Coulter vs Darwin

Godless | 06/06 | Ann Coulter

[tomzz]

You can't help but notice that there is a very vocal sort of a little clique of evolutionists on FreeRepublic, and there has always been a question in a lot of people's minds as to whether or not the theory of evolution is in any way compatible with conservatism.

This new book ("Godless") of Ann Coulter's should pretty much settle the issue.

Ann does not mince words, and she has quite a lot to say about evolution:

"Liberals' creation myth is Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, which is about one notch above scientology in scientific rigor. It's a make-believe story, based on a theory which is a tautology, with no proof in the scientists laboratory or the fossil record, and that's after 150 years of very determined looking. We wouldn't still be talking about it but for the fact that liberals think evolution disproves God....

It gets better from there, in fact a lot better. Ann provides a context for viewing the liberal efforts to shut down everything resembling debate on the subject in courtrooms and makes a general case that it is the left and not the right, which is antithetical to science in general. Anybody interested in this question of American society and the so-called theory of evolution should have a copy of this book

[VadeRetro]

The question is not when was Jimmy Hoffa was deposited in the cement, but which is older. In this case, it would be Jimmy Hoffa.

The bones are of a mature man. It would be assumed he didn't grow up or grow old in the concrete. The objection is without merit.

[stands2reason]

LOL

[restornu]

The rest of the 911 folks might have views different than the conservatives but at least they don't make a cottage industry out of it!

I don't think some here give two cent for those 4 NJ opportunitst widows, many don't like the fact the Ann is standing up to the Godless!

[Arrowhead]

You do not seem anymore inclined to correct me than I do to go back and show you the material I have read over the years.

I have already admitted that memory may be faulty and I have no extensive knowledge of the science. But, you splatter nothing but "lalalala" and you expect me to learn something from that?

Suck a lima bean Pal! You might turn into a artichoke,

Arrowhead>>>---hypocrites-->

[andysandmikesmom]

And just who are the Godless?...some think that those who support evolution are Godless...some think that those who belong to certain Christian churches are Godless...this list could go on and on...seems to me, everyone has their own definition of just who is Godless, and who is not Godless...

[ml1954]

I don't think some here give two cent for those 4 NJ opportunitst widows, many don't like the fact the Ann is standing up to the Godless!

I think Ann is trying to sell books. And she's good at it. She's learned the craft of selling books well.

It's sad actually. She used to be a great spokesman for the conservative coalition. Now she's become divisive.

[restornu]

And just who are the Godless?...some think that those who support evolution are Godless...some think that those who belong to certain Christian churches are Godless...this list could go on and on...seems to me, everyone has their own definition of just who is Godless, and who is not Godless...

Yes you think because I am LDS I am Godless will at least I practic the ten commandment as to those who talk out the both sides of their mouth!

And those who want to break the moral values of this nation,

There are some atheist who are more Godly in their actions then the wolves in sheep clothing!

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"You do not seem anymore inclined to correct me than I do to go back and show you the material I have read over the years."

I did correct you.

"But, you splatter nothing but "lalalala" and you expect me to learn something from that?"

Nothing but? I believe I posted a bit more than that.

"Suck a lima bean Pal! You might turn into a artichoke,"

RIIIiiiiiight...

BTW, natural selection has been the term used since Darwin published in 1859. Unless you are over a hundred years old, it's what was used when you were in school. Nobody says that organisms *choose* to become a new species; that was your invention. You never elaborated on what genetic markers were used as species designators, which was your claim. My incredulity was because the use of genetic markers are a very recent thing and species have been designated LONG before DNA was discovered. Genetic markers simply couldn't have been the traits used to distinguish species.

You also didn't say what scientists have said that species can change without a change in DNA. And when did the days "...when scientists hypothesized the notion that if you plant an apple seed, you can get an orange.", ever exist?

[andysandmikesmom]

What in the heck is wrong with you? I never made mention of any particular Christian religion, yet you just jump and assume someone is talking about you? And you have no idea what I think about any Christian religion, so please, quite this nonsense...

I have seen Catholics, LDS, JWs, 7th Adventists, Calvinists, and every other variety of Christian religion called things such as 'Godless', and much worse...

I suggest you take a look at what you just wrote, because frankly, I am rather in wonder about what you are talking about...its makes no sense...no one criticized you or your religion...I simply asked a question as to who you think the Godless are, you just jump down my throat...

I asked nothing wrong...

[1000 silverlings]

There are some atheist who are more Godly in their actions then the wolves in sheep clothing!.

Hi Restornu, just curious, how you think an atheist can ever be "Godly", thanks.

[restornu]

This puzzling why would one mention things if one did not want a reply!

[Almagest]

<< As I've noted, I am just a messenger here. >>


Unfortunately, you have a paper trail that completely refutes that claim. A mesenger just delivers the message; he doesn't make claims about facts related to the message -- nor does he interject his own opinion. You have claimed, several times, that the "information" in the "message" disproves the "millions of years." You are not just a messenger; you are an advocate, and you have used this issue several times in your advocacy.

It is beyond my ability to understand -- here in a religion thread -- that someone touting religion so loudly as you would behave in this manner so blatantly, and not expect it to be noticed. If I were to come into a discussion of biblical teaching, and post a link to some "news article" questioning your interpretation of a particular doctrine -- and making personal comments that make it obvious I am relying on the "truth" of that article -- and using that article to "refute" your claims -- and then if youm, rightly, were to point out the obvious error in the article that makes it clear that both the article and *I* were misstating the actual facts -- you would not for one minute allow me to try to slough it off with "I am just the messenger."

I would say some things about Christian integrity here -- but I've said them all before, and all it gets me is more vicious abuse from the very people claiming the moral high ground. As the King of Siam said to Anna: 'Tis a puzzlement. I would just ask: Do you really believe this is the kind of behavior taught in scripture?


<< If you can do that and if they agree with you and publically retract the story in question,
then let me know about it and I will cease all mention of it. >>


So -- even though you have access to the truth -- even though we have shown that the articles are erroneous -- even though we have pointed you to the actual evidence that the articles are wrong -- you are going to "stick to the story" unless the media admits their error? Again -- what if this were some lie told about President Bush and parroted all over the place by the left-wing-loonies? Would you accept that kind of excuse from them? I don't think so. By this standard -- it is perfectly reasonable for the lefties to continue to tout the "fake but accurate" National Guard memos -- since both Dan Rather and Mary Mapes still say they are telling the truth about them. It doesn't matter -- by your own standard -- that they have been totally discredited by the real facts; all that matters is that they have not retracted their claims as false.

You know -- hypocrisy is condemning behavior in others that one is deliberately engaging in himself. Hypocrisy is addressed pretty directly in scripture. If you have ever condemned this kind of behavior in the left-wing loonies -- your behavior concerning this issue perfectly epitomizes hypocrisy.

This is not a personal attack -- it is the only logical conclusion that I see possible -- and it gives me no pleasure to have to say so. Please give serious consideration to what this behavior does to your Christian testimony.

[andysandmikesmom]

Your reply was out of line, as far as I am concerned...You said in your post, to me, " Yes you think because I am LDS I am Godless will at least I practic the ten commandment as to those who talk out the both sides of their mouth!"...you are making an unfounded accusation...I never, ever said any such thing...please show where I said that I think you are Godless, because you are LDS..., because that is what you are saying I said...I never said any such thing...again, please show me where I said, what you are accusing me of saying...

[CarolinaGuitarman]

She is puzzled because she in no way said anything to imply that any Christian sect was Godless. She asked you who were the Godless. You said,

"Yes you think because I am LDS I am Godless will at least I practic the ten commandment as to those who talk out the both sides of their mouth!"

She never said a thing about you being LDS; in fact I have seen her point out on other threads that she thought it was wrong that Mormons were ridiculed because their faith was different.

You owe her an explanation.

[Almagest]

He did sometimes mention the V-man, come to think of it. He is the only creationist I ever saw on those debates that OTHER creationists asked to stop posting his nonsense. Of course -- he responded to THEM with some quote-mined stuff, too! LOL!

[restornu]

Because some of those who are non believer appreciate their Judeo-Christian neighbors and live the ten commandments just because it is a good thing go do.

They are not an enemy of good, and they don try to undermind the Law or weaken it!

[Almagest]

WOW! That is amazing. No -- the guy I knew never did stuff like that. He almost confined his posts entirely to quote-mining and mindless repetition. At least most other creationists, who engage in quote-mining and mindless repetition, often add their own ramblings. Not this guy. He almost never strayed from the quotes.

[1000 silverlings]

I thouhgt of these people:

2 Timothy 3 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

3:3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

3:4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

. 3:6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,

3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

[Almagest]

<< Now, I did watch a rather interesting program last evening, on some channel or another, that was talking about certain beasties, like the Loch Ness Monster, living today, in various oceans, and lakes. >>


Several of the creationists on FR claim that dinosaurs lived alongside man -- and at least one is claiming that there is plenty of evidence that they survived "up to at least 1200 years ago." Apparently, we all know this, but are engaged in this huge conspiracy to cover it up.

[Almagest]

<< Horse + Jackass will always = a half-ass mule >>


Stallion + Jackass = Brokeback Mountain for horsies.