Man trumping God...or the theory that man arose without any intervention from God...is the issue being raised here. The core component of liberalism is that there is no God and everything can be explained through chance. From this springs forth the notion that there is no objective measure of what is right and what is wrong. And that leads to all kinds of evil. By giving a liberal a wide audience and guffawing at his blatant mischaracterization of religious conservatives you are advancing their agenda. You're acting as a water bearer for the left.
And of course I disagree with your characterization of me as a "dumbass".
There is nothing in the theory of evolution that requires "Man trumping God." To be perfectly fair, many evolutionists are atheists. However, many are not. As I am fond of pointing out, Pope John Paul II said that belief in evolution is not contrary to Catholic theology. (He specifically says that man became man only because of God's intervention, which means that it's okay for Catholics to be in the "Theistic Evolution" camp). I am not asserting the primacy of Catholic theology, but pointing out that one can be deeply religious -- one presumes the Pope is deeply religious -- and still accept the scientific accuracy of the theory of evolution.
The core component of liberalism is that there is no God and everything can be explained through chance.
This is wildly overstated and has nothing to do with whether a scientific theory is accurate anyway.
From this springs forth the notion that there is no objective measure of what is right and what is wrong. And that leads to all kinds of evil.
So can belief in absolute measures of morality and deeply held theological beliefs. (The Osama bunch comes to mind).
By giving a liberal a wide audience and guffawing at his blatant mischaracterization of religious conservatives you are advancing their agenda.
What's wrong with admitting someone has a point, even if you disagree with everything else? A poster named exmarine and I completely and vehemently disagree on evolution. However, I believe he's right when he posts on the founders of the United States. Should I reflexively start attacking him when I think he's right?
You and I disagree, too, on your characterization of the cartoon as "a blatant mischaracterization of religious conservatives." It is an exaggeration, but that's the nature of cartooning. Or do you believe Boss Tweed actually fed women to tigers?
You're acting as a water bearer for the left.
We disagree.
And of course I disagree with your characterization of me as a "dumbass".
No doubt. But that's between you and balrog666.
Only in your own mind.
The core component of liberalism is that there is no God and everything can be explained through chance.
Wrong again. Painting all liberals as atheists, heretics and/or evil-unbelievers may make it easy for you to despise them and dismiss their arguments, but it does not reflect reality. I suggest you seek help, immediately.
From this springs forth the notion that there is no objective measure of what is right and what is wrong.
Actually such an idea needs no theological underpinnings.
And that leads to all kinds of evil.
Wrong again. Are atheists any less moral than Christians? Is any Buddhist country any more "evil" than Western cultures are?
By giving a liberal a wide audience and guffawing at his blatant mischaracterization of religious conservatives you are advancing their agenda.
Mischaracterization? BWAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHA!
I guess you don't read the crevo threads very often. And it's not conservatives being tarred and feathered, but fundamentalist crackpots. And the MSM likes nothing more than people like you equating them as well. You need to think again.
You're acting as a water bearer for the left.
No, I posted an amusing parody that accurately reflects reality as we see it here on this thread.
And I posted it for discussion by us all. But whacko thought police like you seem to be afraid that people might actually think about their beliefs and discuss them with some objectivity. Oh, the horror!
And of course I disagree with your characterization of me as a "dumbass".
I must admit that I thought I was exaggerating. Now I am not so sure.