabinet minister on their personal religious beliefs, and then rejecting them from cabinet based on what you like or don't like about their religion? Is that seriously what you propose?Or is only when they're Tory cabinet ministers? Nope, all of them, not just the Tories. LOL If the minister in charge of indian affairs, for example, was a known racist should he/she hold that post? Science and religion are not compatible. Our science minister should not come into the position with a biased point of view. Perhaps someone with an actual science background would be more appropriate. Anyway, the government does not appoint ministers because of their knowledge or experience -- they either get appointed because of a friendship or maybe the gov't just doesn't give a damn who runs what department. The minister of highways should be someone that has never driven a vehicle in their life -- makes sense no? LOL Quote ...jealous much? Booga Booga! Hee Hee Hee
Alta4ever Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Nope, all of them, not just the Tories. LOLIf the minister in charge of indian affairs, for example, was a known racist should he/she hold that post? Science and religion are not compatible. Our science minister should not come into the position with a biased point of view. Perhaps someone with an actual science background would be more appropriate. Anyway, the government does not appoint ministers because of their knowledge or experience -- they either get appointed because of a friendship or maybe the gov't just doesn't give a damn who runs what department. The minister of highways should be someone that has never driven a vehicle in their life -- makes sense no? LOL So studing Biomechanics isn't science, doesn't constitute a science background. Goodyear was raised and educated in Cambridge. After high school he attended the University of Waterloo, studyng in Biomechanics and Psychology, but left without completing a degree. He afterwards attended the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, where he graduated cum laude, was class president, and valedictorian. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Goodyear What makes no sense is this drive by smear this is absolute crap. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Argus Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Science and religion are not compatible. I guess that whole gravity theory was so much nonsense, then. Newton was way too religious a man to have ever come up with any valid scientific ideas. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Oleg Bach Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 I guess that whole gravity theory was so much nonsense, then.Newton was way too religious a man to have ever come up with any valid scientific ideas. Michaelangelo - was religious and a hell of a scientist when it came to biology and the reconstruction of the human form though marble. Stupid religion and stupid science are not compatable with anything of value. Darwin for instance - never mentioned once that "there is no God" - and I am sure if he thought that the publishing of his book would lead to an antheistic movement - he may have refrained from publishing - same can be said of Sigmund Freud...If he could have forseen that the Nazis were going to warp and twist his theorys into some sort of social control devise to help spawn facism - He would have killed himself earlier. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Maurizio Bevilacqua Who held the post was a Roman catholic yet he wasn't asked this quetion why not? Do I need to post the list of Liberals that held this post that had religious leanings but yet no question on this to them? This is nothing but a smear. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Oleg Bach Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Maurizio BevilacquaWho held the post was a Roman catholic yet he wasn't asked this quetion why not? Do I need to post the list of Liberals that held this post that had religious leanings but yet no question on this to them? This is nothing but a smear. Listen to that psuedo intellectual on Toronto talk radio - they hyper vocabularist - who think he is a genious - he cleverly attacts religion just about every damned show - The guy struts like a snotty humanist British school boy always rocking up on to his toes like he has authority - damned right this is a smear - they are trying to promote the idea that believers in intelligent life that is eternity and the universe are stupid - it's a class struggle and a quest for supermacey by athesist. Quote
M.Dancer Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Maurizio BevilacquaWho held the post was a Roman catholic yet he wasn't asked this quetion why not? Because neither Roman Catholics nor the Roman Catholic Church hold that the literal interpretation of the account of Gen. is an article of faith so asking would be a non sequitor. Sort of like asking a Hindu if they believe in the account of Noah.... And given that Goodyear cut funding to one of the most important research projects in our time, one where disbelief in evolution is relevant, it is relevant if it is his unscientific beliefs influenced that decision. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
noahbody Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 In psychoanalysis, a symptom is a slip one is committing when s/he tries too hard to follow the rules. Freud is here in my living room. He would like you to explain how Goodyear's agnostic response in which his words appear to be carefully chosen could be characterized as a slip or a symptom from a Creationist. Can you not see that they could be a political response from a politician? Quote
Oleg Bach Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Hate to interupt again - but clue me in - what funding did he cut? Quote
Molly Posted March 19, 2009 Report Posted March 19, 2009 Name that cut, Dancer. Please. Quote "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" — L. Frank Baum "For Conservatives, ministerial responsibility seems to be a temporary and constantly shifting phenomenon," -- Goodale
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.