Replies

Dominionism?

DOMINIONISM?

Dominionism?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

You have got to be hosing me, Sparky! There aren't enough Dominionists in this country to fill up a phone booth. They could hold their meetings in one and still leave Clark Kent room to change into Superman!

Using the paranoid rants of a bunch of Canadian lefties was a great touch. Yep, you and the granola crowd in Toronto found us out, we're turning out legions of little stormtroopers at the Christian schools! When it says "gym class" on the schedule, we're really doing drill and showing them how to use truncheons to beat Unitarians into submission--which is an easy task suitable for children, when the great day of revolution comes we'll have the adults beat all the Catholics and Presbyterians into submission.

Oh man, you have actually made me laugh until I hurt. That was good stuff. BTW, I've been a born again Christian for 25 years as of next June and I've never heard of even one of the "leaders of the Dominionist movement" you and your granola buddies have listed in their shocking expose. These people mean exactly squat in American Christianity and American politics, and even if they somehow took over (BWAHAHAHAHA!!) they would have to face the wrath of the other hundred million or so American Christians, who would give them a fair trial followed by first class hangings.

All I can say is I hope you get a good deal on tinfoil, because you sure must use a lot of it! Now, how about you answer the question I asked you:

Do you believe eliminating religion should be a main goal of working scientists?

Pretty easy yes or no answer there.

Its most common form, Dominionism, represents one of the most extreme forms of Fundamentalist Christianity thought. Its followers, called Dominionists, are attempting to peacefully convert the laws of United States so that they match those of the Hebrew Scriptures. They intend to achieve this by using the freedom of religion in the US to train a generation of children in private Christian religious schools. Later, their graduates will be charged with the responsibility of creating a new Bible-based political, religious and social order. One of the first tasks of this order will be to eliminate religious choice and freedom. Their eventual goal is to achieve the "Kingdom of God" in which much of the world is converted to Christianity. They feel that the power of God's word will bring about this conversion. No armed force or insurrection will be needed; in fact, they believe that there will be little opposition to their plan. People will willingly accept it. All that needs to be done is to properly explain it to them.

And, for anyone interested, it gets WAY better.

And you really believe this load of cr@p?

I don't know what those nutjobs have been smoking, but it must be some really good stuff.

They're putting most conspiracy theorists to shame. All I can figure is that they are projecting big time. They're so worried about what they think Christians are going to do (taking over and mind control and censorship and all) because that's what they would do themselves given the chance.

Are evolutionists really scientists? You decide after reading the description of the 'end all be all' hypothesis of 'hopeful monsters'- It's quite clear that GoldSchmidt represents that majority of evolutionary scientific thought (Even htough some deny it)- and as such, the whole Evolutionary hypothesis should be htrown out of science classes altogether as nothign but a nutjob hypothesis because Goldie believes what he does. "In the 1930s, paleontologist Otto Schindewolf concluded that the missing links in the fossil record were not really missing at all, but rather were never there in the first place! Schindewolf proposed that all the major evolutionary transformations must have occurred in single large steps. He proposed, for example, that at some point in evolutionary history, a reptile laid an egg from which a bird was hatched! This bizarre notion was championed in 1940 by the geneticist Richard Goldschmidt of the University of California at Berkeley. Like Schindewolf, Goldschmidt resigned himself to the fact that true transitional forms were not found despite over a hundred years of searching for them, and that evolutionary theory would simply have to accommodate this fact.

Goldschmidt sought to advance Schindewolf's notion of evolution through single large steps by trying to imagine a plausible mechanism for it. He suggested that the answer might lie in what are known as embryological monsters, such as the occasional birth of a two-legged sheep or a two-headed turtle. Goldschmidt conceded that such monsters rarely survived very long in nature, but he hoped that over a long period of time some monsters might actually be better suited to survive and reproduce than their normal siblings. Goldschmidt named this monstrously hopeless speculation the "hopeful monster theory." Since there was not even the slightest shred of evidence to support the hopeful monster theory, it was dismissed with derision by almost all evolutionists of his time." http://ncseweb.org/creationism/analysis/hopeful-monsters There you have it folks- proof positive that that Macroevolution is nothign but a psychotic's delusionary muddled hypothesis.