Religion to left politics is a non sequitur, Hilary will be admired by her followers no matter what, I'm still not convinced she can get the parties nomination, She's too old. For the right, there's many other issues before religion that count, but yes she will be considered " not religious enough" by those who that matters.
never trust a stroll and his out of context quoting. here is tsing's full quote. note the part about stu, which stroll left out.. tsing --- "I'm not sure that was the point of dbphoenix's OP. Regardless, now that stu is here, he'll try to drive out any mention of anything religious whatsoever, and jem will come back bringing religion into it with two hands and both feet, and the two will then argue (over something that can't be proved either way) until a hypothetical judgment day, driving all others to flee the thread."
"..jem will come back bringing religion into it with two hands and both feet.." .... context being, it's part of the quote which corresponded most to reality. As the record shows
I bring truth with both hands and both feet. I stand with science and history... you stand with a small irrational group who can't stand the fact that that there is: a. no proof that non life evolved into life;. b. that if there is only one universe our universe appears designed; and c. that the states had ties to religion at the time of the U.S.' founding.
why don't you go ahead and try to explain it because they are not mutually inconsistent. Try not to be your usual douchey self. (avoid your typical arguing with strawman...leftist baloney.)
Actually since you made the statements, I was sort of hoping that you could explain them in your usual douchey way. But apparently not, douchey or otherwise.
his valueless but douchey responses are completely predictable. did anyone expect any substance or value from db? ever?