Climate change beliefs now have "religion status,".... soooo when will our government apply it's powers of "seperation of church and state," and quit attempting to mandate treaties and laws regarding global warming????

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/04/i ... us-status/

Your link is for the UK so it doesn't apply to me but going by your comment you think it's okay to fire a person for his personal belief?

Our gubermint hasn't mandated any treaties against pollution has it?. If you'll think back it was our own War Prez who pissed in his Wheaties when he wouldn't sign the Kyota treaty to cut down pollution. Then the War Prez rescinded industrial pollution laws here as quick as possible pissing off several allies with his hypocrisy.

We get a steady supply of wetbacks from Mexico and we get a steady stream of pollution so you think it's taboo to get wetbacks but getting their pollution is okay? or maybe the tons of toxins released by China into the atmosphere is beneficial?

I find it amusing that "they" changed the term "Global Warming" to "Climate Change". If either could be controlled by man, I would think Global Warming would be the easier of the two. Just give everybody an air conditioner and have 'em point it outside instead of inside. Now, stopping or re-directing "solar-winds" or an Arctic cold front would seem a bit more difficult...
Wayne

I said,... "attempting to mandate".... (don't change the wording in my post, or put words in my mouth)

...., and since the "link is for the UK and doesn't apply to you",... then why should Mexico's, and China's pollution be of any concern to "me"? (I couldn't give a shit less what they do, or how they do it)

Anyway,... I'm sure Bush recognised the global warming/climate change "scam" for what it actually is,... so I fully agree with what he did by NOT SIGNING the Kyota treaty.

If you want to believe Gore's bullshit,... then that's your business and none of mine, 'cause I havn't seen substantal proof to convince me it's actually "man-made" as some claim.

My point was/is,... someone has now given the "scam" religious status,.... and since the government recognises "seperation of church and state",... then the government should "END ALL ATTEMPTS" at any future treaties (and laws/regulations) regarding this new religion of "climate change."

He doesn't believe it any more than you do, Horse.

I've never seen any of AlBore's B-S on the subject so I'm unaware of his claims but maybe you should take a few of your own smart pills.

Our gubermint hasn't mandated any treaties against pollution has it?

Is that not a question?

I take it you're either unaware of the pollution poured onto America's atmosphere from the South American sweat shops, or maybe you think America should be Mexico's trash can. You must be unaware of the tons of toxins poured into the trade winds by China's non-regulated smudge pot? The only thing BuShInc/CheneyBurton understand is the cronie kickback system for the oil and coal industries.

The worldwide pollution problem is a scientifically proven fact, it's not an old wive's tale as you seem to preach. The problem anti-environment folks have is confusing short term weather conditions with overall climate change. By outward appearances the only difference between the radical religious hypocrites in America and the radical religious hypocrites anywhere else is the deity they hypocritically represent. The mooselimbs want to govern their population with their religious belief and ratwingers want to govern the population with their own belief so in the end I don't want either of them including me into a world of hypocrites who's only claim to fame is their own superstition and self serving agenda.

I brought this up a couple months ago. With the confirmation and swearing in of Justice Sotomayor, we now have a majority of the Supreme Court Justices who have publicly stated that foreign court decisions should be considered by the Supreme Court. We also have a Federal Law mandating environmental education in the public schools, a law that was passed by Congress. Put those two together and you have the logical conclusion that the Supreme Court might rule against that law since it would violate the First Amendment, and by extension, create a legal precedent for considering environmentalism to have the same footing as religion in this country.

Since you seem so concerned about hypocricy, then the "hypocricy" of the scammer's should be very obvious to you, as they change the name of their game (scam) from "global warming" TO "climate change".

calm down and try to follow your own topic. The way some of you inter-mingle global warming and short term weather patterns is what confused you, that and being already confused about the separation ordeal.

I for one, am not confused.
It's the "Goreites" that seem to be confused, and their "confusion" is what caused them to change the name of their scam from Global Warming, to, Climate Change.

Oh so now the warming trend isn't climate change? No matter, your topic was separation of gubermint from religion and then you used a UK ruling to lambaste the scientist. I'm not good at girlie fighting so could you stick with one topic.

So climate change can't possibly mean there's a cooling trend?
It's obvious that the "climate change" scammers are trying to have things "both ways", just to cover their lying asses.

Yes,... I used a UK ruling to make others here aware that climate change has now been defined as a "religion",... what's wrong with that?

Do you agree with the "seperation of church and state",.... or not?

OH,... and BTW,... I have absolutely no interest in your confession that girls have kicked the shit out of you.

The girls kicked your ass so get over it, shit happens.

Separation? I don't believe religion or it's influence has a place anywhere in society besides in religious ceremony inside the confine of the church.

Stats say the atmosphere is warming so what's your excuse for that and don't give me the liars-for-hire-shit I'd like to know why laymen dispute the scientific evidence, not why laymen believe liars-for-hire.

"Stats" can say anything, so they prove NOTHING.

Question,... are you an atheist?

---