It wasn't science the engendered Roe vs Wade and the subsequent murders of tens of millions of babies, is was the avoidance of science.
If the law waited for science, as it should have, it would have come to the conclusion that abortion kills humans. The politicians wouldn't have liked that. They've been avoiding that bit of science for decades now, and still haven't legislated a consistent definition of the term "human".
If the law waited for science to come to a conclusion, there wouldn't be a Crap&Trade bill wending through Congress seeking to steal hundreds of billions of dollars and shut down America's coal miners. Too bad they elected their Messiah, huh?
Law rarely waits for science. The people are too stupid to even begin to understand the issues. Instead, the conmen typically concoct some half-assed scientific sounding nonsense that scares enough people to demand support for whatever silly legislation it is the conmen are seeking to line their pockets with.
Remember the air-bag nonsense? The engineering analysis of their effectiveness wasn't fully determined, but Congress was passing legislation forcing them, and their costs, on us anyway.
You'll notice city buses and school buses do no have seat belts, nor do city buses suffer from the same absurd emission requirements the other motor vehicles in California do.
No, politics isn't about science, politicians do not use science, except superficially. Politics is all about emotion and shell games. Hasn't changed in millenia.
The ultimate problem is, naturally, that ignorant and stupid people, who far out number us, are allowed to vote...by the politicians that want as many stupid and ignorant voters as possible.
Granted, junk science is being used to justify green laws and part of that is the avoidance of real science, however in the cases we see before us now, science is being used as justification for legislation the same way that religion has.
I think that we need to go back to the days of only certain people being allowed to vote. Welfare recipients shouldn't be allowed to vote. Anyone that doesn't pay taxes shouldn't be allowed to vote. Career students living off student loans shouldn't be allowed to vote. For those who pass those qualifications, there should be a basic knowledge test that has to be passed before they are allowed to register.The ultimate problem is, naturally, that ignorant and stupid people, who far out number us, are allowed to vote...by the politicians that want as many stupid and ignorant voters as possible.
Junk science is being used. AGW is junk, nothing more.
Most of them are too young to know what's up, anyway.
Not to mention providing proof of citizenship, registering far enough in advance of the election to allow a citizenship check, proof of ID at the polls, and the abolition of the absentee ballot except for medically certified mentally competent but physically incapacitated (ie, BEDRIDDEN - wheelchairs can go to polls, and take their passengers with them) voters meeting all other eligibility requirements. (Military and consulate personnel overseas are the only acceptable exception.)
Without all those fraudulent absentee ballots, Franken (will he share committee chairs with Feinstein, making them Franken-stein seats?) would be contaminating the Senate now. Don't expect him to vote in favor of these ideas.
I'm talking about income taxes. If you haven't been raped by the IRS, after busting your ass all year to make a living, you don't get to vote.Scarecrow posted:Fine in theory, and I agree, but horribly dependent on what taxes we're talking about. Everyone pays sales tax, for example.
NOT SO FAST...
Also, now that you've accused me attacking you personally, would you mind showing me exactly what I said that was a personal attack. Do you understand the meaning of "giving you benefit of the doubt."?
I clearly said that I don't think you're stupid, but, in a rush to post something, anything to back up your claims, you posted Op-Ed pieces. It happens.
However, now I'm giving you an opportunity to save face and post something that backs up your claims...
Got anything to refute my documentation? Didn't think so. Have a nice day.
Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.