 AtlLiberal says: I've not vetted this account but if true it is a particularly stunning example of gullible saps causing real damage by their irresponsible actions. stupidity has no limits and no boundaries.. Someone that dumb in charge of developing young minds. The world might as well just line up the kids at a coalmine and stop the pretence. @tabsey Your comment made me laugh even though it's really not funny. I like to believe that folks are generally good and mean well yet I keep running into accounts of such abject stupidity that it shakes my confidence at times. It seems unfathomable to me that in the 21st century we could take the word of a psychic as evidence of something as serious as this. This is not simply a slip-up. This is a serious breach of competence. That psychic has a license from a local government, right? Children's Aid is that government's agency. Vicious circle. That psychic has a license from a local government, right?Beats me! Perhaps the "psychic" was aunt Mabel sitting at the kitchen table. Though I must admit I'm somewhat out of the loop as far as what it takes to be a psychic these days. Must they pass some sort of written exam? Or do they simply apply for a business license to bilk the public? Are they regulated to insure cosmic alignment? If their alignment is off do they have to go to a state supported psychic alignment center? We must have these important questions answered! Do phsycics need a liscense to practice?? Amazing, just shows how rediculous our justice system is anymore, that they would take this seriously. The judge will probably order the child removed, "just in case". @jmjones Just to set the record straight, it seems you've confused the legislative and judicial systems. And the issue is not trying to protect a child from harm, it's about accepting the word of a psychic that the child is in danger. There was no prior indication that any abuse was taking place; only the word of this charlatan. I agree At, you must of misunderstood me. But wait, is this even going to court?? Anyway, it's just rediculous that they would take this guy's word knowing full well that he got his info from a "phsycic". But then again wouldn't it be weird if the child was being abused.. just a thought though I agree At, you must of misunderstood me.Sorry, it happens sometimes.  But then again wouldn't it be weird if the child was being abused.. just a thought thoughNot necessarily weird. A coincidence perhaps. The psychics and other new age hucksters trade on coincidence. We all remember the 1 in a 100 predictions that "come true" and conveniently forget the 99 that never come to pass. P. T. Barnum made a comfortable living adhering to that scheme. Good point. Humans are naturally superstitous I suppose, they're so sick of the mundane that they really want to see a "supernatural power" at work. Good point. Humans are naturally superstitous I suppose, they're soI'm not so sure about the natual superstition of people. We no longer live in caves when the flash of lightning or the death of a companion was beyond our comprehension. I will agree that the desire to control events beyond our control is very strong and some people do resort to bizarre actions to attempt to control the world around them. I think it's a 12 Step maxim about knowing what we can and can't change and the difference between the two. Sure it would be cool to read minds, move objects with our thoughts and speak to ... Hmm, but then there is the unknown... The things that not even science can answer. We'll have to wait and see. Hmm, but then there is the unknown... The things that not even science can answer. We'll have to wait and see.Well, the unknown is exactly what science strives to answer. Now if you're talking about pink unicorns, I can't help you. They may exist but until we have evidence that they do I'm comfortable with not believing in them. The same with reincarnation, levitation, immaculate conception, the dead reanimating (except zombies of course), and other such foolishness. Ah, so in other words science only believes in things it has evidence for, and simply ignores what it can't explain. Personally I take science and the Bible and combine them, science explains how things work in the universe, they both offer explanations for what the other ignores. I find your use of the word belief interesting though, I didn't think evolutionists believed in anything. Either something is a fact or it's not, right? But obviously you realize that just because there isn't evidence for something doesn't constitute proof that it doesn't exist. Ah, so in other words science only believes in things it has evidence for, and simply ignores what it can't explain.Are you familiar at all with the scientific method? Google it if you aren't. I didn't think evolutionists believed in anything.Ohoh. It seems we've gone down the rabbit hole. Your comment is absurd. Either something is a fact or it's not, right?It seems you are confusing fact and dogma. Facts in science are backed up with evidence. Religious "facts" are dogma, to be swallowed whole, without evidence. It's that whole faith thing. But obviously you realize that just because there isn't evidence for something doesn't cons... Atl, I will admit that I'm ignorant in science and evolution. I find this no less offensive, however, than your obvious ignorance of the Bible and Christianity (your reference to God as "sky buddy" earlier is an eloquent example of this). I would say that is another major problem with both sides, they're both ignorant as to what the opposition is trying to say because neither side take's the other's seriously. I personally am not an advocate of Evolution or Creation, I see flaws in both teachings. I see nothing wrong with the sides saying that "this is their best explanation", but when either side wants to shut down the other because they think theirs is flawless, and perfect, and that there... jmjoness, you just don't get it do you. My reference to your god as a "sky buddy" was sarcasm. I'll admit when I'm ignorant on a subject, as you finally did about science and evolution. There is no shame in ignorance exceopt in ignoring it. And as far as your assumption that I'm ignorant of christianity it would be more honest on your part to say you don't like me being critical about christianity. Instead you decide to attack me personally. I've been sarcastic about your beliefs and that's upset you. At least I've not said things that are patently not true. but when either side wants to shut down the other because they think Creationism is not based on science. ID is not based on science. Why teach them in a science class?Yes, and what is science based on I wonder? evidence? evidence does not speak for itself, it can be manipulated by human belief and opinion. Human reasoning? Human reasoning is flawed, we've already discussed how we can't even disprove the notion of fluffy pink unicorns and gravity fairies. Science has it's limits, that's the only point I'm trying to make. Now, should ID be discussed in a classroom? My only question is why not. If it's so utterly rediculous, what's the harm? The fact is that science cannot disprove creation, and atheistic scientists know this. They are bias... And as far as your assumption that I'm ignorant of christianity it would be more honest on your part to say you don't like me being critical about christianity. Instead you decide to attack me personally. I've been sarcastic about your beliefs and that's upset you. At least I've not said things that are patently not true.Actually I have no problem with you being critical of Christianity. By all means. However, sarcasm is not criticism. Sarcasm is insulting, and degrading, and again it doesn't get anybody anywhere. If you have some genuine criticism of Christianity you should give it in a manner that would not be construed as unwarrantly offensive. Now, as far as being more... Now, should ID be discussed in a classroom? My only question is why not.It's not science. Science, at it's basis, is designed to be refuted. ID is based on religion which is to be accepted on faith. science cannot disprove creation,Then why do you fear it so? They are biased against the Bible and they do not even want it discussed.Certainly not in a science class. Perhaps a class on comparative religion? Where it belongs. Please tell me that you're not that dense. But either way there is no point in continuing,I agree but below this comment you do continue. How odd. Your obvious biasness against Christianity impedes y... I'm sorry, but none of that registered with me pw... I think you need to go take a nap, get sober, SOMETHING! Anyway, as for the case with this "phsycic", to me it's just another example of our faulty justice system. The fact is I'm sure these people find this accusation absurd and completely baseless, but they have to pursure it according to the law. They should be able to use their innate since of reasoning to determine if this case is in any way grounded in truth, but unfortunately they're not. Anyway, as for the case with this "phsycic", to me it's just another example of our faulty justice system.JMJ, I agree with you mostly except that I view this as not the justice system but the laws themselves. I view it as somewhat analogous to the minimum sentencing guidelines which give courts no ability to hear a case and decide on the merits of the case what if any type of punishment to apply. The fact is I'm sure these people find this accusation absurd andAgreed. It shouldn't have gotten as far as it did. It's common sense to treat accusations of child abuse with seriousness yet th... |
View the Top Clips from June 19, 2008
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
