Romney was the fat-bloated-idiot demographics primary choice. One would think the fact that they choose the phoniest of the bunch instead of Huckabee would be the social conservatives first clue that the culture war is a fraud but they never were very good at catching on.

Not that I'm not sick to death of hearing about this girl just like everyone else over the age of twelve, but why make fun of her? I'm sure Rush must of made some bullshit comment or McCain must have said something stupid that would have been much more worthy.

Look, I'm all for live and let live, and the "debate" between science and religion holds no interest for me (is it technically a debate if one side has no evidence to fall back on?). But I'm sick and tired of the important decisions in this country being made by religion. For the past eight years we have lived under a president who was elected based mostly on his religious convictions and who made policy largely on those same convictions. The consequences speak for themselves. Maybe it's time to reign some of those beliefs in.

I'm sick and tired of evolution being challenged in schools just because it doesn't meet some emotional need (more on this later), I'm sick and tired of gays being scapegoated to get incompetent leaders re-elected using some obscure line from a "holy" book that could have been written by anyone, I'm sick and tired of our foriegn policy being dictated by people who actually WANT the world to end. It is time for a return to reason and if militant reason is what it takes, well then so be it. It seems to be working for the other side.

As for the argument that science won't catch on because it is missing that emotional comfort component, well, to be quite blunt, maybe the problem doesn't lie with science. Maybe humanity just needs to grow up and stop hoping there is some invisible man holding it's hand. As it stands right now, the only argument that the religious nuts can put forward against science as the basis for society is that you can't get something from nothing. They can't provide any evidence their god exists, they can't account for evolution without pretending the fossils are something else, and no matter how long the debate goes on, eventually the argument always gets around to some sort of emotionalist BS about humanity needing a cosmic babysitter to make it feel good about itself. If that is all religion is then it, quite frankly, serves no purpose.

Let's not let our society continue into decline because a bunch of busybodies care more about other people's sex lives then they do their own needs.

It hasn't accomplished much except generate three digit posts. It certainly hasn't proven that any religion is true which is kind of the point of religion, to explain the "Truth". All it seems to have done is give a few right wing trolls an excuse to beat the rest of us over the head with their faith while providing no proof that it is true ("religion is necesary for science", I'm gonna love watching you explain how and I bet I won't have to try very hard to pick it apart). Anyone who is intellectually honest has to admit that the two are incompatible.

Science is a pursuit of truth based on looking at evidence, religion says it knows the truth based literally on nothing. The two are polar opposites. This series serves no purpose except to make nice with two competing philosophies. All while putting most of the blame on the one that doesn't have an entire political party, hundreds of radio stations, more then a few TV stations, and a day of the week dedicated to itself. If Salon insists on keeping this series, then at least point the finger of blame for incompatibility where it rightfully belongs, religion.

This country is in enough trouble because religious zealots are getting to write the dialogue in this country, let's not let them run a website that doesn't even agree with the goals of most of them anyway.

And if the public ever figures this out, the only thing O'Rielly will be saying into a microphone is "Do you want fries with that?". As much as I don't like rap, I wish to God just one of the people he "fueds" with would point this out. This guy doesn't give a rats ass about you or your kids, if he did, he would support things like more affordable heathcare and more funding for public education. Not serve as a mouthpiece for a party trying to abolish both of those things.

To be a conservative by definition means that you shut your brain off and do what others tell you to. There's a large segment of our society that isn't intelligent enough to form their own opinions. Without Rush and the rest telling them what to think, how would they know what their opinions are? You seem to be overlooking that part. Sure he is always wrong but do you really want the responsibility of thinkng for a large segment of the population? I sure don't.

What? It's not? Oh, well then. Maybe Tony Perkins and his ilk shoudl spend less time obsessing on other people's sex lives and more time on, I don't know, helping actual families in need.

What am I saying, then they wouldn't have an excuse to kill gay kids! Silly me!

I don't know why you are surprised by this, this is how the republican party works. They have no conscience. For a look at what we will return to if McCain wins, here is a good example:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08012008/watch.html

There is no such thing as a republican with a conscience.