Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Darwinian Conservatism: How Darwinian science refutes the Left’s most sacred beliefs.
The American Thinker ^ | 23 July 2006 | Jamie Glazov and Larry Arnhart

Posted on 07/23/2006 8:49:26 AM PDT by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 661-678 next last
To: b_sharp
Some churches have no problem with evolution, others do. It's a religious, not a scientific issue.
The "Clergy Letter Project". 10,000 clergymen endorse evolution.
Statements from Religious Organizations. In favor of evolution.
181 posted on 07/23/2006 2:36:51 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (The Enlightenment gave us individual rights, free enterprise, and the theory of evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: b_sharp

If you had read the initial statement, it was making the assumption that they were Christian communities.

You can call yourself "Christian" because you have a family that may have attended a Church once, as many people do, but this does not imply those statistics are Christian.

It was his way of twisting my argument to suit his, and my fault for not making clear to someone who doesn't see the statistic from a Christian perspective.


182 posted on 07/23/2006 2:38:45 PM PDT by A0ri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason

Not if it concerns survival.


183 posted on 07/23/2006 2:40:17 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Glad you posted tha Patrick. Notice anything?

:o)

The Churches you posted are known as heavy Liberal religious communities and denominations.


184 posted on 07/23/2006 2:40:38 PM PDT by A0ri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: A0ri

(tha) *the link*


185 posted on 07/23/2006 2:41:01 PM PDT by A0ri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: A0ri

I also notice, Patrick, that most of your references to Christians include "Liberal" Churches.

Explain.


186 posted on 07/23/2006 2:43:48 PM PDT by A0ri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: A0ri

"If you had read the initial statement, it was making the assumption that they were Christian communities. "

No it didn't.

"It was his way of twisting my argument to suit his..."

I did nothing of the sort. Stop making things up.


187 posted on 07/23/2006 2:43:51 PM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman (Gas up your tanks!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Wait, what's that sound?


188 posted on 07/23/2006 2:45:19 PM PDT by Senator Bedfellow (If you're not sure, it was probably sarcasm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: CarolinaGuitarman

It was that, or simple ignorance.


189 posted on 07/23/2006 2:45:25 PM PDT by A0ri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: A0ri
The theory of evolution is a common force used against Christianity -- which is a common force against Conservatism

There is some truth to this.

190 posted on 07/23/2006 2:45:49 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: A0ri

"It was that, or simple ignorance."

No it wasn't. You are making it up, because the facts went against your claim. Why must you prevaricate?


191 posted on 07/23/2006 2:46:44 PM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman (Gas up your tanks!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: cornelis

At second glance, that doesn't look pretty.

:o)


192 posted on 07/23/2006 2:47:52 PM PDT by A0ri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: CarolinaGuitarman

Guitar, are you going somewhere? You've beaten irrelevance into the great blue yonder.


193 posted on 07/23/2006 2:48:55 PM PDT by A0ri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; A0ri; b_sharp
But are they real Clergy representing real Religious Organizations? Ha!
194 posted on 07/23/2006 2:50:12 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Senator Bedfellow

Your illustration is a shameless fraud. No authentic Caledonian would perch on rocks in so precarious a manner as that.


195 posted on 07/23/2006 2:55:15 PM PDT by ToryHeartland (English Football -- no discernable planning whatsoever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: A0ri

"Guitar, are you going somewhere? You've beaten irrelevance into the great blue yonder."

Says the person who has to move every goalpost in order to keep his head above water. The person who can't back up their claims. The person who must prevaricate.

How sad.

You asked for evidence to back up my claim that most evolution acceptors in the USA are Christian, and I provided it. Now you can't stand it, so you are looking for something, ANYTHING, to change the subject and evade the simple truth.


196 posted on 07/23/2006 2:57:13 PM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman (Gas up your tanks!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: A0ri
"For example, I myself am an ID'ist. I believe in Microevolution, but not in heavy Macro. I do not disagree with arguments that include or involve Christianity. I do disaree with the general philosophy of atheists to use it is a "proof" against Christianity -- as it is often used by my Socialist friends. I use Christianity to support Conservatism, wheras my Socialist friends use evolution to support flawed human "enjoyment" behavior."

Point taken.

However you can't just make pronouncements that Evolution includes attitudes it simply does not. No matter that some atheist evolutionary scientists use evolution to pummel the religious, atheism is not part of Evolution. I am and have been a strong atheist for almost 40 years. I do not use Evolution as a cudgel to beat the religious. This is, in part, because I realize the current limitations to the SToE in addressing processes before life existed.

That some use the StoE as a weapon really says nothing about that validity of the science or its findings. It's an unfortunate reality that science has been misused for centuries for political gain. It has also been used to make life more enjoyable and meaningful.

Just to take a small side trip from the thread topic...
Sudden jumps in the diversity of life frequently correspond to extinction events and/or increased bombardment from space. Does this suggest/favour pure Earth bound evolution or potential ID influence?

If it is from an ID influence, how would we tell the difference between that influence and Evolution? If it is an ID influence how would we test the hypothesis? If we cannot tell the difference between this type of ID influence and Evolution, but we can devise tests for Evolution, which should we pursue?

197 posted on 07/23/2006 3:00:27 PM PDT by b_sharp (Why bother with a tagline? Even they eventually wear out! (Second Law of Taglines))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: ToryHeartland

*** Pimento placemarker ***


198 posted on 07/23/2006 3:00:40 PM PDT by ToryHeartland (English Football -- no discernable planning whatsoever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: CarolinaGuitarman

I see nothing that would make me bow down to your superior elitist self. Not a charming quality, imo.

You made a broad assumption, which I stated was in my error for not being specific.


http://objection.4camp.net/go.php?n=179112


199 posted on 07/23/2006 3:02:17 PM PDT by A0ri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: A0ri
"You can call yourself "Christian" because you have a family that may have attended a Church once, as many people do, but this does not imply those statistics are Christian."

I think most consider themselves Christian because they believe Jesus Christ died for their sins and is the route to forgiveness.

You seem to believe that Christians are defined as Christian by not believing Evolution.

You state in a post that you are an IDist. I hope you are aware that most IDists say they believe an alien race could be the designer. How does that fit in with your definition of IDist?

200 posted on 07/23/2006 3:07:47 PM PDT by b_sharp (Why bother with a tagline? Even they eventually wear out! (Second Law of Taglines))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 661-678 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson