Rick Santorum is a Catholic who won the majority of the votes of evangelical Protestant voters in Iowa last Tuesday. The website religion dispatches analyzes Santorum's extreme views that won him sympathy in these audiences
Rick Santorum is a Catholic who won the majority of the votes of evangelical Protestant voters in Iowa last Tuesday. site YNET Sanatorium is reported to have said at an event in New Hampshire that he is Christ's candidate. The head of the "Anti-Defamation League" (ADL), Avraham Foxman, claimed that the conservative Santorum insists on involving his religious beliefs in his election campaign, and this is "anti-American behavior". According to him, Sanatorium's words hurt Jews, Muslims, Hindus and non-believers.
אתר religious dispatches Analyzes his religious views that hit hot buttons with the believers of all religions who voted for him. The writer, Sarah Posner, is the author of the book "Prophets of God: Faith, Fraud and the Republican Crusade for Value Voters" and senior editor on the Religion Dispatches website.
Science and intelligent design
When Santorum first entered the race last year, Laurie Leveau reported that he set himself apart from all other Republicans by being the most extreme in his opposition to science. In addition to being a global warming denier (like most Republicans, who receive funding from oil companies, AB), Santorum proposes to give human status to fertilized eggs and opposes embryonic stem cell research. But Lori, a veteran journalist who covered the monkey trial in the Dover testified that this is only the tip of the iceberg.
Santorum was articulate The proposed amendment to the constitution (known as the Santorum amendment in which he introduced language taken from the world of intelligent planning into the federal law: "When a controversial topic is taught (such as biological evolution), the curriculum should allow students to understand the full range of scientific opinions that exist, why these topics may arouse controversy and how scientific discoveries can to affect society." Fortunately, the law did not pass but it remains forever in the legislative archives. In fact, during the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial in 2005, school board attorney Richard Thompson tried to argue that federal law recommends that students study alternatives such as planning The intelligent. These views of his did not help him when he ran again for his seat in the Senate. Although he withdrew his support for the intelligent planning, it did not help him and he was not elected.
Santorum and Islam
During the debate over building a mosque near the World Trade Center on the tenth anniversary of the twin disaster, Santorum sided with conspiracy theories and claimed that Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf was a jihadist. In an interview in 2007, he claimed that because Europeans have become secular they are not having enough children, making their continent vulnerable to an Islamic takeover.
"Only Catholics and religious evangelists" said Santorum, "understand the battle for the existence of Christianity. They understand that there is a battle going on here over fertility (hence his support for the ban on birth planning), and the role of this planning in the decline of Christendom.
Abortions
Santorum has repeatedly expressed his opinion that the attempt to prevent abortions to protect the mother's health is fraudulent. In a message he published during the campaign in Iowa, a year ago Santorum criticized President Obama's support for the right to abortion and said "we are about to decide who is a human being and who is not a human being" claims by movements opposing a woman's right to her own body.
"Freedom of sex will prevail over freedom of religion"
Santorum's views against homosexuals, and his opinion on the Google problem (the problem that when you tap on a person's name, you don't necessarily get only positive articles about him, a problem he suffers from himself after his name was linked to an article that received a lot of press in the outlets of the body) and yet he links it to a conference of an LGBT Christian body. During a debate in September with a gay soldier who came out after the don't ask, don't tell policy was canceled, Santorum said, "We are going to recognize this group of people and give them special rights that will harm religious freedom." "Our freedom of religion has been harmed because we have now created privileges" he said. "We have the legal right to freedom of religion, but now the courts will give more rights in the constitution - freedom of sex. And I think this is wrong. It's a destructive ingredient."
According to the writer, this statement is factually incorrect and is a bizarre and incorrect interpretation of the Constitution. The right is protected by the First Amendment along with the freedom to perform religious worship). In no case did the courts recognize the rights to "sexual freedom" but the right of every person to do whatever he wants in his home as long as he does not harm society.
She adds that Santorum has also shown paranoia towards secularism which he says will lead to a decline in the power of Christianity, which in turn will lead to a decline in productivity, and will allow an Islamist takeover of America. In his case, everything is connected together and belongs to religion.
On the same topic on the science website
22 תגובות
Quantum Mechanics Of Life http://universe-life.com/2011/03/27/quantum-mechanics-of-life/
Life's Evolution Is The Quantum Mechanics Of Biology
From "Essence Of Quantum Mechanics"
http://universe-life.com/2011/01/24/quantum-mechanics-and-entanglement/
The universe, and life within it, are not just conglomerations of mechanisms. The universe, and life within it, have come into being by the nature of energy-mass dualism, and their fate, their final outcome, is governed by this dualism. The genesis and, most likely cyclic, existence of the universe are governed by the energy-mass relationship.
Energy-mass relationship also governs the routes, the mechanisms, of cosmic and life evolutions.
Mechanisms do not set/determine the classical physics fate states. Mechanisms are routes of evolution between classical physics fate states. Quantum mechanics are mechanisms, probable, possible and actual mechanisms of getting from one to other classical physics states WITHIN the expanse from cosmic singularity to the maximum expanded universe and back to singularity states.
The universe is the archetype of quantum within classical physics. This is the fractal oneness of the universe. Astronomically there are two physics. A classical Newtonian physics behavior of and between galactic clusters, and a quantum physics behavior WITHIN the galactic clusters.
Life's Evolution Is The Quantum Mechanics Of Biology.
UNRAVEL COMPLEXITIES OF GENETICS. Extend Evolution/Natural Selection Backward To Genes/Genomes, BOTH ARE ORGANISMS.
The origin-reason and the purpose-fate of life are mechanistic, ethically and practically worthless. Life is the cheapest commodity on Earth.
Human life is just one of many nature's routes for the natural survival of RNAs, the base Earth organism.
It is up to humans themselves to elect the purpose and format of their lives as individuals and as group members.
Dov Henis (Comments From 22nd Century)
"Rethink Evolution/Natural Selection"
http://darwiniana.com/2011/03/26/in-evolution-last-really-can-be-first/comment-page-1/
Interesting article but requires urgent proofreading.
light,
Thanks for the comment
Yuval Shalom
in debates of this type and in general,
Concepts of black and white like absolute truth are foreign in my opinion
In reality, everything is so diverse, complex and unclear.
It would have been more correct to add to the phrase "Santorum's views".
In my opinion or as I understood.
After all, at best you heard what he said, not what he thought. .
My personal opinion is that the main motive of a politician is respect
The status and the control, while the ideology view is for him,
Steps to increase, on the personal promotion scale.
Santorum's views do not reflect scientific reality, and in this respect they are not "superior". But it is possible to criticize a worldview according to more than one criterion. For example, the popularity index. Lies and hypocrisy are an integral part of human existence, and it is not easy to put one's finger on the line between good and bad. Therefore it almost always happens that those who fight for absolute objective truth find themselves on the losing side.
I would appreciate it if you could explain to me what is wrong with this definition of a person who opposes evolution, stem cells, and denies global warming? Shall I call him a man of great views?
my father
It seemed to me that your opinions and views
It is better that you present them only here, in the dialogue you have with the readers.
However, according to the anger in your response, I understood that I was wrong and that your role is indeed
Permits or includes your personal analysis and interpretation in the articles you edit.
Sorry for the misunderstanding
Laur, yes, I wrote the title.
Why does it bother you?
To Moshe, you mean that you believe that the truth is not important, but who benefits from it (if at all, that is not even true). Well, you will be surprised, the truth is important to me, and I do not subject it to ideology, and if the scientists are unequivocal that there is warming (as it is expressed in Science and Nature), this will be my position and I will continue to defend it.
For Eyal, it's just a matter of design, because I wanted the author's name to appear. Besides, it's also unfair because it takes time for news articles from that day to have comments. There are also articles that don't get any comments at all on the first day, and it's not nice to show zero comments all the time on the front page. Even though I know which articles will get tens or even hundreds of comments and which won't, you can't choose the automatic system. It's either always show or not.
Eyal,
I overcome the problem you raised by subscribing to the article that interests me. Every time a comment is added, I get a copy of it in my inbox.
My mail server is one of the most advanced. When a new email arrives, I see it immediately without having to refresh the page. recommended.
Religion returns and takes over after a short period of secular flourishing. Except for short periods and isolated places, religion has always ruled the world and the human race has always lived in symbiosis with it. Due to the current population explosion, a world war is expected to break out soon. Religion has been given the image of a war maker, but this is a wrong image. Religion does not cause wars; It only helps to decide with whom to make an alliance and against whom to aim the barrels of the guns. Suddenly there is talk, for example, about the "Judeo-Christian religions" standing up against Islam. In this time before war, the popularity of religion is increasing, and the rise of Rick Santorum is just one of the manifestations of this.
Hi Abby, just a technical note, why does the indication of the number of comments under each article not appear on the main page? Only when you click on the "all articles" link do you see how many comments each of the articles has.
It's a shame, it's very useful, sometimes you want to know if new comments have been added to a certain article and such an indication can save unnecessary entering the article itself and scrolling all the way down to check, it would be desirable for such an indication to appear on the main page as well.
Thanks in advance.
Following on from what you said about the Republicans you forgot to add
The Democrats support the warming theory to get money and budgets from the UN
Which of course is at the expense of the American taxpayer!!!
Hello father
Asking again, I'm sorry
Is the term "darkest candidate" your creation?
Thanks in advance
Yes, although Ron Paul is also delusional in his own way.
Indeed Max, that's why we have deteriorated to the current situation.
My father is peace
Is the term "darkest candidate" your creation?
You shouldn't be moved by candidate statements in an election campaign, we also had candidates who kissed rabbis' beards, ate mufflets and wore a turban.
Don't you see clearly that all science - as opposed to technology - of the 21st - 20th centuries is in fact the "table" of a powerful American political professional association with average American religious views and that this is the cultural and budgetary catastrophe of the current world??
To continue to be scientifically nullified compared to a powerful American religious professional association?
21st Century Science: A Challenge, And Prospects?
No hope for American-International Science Dominated By
An American Religious Political Trade-Union…
http://universe-life.com/2011/12/17/enlightenment/
http://universe-life.com/2011/12/13/21st-century-science-whence-and-whither/
Dov Henis (comments from 22nd century)
http://universe-life.com/
Avishai, there was already one president who banned embryonic stem cell research, and even Obama was unable to pass a law that would allow it and he had to sign the permit in the form of a presidential decree that the next one after him could cancel in a second.
The problem is not the president but that the atmosphere in the US is becoming more and more anti-scientific. The US president is the man who is supposed to press the nuclear button and the thought of it being a dark man is frightening.
And besides, if you read Carl Sagan's last book A Haunted World, you would have seen that even then, 15 years ago, he was worried that education was deteriorating and that the great universities were full of foreigners, because Americans were becoming more and more ignorant. Part of this is the fault of Republican administrations that starved the education system out of the ideology that the government should not spend money period. It doesn't matter that education is not an expense but an investment.
Abi, I respect what you do on the site, but you are talking here about value issues that are subject to a value debate in themselves. There are no scientific tools to judge what the rights of a homosexual soldier are, and there are no scientific tools to judge what the minimum definition of taking a life is. This is a fairly deep world of social values. The only place in the article where there was legitimacy to the presentation of the topic on a site that deals with science, was when Santorum claimed that biological evolution is controversial. It is still not to put in jail everyone who thinks like this, and although it may be contrary to your views or mine, it should not be presented on the site as the enemy of science. Americans know well enough, and perhaps better than we do, the importance of quality scientists, and no Republican president is going to change that with comments about evolution. As for all the other topics, it is not clear to me why they should appear on a site that is about science. Moore has already written enough about the naturalistic fallacy for us to know where to draw the line.