Skip to comments.
Evolution Disclaimer Supported
The Advocate (Baton Rouge) ^
| 12/11/02
| WILL SENTELL
Posted on 12/11/2002 6:28:08 AM PST by A2J
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 4,241-4,260, 4,261-4,280, 4,281-4,300 ... 7,021-7,032 next last
To: f.Christian
To the nurse of f.Christian: Please increase the dosage! Please!
4,261
posted on
01/09/2003 4:38:01 PM PST
by
BMCDA
(Why assume so glibly that the God who presumably created the universe is still running it?)
To: tpaine
Our boy has a very limited argumenitive style. He ignores points that he has trouble refuting, and outright denies those he cannot with 'arguments from authority', either with himself or God as the authority. I think it's more than just that. See my post 4201. He asserts his position, has it soundly refuted, and claims victory over a point not even present in his original statement.
4,262
posted on
01/09/2003 4:40:50 PM PST
by
Condorman
(Flying Saucer: a phenomenon occuring when a nudist spills his coffee)
To: All
100 % liberals say . . . relative - - - existentialism // evolution ! ! !
Main Entry: ex·is·ten·tial·ism
Pronunciation: -'ten(t)-sh&-"li-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1941
: a chiefly 20th century philosophical movement embracing diverse doctrines but centering on analysis of individual existence in an unfathomable universe and the plight of the individual who must assume ultimate responsibility for his acts of free will without any certain knowledge of what is right or wrong or good or bad
4,263
posted on
01/09/2003 4:41:05 PM PST
by
f.Christian
(Is the universe absolute(conservative) . . . or - - - flux // relative(liberal) ? ? ?)
To: gore3000
Hey dumb#ss Im not Vade. Actually I alreasdy refuted every claim you ever posted. In fact I did it about eight times already. In fact anyone who cares to go back can read it you however won't even answer one simple question.
How old do you think the Earth is?
Don't start spouting out at the mouth if you won't even answer a simple question.
Fear the simplicity.... How old is the Earth?
To: gore3000
gore3000 wrote"Clearly my statement is true and you cannot refute it."
Nope I not Vade, although I bet he has also, have refuted any and every silly post you have made. After the eighth time I quit refuting because you cut and paste the same argument over and over and when you are proved wrong you claim victory.
I remember two other people who used the same tactic I think their names were Adolf Hitler and Stalin. This idea was the one part of the communist manifesto that Adolf really took to heart.
To: Sentis
Bunch of blathering liberals . . . intellectual // false science fascists - - - totalitarians ! ! !
4,266
posted on
01/09/2003 4:58:32 PM PST
by
f.Christian
(Is the universe absolute(conservative) . . . or - - - flux // relative(liberal) ? ? ?)
To: betty boop
Either we are going to have a rule of law -- i.e., follow what the Constitution says -- or we are going to have a rule of men. The federal Constitution says nothing about having Bible classes -- or Gaia worship -- in the public schools. The public schools are supposed to be under local governance; therefore state constitutions would apply to these questions. -BB- Betty, at some point you are going to have to face up to the fact that our 'federal' constitution has a supremacy clause that says that states are bound to follow the basic principles/laws of the United States Constitution.
One of these basic principles, as you admit, -- is keeping government out of religion, and vice/versa.
Thus, fed/state/local public funded schools cannot favor any of 'the establishments of religion'.
Such a simple concept, - why is it so difficult for some to understand?
To: tpaine
It's tough to argue with God. The problem is all those people who think they speak for God.
4,268
posted on
01/09/2003 5:00:31 PM PST
by
balrog666
(Hubris? I guess those Greeks really understood human nature!)
To: tpaine
You have no problem with the govt establishing full blown Atheistic liberalism // evolution do you ? ? ?
I understand - - - perfectly ! ! !
4,269
posted on
01/09/2003 5:02:33 PM PST
by
f.Christian
(Is the universe absolute(conservative) . . . or - - - flux // relative(liberal) ? ? ?)
To: f.Christian
Can't you even make sense in a tag line?
4,270
posted on
01/09/2003 5:07:06 PM PST
by
balrog666
(Blarg! Made you look!)
To: BMCDA
When did this happen? Today or 300 years ago?And if this is true it is bad why?
And this is bad why? And how can you tell the difference?
Why should chemicals react with each other?
Oh but it seems to work quite well in this reality. And without some compelling evidence why should we believe that this is not the ultimate reality?
And if his mental processes are not only determined by the motions of atoms and electrons what reason has he to believe that his beliefs are true in this case?
OK
I dont think my opinion will change your mind so please answer these questions yourself and for your own sake (if you are truly interested).
To: balrog666
Is sense // reality . . . relevant // welcome to an evolutionist // liberal - - - NO // NEVER ! ! !
Main Entry: rel·e·vant
Pronunciation: 're-l&-v&nt
Function: adjective
Etymology: Medieval Latin relevant-, relevans, from Latin, present participle of relevare to raise up -- more at RELIEVE
Date: 1560
1 a : having significant and demonstrable bearing on the matter at hand b : affording evidence tending to prove or disprove the matter at issue or under discussion < relevant testimony > c : having social relevance
2 : PROPORTIONAL, RELATIVE
- rel·e·vant·ly adverb
synonyms RELEVANT, GERMANE, MATERIAL, PERTINENT, APPOSITE, APPLICABLE, APROPOS mean relating to or bearing upon the matter in hand. RELEVANT implies a traceable, significant, logical connection < found material relevant to her case >. GERMANE may additionally imply a fitness for or appropriateness to the situation or occasion < a point not germane to the discussion >. MATERIAL implies so close a relationship that it cannot be dispensed with without serious alteration of the case < facts material to the investigation >. PERTINENT stresses a clear and decisive relevance < a pertinent observation >. APPOSITE suggests a felicitous relevance < add an apposite quotation to the definition >. APPLICABLE suggests the fitness of bringing a general rule or principle to bear upon a particular case < the rule is not applicable in this case >. APROPOS suggests being both relevant and opportune < the quip was apropos >.
4,272
posted on
01/09/2003 5:13:09 PM PST
by
f.Christian
(Is the universe absolute(conservative) . . . or - - - flux // relative(liberal) ? ? ?)
To: balrog666
Apparently his local the hardware store ran out of dashes. But man oh man, did he get a deal on the 75-pound bag of slashes.
4,273
posted on
01/09/2003 5:18:45 PM PST
by
Condorman
(I am your slave from now until the moment you read this tagline)
To: Condorman
"I think it's more than just that. See my post 4201. He asserts his position, has it soundly refuted, and claims victory over a point not even present in his original statement."
#4201:
No one attempted to discredit Christianity. These were posted in support of the idea that the Golden Rule is not strictly Christian. Are you having problems remembering your positions from post to post?
4201 -Condorman-
I'll cede some points. In this case, the point made is a quibble, so I couldn't care less.
4202 -exmarine-
Good grief! Our 'God fearing' exmarine just stated that the point on the origin of human rights is a "QUIBBLE".
-- As you infered, he'll say anything to save face.
To: balrog666
The problem is all those people who think they speak for God.
4268 -B666-
Forgive them, they know not what they do.
[Its a catch 22 type thing. - The more zealous they are, the less rationality evidenced]
To: balrog666
Please, do not feed the fletcher.
To: tpaine
If you // anyone . . .
believes evolution . . . you // they - - - have NO // zero - - - sense // science // reality . . .
bilge // head . . . fluids // matter ! ! !
4,277
posted on
01/09/2003 5:35:24 PM PST
by
f.Christian
(Is the universe absolute(conservative) . . . or - - - flux // relative(liberal) ? ? ?)
To: Aric2000; SwordofTruth; Alamo-Girl; f.Christian; exmarine; scripter; Heartlander; betty boop; ...
"Do you understand yet?"
It's quite possible because you have an infant (unless you're a middle-aged or old man who married a younger woman) that I understood your premise before you were born. I DISAGREE with your premises; our premises are DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED in this regard.
Your theory has been HIJACKED; you are in MASSIVE SELF-DENIAL about your beliefs and the agenda of evo.
Your arrogance is ASTONISHINGLY boring.
To: viaveritasvita
How about...
Your arrogance // immaturity is . . .ASTONISHINGLY - - - boring // lazy.
---better ? ? ?
4,279
posted on
01/09/2003 6:13:31 PM PST
by
f.Christian
(Is the universe absolute(conservative) . . . or - - - flux // relative(liberal) ? ? ?)
To: balrog666
"Can't you even make sense in a tag line?" LOL!!!
4,280
posted on
01/09/2003 6:15:24 PM PST
by
SunnyUsa
(how long till 'we' hit 5000?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 4,241-4,260, 4,261-4,280, 4,281-4,300 ... 7,021-7,032 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson