• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Maryland senators vote against Big Bang

PhxHorn

Thinker
P
Joined
Mar 17, 2004
Messages
161
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030602181_2.html

A strange thing happened yesterday when Sen. Paul G. Pinsky (D-Prince George's) introduced a resolution to honor John C. Mather, co-winner of the 2006 Nobel Prize in physics. Two senators -- Janet Greenip (R-Anne Arundel) and Nancy Jacobs (R-Harford) -- declined to vote.

"I don't believe in the big-bang theory, and I'm not going to honor someone who does," Jacobs said after the session.
 
No, the universe they believe in has changed much more rapidly than the scientists' cosmology, by several orders of magnitude.
 
PhxHorn said:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030602181_2.html

A strange thing happened yesterday when Sen. Paul G. Pinsky (D-Prince George's) introduced a resolution to honor John C. Mather, co-winner of the 2006 Nobel Prize in physics. Two senators -- Janet Greenip (R-Anne Arundel) and Nancy Jacobs (R-Harford) -- declined to vote.

"I don't believe in the big-bang theory, and I'm not going to honor someone who does," Jacobs said after the session.
Click to expand...
Gee, Republicans, who would have thought that.
 
If you visit Nancy Jacobs' website you’ll find an apparent obsession with sex.

And on Janet Greenip’s website, we find this charmer:

LAST Monday over 400 homosexuals rallied outside then went from office to office to convince our Senators and Delegates that two men or two women should be able to get ”married.” The Court of Appeals (Maryland’s Supreme Court) could rule in their favor any day now.

IF those of us that believe that marriage is God’s design for one man and one woman don’t tell those same legislators to allow us to vote to put God’s definition into our Constitution we will soon have gay “marriage” in Maryland.
Click to expand...


Didn’t God’s definition of marriage also stipulate that women were supposed to be subservient to men?

If following God’s definition were to keep fine ladies like these out of office, I might actually be inclined to change my mind on the subject.
 
Ryan O'Dine said:
If you visit Nancy Jacobs' website you’ll find an apparent obsession with sex.

And on Janet Greenip’s website, we find this charmer:




Didn’t God’s definition of marriage also stipulate that women were supposed to be subservient to men?

If following God’s definition were to keep fine ladies like these out of office, I might actually be inclined to change my mind on the subject.
Click to expand...

I believe God's plan also allows for polygamy, so I guess multiple wifes will be on the table soon also!

Though, having been married once (I got over it), why any man would want two or more wives is beyond me!
 
Ryan O'Dine said:
Didn’t God’s definition of marriage also stipulate that women were supposed to be subservient to men?

If following God’s definition were to keep fine ladies like these out of office, I might actually be inclined to change my mind on the subject.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup: Well said.

Regarding the quote from her web-site,

LAST Monday over 400 homosexuals rallied outside then went from office to office to convince our Senators and Delegates that two men or two women should be able to get ”married.” The Court of Appeals (Maryland’s Supreme Court) could rule in their favor any day now.

IF those of us that believe that marriage is God’s design for one man and one woman don’t tell those same legislators to allow us to vote to put God’s definition into our Constitution we will soon have gay “marriage” in Maryland.
Click to expand...

that's what I call a big step towards theocratic fascism.
 
PhxHorn said:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030602181_2.html

A strange thing happened yesterday when Sen. Paul G. Pinsky (D-Prince George's) introduced a resolution to honor John C. Mather, co-winner of the 2006 Nobel Prize in physics. Two senators -- Janet Greenip (R-Anne Arundel) and Nancy Jacobs (R-Harford) -- declined to vote.

"I don't believe in the big-bang theory, and I'm not going to honor someone who does," Jacobs said after the session.
Click to expand...
An American wins an internationally acclaimed prize for scientific achievement, and these two maroons can't see out of their cacoons far enough to get past petty political concerns.

Mather and Smoot are exploring the boundaries of the known, pushing back the edges of uncertainty, and these two can't see the value in that? I have this picture in my head, of each of these self important persons waking up in the morning and speaking into the mirror: "Today, I intend to make a complete ass of myself."

Mission accomplished.

Self inflicted wound for two hundred, Alex, these two are the Daily Double Dunce Division. :p

DR
 
Good post Darth.

I find that the big-bang and God are not mutually exclusive.

But I guess my theory is a slow one to rise these days.
 
I would like to think the voters of Maryland would remember this sort of inanity come election time, but for some reason I'm sure large parts of their districts agree with them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom