This video from Reason.tv that ECM found at Big Government explains how unions destroy competition by using political contributions to Democrats. Competition is achieved when consumers like you and me have choices in the marketplace. Without choices, one company (or the government) has a monopoly, and can deliver low quality for a high price – and there is nothing you can do about it.
Here’s the video:
And here’s the blurb:
You may have heard the UPS is in quite the political fight with FEDEX. Though both are package-delivery companies, they’re governed by totally different federal labor rules. As a result, UPS’s workforce is much more heavily unionized than FEDEX’s-and more than twice as expensive.
So now UPS is trying to get FEDEX reclassified under federal law as a way of screwing a competitor.
Unions are major, major donors to the Democrat party, and they want to make sure that you have no choice at all about how you spend your money. And that includes government-run education!
And of course, removing competition is only one thing unions do to raise consumer prices – they also advocate for tariffs, which also makes you and I pay more for consumer goods. Unions are against consumer rights.
In 1994, when this debate was held, intelligent design was still pretty new. This debate, more than any other resource, clarified what was at stake in the debate over origins.
Provine makes clear what follows from the truth of evolution: no free will, no objective standard of good and evil, no life after death, no meaning in life. Johnson argues that the Cambrian explosion disproves Darwinian evolution, and the only reason why Darwinian evolution is widely-accepted is because materialism is pre-supposed.
If materialism is pre-supposed, then only atheistic answers to the origins question are allowed, so naturally Darwinism wins – it has to win once you make a philosophical assumption that matter is all there is. (An assumption contradicted by the big bang theory, which requires the creation of all matter from nothing.
Debate before an audience between two professors on the naturalistic vs. the theistic way of understanding human existence.
William Provine, Professor of Evolutionary Biology at Cornell University, cites evidence supporting neo-Darwinian theory and argues that microevolutionary processes account for the origin of all life. He asserts that modern evolutionary theory is incompatible with belief in God; that there are no absolute moral and ethical laws; that free will does not exist; and that human character is merely a result of heredity and environment.
Phillip Johnson, Professor of Law at the University of California in Berkeley, agrees that modern neo-Darwinian theory is atheistic and scientific; however, as a general theory it is a philosophical dogma that is inconsistent with the evidence.
Provine and Johnson debate basic questions: Do we owe our existence to a creator? Can the blind watchmaker of natural selection take the place of God? Moderator is Timothy Jackson, Dept. of Religious Studies, Stanford University.
And here’s a couple of clips from the opening. (H/T Uncommon Descent via ECM)
This is very much worth watching, especially for atheists who typically are not aware that evolution rests on a philsophical assumption that is assumed, and that contradicts astrophysics. That has to stop. And the best way to stop it is by calling it out into the open using debates like this one.
And don’t forget about my recent post about the role of pre-suppositions like the pre-supposition of naturalism in historical Jesus research. The post contains debates where this is actually discussed as well.
Big Hollywood has already posted a couple disturbing videos of young school children singing/speaking praises to President Obama, but when eleven more dropped in our email box it came as quite a shock. What seemed like an aberration now appears to be a troubling pattern.
Maybe “epidemic” is a better word.
Each one of the videos below is creepier than the last because the further down you go, the younger the children — brace yourself for kindergartners – except for the last and most disturbing video, which you have to see to believe.
Young captive minds, easily influenced, eager for direction, enlisted into a cult of personality focused on an individual who, other than being the first black president, has yet to accomplish anything of significance.
But Obama’s skin color has nothing to do with this. Does anyone interested in retaining their merit badge for intellectual honesty really want to argue that Condi Rice or J.C. Watts would’ve spawned a dozen-and-counting tribute videos?
This is about brainwashing our children into Leftist identity politics. Sure, the schools can argue that they had some kind of parental permission — which, if true, is somehow even more disturbing — but who even considers doing something like this with young minds? That’s a rhetorical question.
[…]Each video has also been transcribed so you can follow the bouncing ball…
My concern is that teacher unions will use their power and influence to brainwash children into supporting bigger and bigger government, which will in turn increase teacher salaries.
WINTERY KNIGHT 