From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Brief summary of my Point of View[edit]

The following will serve as a reference point to shorten my explanations in the Talk pages.

My Certainties

There is no way for creationism or scientific creationism to be scientific--because Occam's razor slices the Creator from any creationist's or scientific creationist's hypothesis.

Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)

A hero who stood for truth, no matter what it was. Robert Ingersoll, Esq. [1]

"Religion does not teach self-reliance, independence, manliness, courage, self-defence. Religion makes God a master and man his serf. The master cannot be great enough to make slavery sweet." What is Religion?, 1899; Ingersoll's last lecture. [2]
But some evolutionists believe that evolution is fact, and they are deluding themselves by confusing fact with cause for the fact.

That is, just because most scientists find evolution a crucial piece in their understanding of the world does not make evolution a fact.

That standard of finding would find that creationism was fact at least until about 1850. Surely scientific fact is different from majority vote.

Hence, there is something pathological about the evolutionists asserting that evolution is fact.

I say this with a twinge of embarrassment for my own family--for I would say that I also am an "evolutionist," that is, someone who believes that people evolved from some stranded and stressed colonies of descendants of the ancestors of the chimpanzees.

My Conjectures

Those evolutionists that assert that evolution is fact are aflicted with the disease of Religion in failing to recognize how important it is to distinguish between 1) what is true and 2) what they hope is true.












Margaret Sanger[edit]

Margaret Sanger was a nurse who visited poor families. And she was appalled at the number of babies born to poor women who had no control over their lives. Furthermore, she understood the problem first hand because she was the fifth of eleven children. When she asked, she found that poor women were interested in being able to have full sexual relations with their husbands without having more children. But the women did not know how to have full sexual relations with their husbands without having more children. Sanger told them. But for the women with big families, it was already too late.

Margaret Sanger

When she and her colleagues published the first issue of the new magazine Woman Rebel, she expected objections from religious people because she had argued in the magazine that women should have access to information on methods for contraception. But to her surprise, the first huge objection arose from the United States Post Office who declared her magazine "unmailable" because of a federal law prohibiting the mailing of information about contraception.

She was amazed that the newspapers failed to notice that the government had squelched a "free press." Instead, one paper published a front page pun on barring Sanger from "mails."

She pointed out that she was only mailing an argument: That women should have access to information on contraception. But the United States Department of Justice indicted her anyway.

"My faith was still childlike," she wrote. She thought that the judge would listen to reason. "All I had to do was explain to those in power what I was doing and everything would come [out] right."

When she appeared in a sudden call before the judge without an attorney and asked to postpone the trial so she could get ready for the trial, the male prosecutor insisted that she not be given a postponement during which time she could publish more arguments that women should be informed of the options for contraception. The male judge agreed and ordered her to appear the very next day with an attorney to represent her. The male attorney she found suggested that her best option was to plead guilty.

"I indignantly refused to plead guilty under any circumstances. . . . I was trying to prove the law was wrong, not I." So she decided that she must insist and put her foot down against the society and insist that the courts, media, and public begin to deal with the case as a problem in the society rather than as a problem in herself. Hence, she jumped bail, left her children with her husband, took a train that night to Canada, and from there sailed to England to prepare her case. She saw that the public would not tackle the tough public problem in the case if she allowed the system merely to put her in jail and inevitably to break her spirit.

Almost a year later she returned to America when she was prepared to argue her case in court. After reconstituting the case in full force against her, the federal government finally relented months later and dismissed the charge against her.

The general public had expressed sympathy for her when her five-year old daughter died, thereby putting pressure on the federal government to be reasonable. And the publicity had generated many wealthy contributors who came to understand in the public demonstration that Sanger was working a tough problem in the society, not her own personal problem.

Beethoven, bless his heart[edit]

I just discovered a wonderful site where you can follow the scores to Beethoven's symphonies.

It also helps to have a legal download of high presence recordings by Zubin Mehta and Peter Serkin and a new pair of Bose airplane engine noise-cancelling earphones to get up there.

Ludwig van Beethoven