Wow... now Hugh Freeze is DMing students... can't make this stuff up.

(07-10-2022 02:19 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  Wow... now Hugh Freeze is DMing students... can't make this stuff up.

He was simply defending his athletic director, his friend, against unfair attacks from someone who didn't even know him. I doubt he even knew who she was.

(07-10-2022 01:23 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  The idea that you think what I posted is "far right conversations" is telling, since the majority believes what I just stated. Anyway, I'm not going to get into it more, because somehow what I posted is political but attacking creationism is not. I want to get back to football. My may point is those who push science only do so when it fits their agenda.

The reality is Creationism is a religious belief. Evolution is a scientific theory. Neither are political, unless you are a politician that thinks you can make anything political if it benefits you.

And I did not mention anything about that. I'm warning you guys off the anti LGBT rhetoric that was not needed, and only serves to divide.

If you guys want to debate evolution vs creation, that's fine.

Liberty fans: We're so much better than anyone that came into the SBC, it's a shame we're not in the SBC cause we're far superior than CUSA competition

Also Liberty fans: SBC fans look down on everyone else but they're a glorified FCS conference

(07-10-2022 01:23 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  The idea that you think what I posted is "far right conversations" is telling, since the majority believes what I just stated. Anyway, I'm not going to get into it more, because somehow what I posted is political but attacking creationism is not. I want to get back to football. My may point is those who push science only do so when it fits their agenda.

What did you state that the "majority" believes in?
I did not attack creationism as your belief or a belief. I will however attack the idea of teaching creationism as science. That is extremely dangerous for our country and world.
RE:Your earlier post----How do you "define" a woman?

(07-11-2022 08:03 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Liberty fans: We're so much better than anyone that came into the SBC, it's a shame we're not in the SBC cause we're far superior than CUSA competition

Also Liberty fans: SBC fans look down on everyone else but they're a glorified FCS conference

Never said we are so much better than anyone in the SBC. Said of the 4 teams they took, case could be made easily Liberty should have been one of them. I certainly never said the Sun Belt was a glorified FCS conference, nor have I heard any Liberty fans say that, ever. I made the point that Sun Belt teams started out as FCS transfers and it worked. Just saying same could be said possibly for Sam Houston St. and Jacksonville St. in several years.

(07-11-2022 08:19 AM)ragin4u Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 01:23 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  The idea that you think what I posted is "far right conversations" is telling, since the majority believes what I just stated. Anyway, I'm not going to get into it more, because somehow what I posted is political but attacking creationism is not. I want to get back to football. My may point is those who push science only do so when it fits their agenda.

What did you state that the "majority" believes in?
I did not attack creationism as your belief or a belief. I will however attack the idea of teaching creationism as science. That is extremely dangerous for our country and world.
RE:Your earlier post----How do you "define" a woman?

I'm not allowed to state what the majority believes in because moderators have said any discussion of LGBT topics is off limits. I don't see creationism as dangerous at all.

(07-11-2022 10:14 AM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 08:19 AM)ragin4u Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 01:23 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  The idea that you think what I posted is "far right conversations" is telling, since the majority believes what I just stated. Anyway, I'm not going to get into it more, because somehow what I posted is political but attacking creationism is not. I want to get back to football. My may point is those who push science only do so when it fits their agenda.

What did you state that the "majority" believes in?
I did not attack creationism as your belief or a belief. I will however attack the idea of teaching creationism as science. That is extremely dangerous for our country and world.
RE:Your earlier post----How do you "define" a woman?

I'm not allowed to state what the majority believes in because moderators have said any discussion of LGBT topics is off limits. I don't see creationism as dangerous at all.

And it should be. I understand where you are coming from but this just isn't the place for some of these discussions. Religion, LGBTQ, etc. are not topics that do well on message boards. Even creationism vs the Big Bang are best avoided.

(07-11-2022 10:20 AM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:14 AM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 08:19 AM)ragin4u Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 01:23 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  The idea that you think what I posted is "far right conversations" is telling, since the majority believes what I just stated. Anyway, I'm not going to get into it more, because somehow what I posted is political but attacking creationism is not. I want to get back to football. My may point is those who push science only do so when it fits their agenda.

What did you state that the "majority" believes in?
I did not attack creationism as your belief or a belief. I will however attack the idea of teaching creationism as science. That is extremely dangerous for our country and world.
RE:Your earlier post----How do you "define" a woman?

I'm not allowed to state what the majority believes in because moderators have said any discussion of LGBT topics is off limits. I don't see creationism as dangerous at all.

And it should be. I understand where you are coming from but this just isn't the place for some of these discussions. Religion, LGBTQ, etc. are not topics that do well on message boards. Even creationism vs the Big Bang are best avoided.

Don't disagree. My issue was just attacks on Christianity/creationism being allowed whereas other topics were not. Just that if one is not allowed, the other should not be either.

(07-11-2022 10:57 AM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  Don't disagree. My issue was just attacks on Christianity/creationism being allowed whereas other topics were not. Just that if one is not allowed, the other should not be either.

None of it is allowed on the main board. You can debate some of it on the Smack Board. Debating creationism versus science is a discussion related around beliefs and that’s generally tolerated here. People are not usually putting down the Christians when they take the science side. Many Christians believe in creationism and also believe in aspects of the scientific explanations. Usually what’s being debated there is the topic itself. If it gets into personal attacks it gets shut down and should be reported. Talking about LGBT is less accepted because while it’s also about beliefs, it also comes off as a personal attack to those that identify as LGBT. If you want hardcore debate of these type topics, there are people on both sides ready to argue with you in the Spin Room.

I do not see where anyone attacked Christianity. My issue is with someone's faith being taught as science.
I am not sure what there is to be debated about LGBTQ rights or as they are otherwise known, human rights.
Maybe you missed my question about your definition of a woman or maybe I missed your answer.

(07-11-2022 01:28 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  I do not see where anyone attacked Christianity. My issue is with someone's faith being taught as science.
I am not sure what there is to be debated about LGBTQ rights or as they are otherwise known, human rights.
Maybe you missed my question about your definition of a woman or maybe I missed your answer.

A woman is an adult biological female that generally has female reproductive parts such as ovaries, uterus, etc.

(07-11-2022 02:46 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 01:28 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  I do not see where anyone attacked Christianity. My issue is with someone's faith being taught as science.
I am not sure what there is to be debated about LGBTQ rights or as they are otherwise known, human rights.
Maybe you missed my question about your definition of a woman or maybe I missed your answer.

A woman is an adult biological female that generally has female reproductive parts such as ovaries, uterus, etc.

My friend, please, this is not the place for these discussions.

(07-11-2022 03:46 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 02:46 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 01:28 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  I do not see where anyone attacked Christianity. My issue is with someone's faith being taught as science.
I am not sure what there is to be debated about LGBTQ rights or as they are otherwise known, human rights.
Maybe you missed my question about your definition of a woman or maybe I missed your answer.

A woman is an adult biological female that generally has female reproductive parts such as ovaries, uterus, etc.

My friend, please, this is not the place for these discussions.

You are right, and I have deleted what I just posted because I don’t want to fall into a trap where we are subjected to any more of his pontificating on his religious beliefs. Like the mods have said: this is a sports forum and that stuff doesn’t belong here.

(07-11-2022 10:57 AM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:20 AM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:14 AM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 08:19 AM)ragin4u Wrote:  

(07-10-2022 01:23 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  The idea that you think what I posted is "far right conversations" is telling, since the majority believes what I just stated. Anyway, I'm not going to get into it more, because somehow what I posted is political but attacking creationism is not. I want to get back to football. My may point is those who push science only do so when it fits their agenda.

What did you state that the "majority" believes in?
I did not attack creationism as your belief or a belief. I will however attack the idea of teaching creationism as science. That is extremely dangerous for our country and world.
RE:Your earlier post----How do you "define" a woman?

I'm not allowed to state what the majority believes in because moderators have said any discussion of LGBT topics is off limits. I don't see creationism as dangerous at all.

And it should be. I understand where you are coming from but this just isn't the place for some of these discussions. Religion, LGBTQ, etc. are not topics that do well on message boards. Even creationism vs the Big Bang are best avoided.

Don't disagree. My issue was just attacks on Christianity/creationism being allowed whereas other topics were not. Just that if one is not allowed, the other should not be either.

(07-11-2022 02:46 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 01:28 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  I do not see where anyone attacked Christianity. My issue is with someone's faith being taught as science.
I am not sure what there is to be debated about LGBTQ rights or as they are otherwise known, human rights.
Maybe you missed my question about your definition of a woman or maybe I missed your answer.

A woman is an adult biological female that generally has female reproductive parts such as ovaries, uterus, etc.

So post-hysterectomy females are not 'women'? Look up uterine agenesis or MRKH Syndrome.
If you think the sex chromosomes decide, there are some issues with that as well.
Maybe not everyone fits into the boxes you think they should.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...mplistic1/

(07-11-2022 01:28 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  I do not see where anyone attacked Christianity.

As long as questioning the application of the scientific method in one specific instance is interpreted as an attack on Christianity, we won't get much farther than this point in the discussion. I am decidedly pro-Christian, even Christian by most definitions, and prize the biology education I received at a Baptist university, but there's simply no easy way to take the charge out of this discussion.

The truth is that science is necessarily based upon the provisional consensus of those working in the field, professional and otherwise. Dissenting viewpoints should always be investigated, but the nature of the machine is that elements that do not meet the standards of the consensus can no longer be treated as equal considerations.

We can see the positive effects of this in, say, psychiatry, where possession by an unwanted entity isn't first on the list of potential diagnoses for those with a variety of mental disorders. Does that mean people aren't possessed? Maybe not, but at some point the scientific establishment had to recognize that giving possession equal time in the classroom isn't really helping anyone. In fact, my guess is that psychiatry education at Liberty gives very little acknowledgment to the possibility of demons (please feel free to correct me!), but for whatever reason, we don't treat that as yielding to "politics." The truly hot button issues are often decided for us by those who lead us rather than any real application of reason.

(07-11-2022 04:55 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:57 AM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:20 AM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 10:14 AM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 08:19 AM)ragin4u Wrote:  What did you state that the "majority" believes in?
I did not attack creationism as your belief or a belief. I will however attack the idea of teaching creationism as science. That is extremely dangerous for our country and world.
RE:Your earlier post----How do you "define" a woman?

I'm not allowed to state what the majority believes in because moderators have said any discussion of LGBT topics is off limits. I don't see creationism as dangerous at all.

And it should be. I understand where you are coming from but this just isn't the place for some of these discussions. Religion, LGBTQ, etc. are not topics that do well on message boards. Even creationism vs the Big Bang are best avoided.

Don't disagree. My issue was just attacks on Christianity/creationism being allowed whereas other topics were not. Just that if one is not allowed, the other should not be either.

(07-11-2022 02:46 PM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-11-2022 01:28 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  I do not see where anyone attacked Christianity. My issue is with someone's faith being taught as science.
I am not sure what there is to be debated about LGBTQ rights or as they are otherwise known, human rights.
Maybe you missed my question about your definition of a woman or maybe I missed your answer.

A woman is an adult biological female that generally has female reproductive parts such as ovaries, uterus, etc.

So post-hysterectomy females are not 'women'? Look up uterine agenesis or MRKH Syndrome.
If you think the sex chromosomes decide, there are some issues with that as well.
Maybe not everyone fits into the boxes you think they should.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...mplistic1/

If you want to continue this conversation, it has to to go the no-spin room. I take some issue with what you say but I'm not going to address it on a football board and clutter this for other people.

I saw something this weekend I haven't seen..

Liberty fans in the wild. That's all. I keep an eye out for fans of teams that are not P5.

(07-12-2022 06:27 AM)gdunn Wrote:  I saw something this weekend I haven't seen..

Liberty fans in the wild. That's all. I keep an eye out for fans of teams that are not P5.

I think you will see more Liberty fans come out now that Falwell Jr. is gone. I saw several Liberty fans at Ocean City, NJ on the boardwalk.

(07-12-2022 09:23 AM)sstaedtler88 Wrote:  

(07-12-2022 06:27 AM)gdunn Wrote:  I saw something this weekend I haven't seen..

Liberty fans in the wild. That's all. I keep an eye out for fans of teams that are not P5.

I think you will see more Liberty fans come out now that Falwell Jr. is gone. I saw several Liberty fans at Ocean City, NJ on the boardwalk.

This was in WV.. SUV had Ohio tags and a LU sticker.