Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CottShop; GodGunsGuts
Personally I don't usually get in the faces of evolutionists who not only deny intelligent design, but also deny the existence of God. Atheists have nowhere else to turn but to Darwin and evolution.

Usually when I get involved in these discussions it is to challenge those who claim to believe in God and yet somehow find it consistent with their belief in God to ridicule and malign those who, when they look at creation, see evidence of design rather than evidence of some endless unguided purposeless process.

I do notice, however, that for the most part the rabid evos on these threads seem to employ the same debating tactics that liberals who call into conservative talk radio shows employ. There are exceptions to the rule and I have engaged a few evolutionists who can make a point without resorting to ridicule or ad-hominem arguments, but those people seem to be the exception rather than the rule.

136 posted on 09/24/2009 8:00:14 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies ]


To: P-Marlowe

[[Usually when I get involved in these discussions it is to challenge those who claim to believe in God and yet somehow find it consistent with their belief in God to ridicule and malign those who, when they look at creation, see evidence of design rather than evidence of some endless unguided purposeless process.]]

as do I- you MUST question the salvation of those who claim to be ‘religious’ yet reject the very word of God, and so mangle His word that it’s left looking nothing like His original word to us- you also MUST question those who claim to be ‘religious’ who’s only apparent goal is to malign and accuse true Christians who consistently bring God’s word and supporting evidnece of creation to hte table, as well as evidence that refutes macroevolution. Whne those claimning to be ‘religious’ engage in nothing more than character assassination, ignoring the issues beign discussed, and attackign the messenger time and time again- one has to judge whether the fruit they bear is of God or not.


137 posted on 09/24/2009 8:05:51 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies ]

To: P-Marlowe; GodGunsGuts; xcamel; metmom

You are one of a growing number of people that rightly understand that the evos on here that are incapable of tolerating dissent of their cult are indeed closet liberals.

Anyone that defends the NEA public screwels, secular humanism and “science” that can only be enforced via liberal activist judges, simply can not be viewed as conservative.

Each and every examination of evolution on here is almost always met with “religious attacks on science”.

xcamel’s “argument” consists of posting Christian taliban drivel; on 9-11 no less.

I see Inquisition...all kinds of whack job anti-conservative liberalism in support of evolution in here.

Chrissy Fit Matthews was stammering and flinging spit on a camera toward a Republican guest about evolution being “settled science” not long ago. (ALOT like algore’s “debate is over” hot air cult!)

I often wonder if Chrissy Fit isn’t one of these festering trolls in here!


139 posted on 09/24/2009 10:53:46 PM PDT by tpanther (Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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