Posted on 10/24/2009 4:02:17 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Oct 22, 2009 — “We have kept the creationist barbarians from the gate,” announced a professor at Hong Kong University triumphantly. A news article in Science this week described tensions in the city over the teaching of evolution. The Darwinists won a vote over a change in wording in the science curriculum that would have “opened the door to teaching creationism and intelligent design in secondary schools.” The door must be shut tight, apparently. Even the possibility of this happening created a furore.
Reporter Richard Stone said, “As a year of honoring Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution draws to a close, scientists in Hong Kong are celebrating a partial victory in what is likely to be an ongoing war against proponents of teaching creationism and intelligent design in secondary schools.” He called the partial victory “bittersweet” because it did not revise the guidelines, nor did it rein in “the few dozen schools in Hong Kong that openly espouse creationism.”
Stone said that most schools in Hong Kong, though publicly funded, are run independently – and many are affiliated with churches. The author of the “barbarians” comment, David Dudgeon (faculty board chair at U of HK) complained...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
Did I call you a liberal? Show me where.
Then you are --still-- assuming that anyone who doesn't toe the line in your belief in literal creation is a liberal.
I am? And show me where I made that declaration.
Please go through my posting history and provide links to where I made statements like that.
This cannot be a contest in pointing out bad people in the world as proof that the other side's beliefs are wrong. It's just guilt by association, which is why I don't do it but you seem to insist on it.
I do? Show me where I made any comment about your stand on the crevo debates. To the best of my knowledge, I've never posted to you before these last few days. Where are all the accusations coming from? You're assuming a lot about my positions on different topics. Talk about guilt by association.
Why are you dragging me into this?
I object to mandatory vaccines even for something like measles. It opens the door to other big government control.
I know the arguments about herd immunity, but even if the people who opt out of the vaccines can catch and spread the disease, those who have been vaccinated have nothing to worry about anyway, so it's no concern of theirs.
If someone doesn't want the vaccines, they should deal with the consequences themselves, those who have them are protected.
That said, I think it's total foolishness to pass on vaccines like polio and tetanus, but the choice is theirs, where it belongs.
My last word to you, tpanther. You’ve accused me of being a liberal and then tried to use guilt by association (since liberals support evolution, I must support liberal positions). Even when I’m agreeing with your position that “science” degrees don’t matter (using your own degrees to show why), you whine and complain. Even on this page of the thread, you’re continuing to accuse others of being liberals, and I see metmom has picked up the “you’re a liberal” banner. All because other Christians don’t agree with you.
There are plenty of Christians who either think evolution may be true or don’t care. If you can’t accept that this is not a clear-cut issue and that reasonable Christians can disagree, we have nothing more to discuss. I learned a long time ago it’s pointless talking to someone who takes the “it’s my way or the highway” approach to religious issues. And while I disagree with the extent to which MissouriConservative argues, I will say that the “you either agree with me or you’re a liberal” line does project a rather poor image of our faith. We Christians are bound my our shared faith in Jesus Christ and we all form the body of Christ in this world, regardless of our opinions regarding whether Genesis may be literal or figurative.
If you too choose to go down the road attacking people like metmom that are siding with JR and believe that the message of creationism IS free speech and IS the alternative message to shout down evolutionists...
good luck.
You’ll seriously need it when trying to convince ANYONE you’re not a liberal.
He did apologize for the error, not something I would expect a liberal to do. That goes a long way.
I am absolutely certain about few things in life. God’s love for me, my faith in Jesus Christ, and my love for my wife and kids. I always hope that I am the first to admit that I an wrong. Doesn’t work out that way all the time, though. Have a great day.
As BamaKennedy puts in force that 'scientific methodology' the first and loudest to howl are going to be those who get their research grants cut....
I’ll tip a pint to you this very evening.
And I’m deciding that it is best not to try and reason with some people. It’s funny that I’ve been labeled a liberal and now a “hater”...lol. I’m guessing narrow minds have a serious need to paint people in a certain way to make their world make sense.
I have been a saved since the age of 14, I was a youth pastor from the age of 20 till I reached 32. I have witnessed these types many times and they drive people out of the church because they are inflexible and narrow minded. As long as the belief is in Christ as your savior, we are free to disagree on other issues. But some see that if you don’t believe as they do, then you simply can’t be a Christian.
So I will no longer waste time with those whose minds are so narrow that they can take notes on a blade of grass.
Good day to you as well.
“He did apologize for the error, not something I would expect a liberal to do. That goes a long way”.
Yeah, now that I look at it, there seems to be two separate conversations also between you and AG...for instance your post #240, which is exactly what I also said.
Again and again I keep hearing liberals are sore being called liberals, but it’s only because they got caught, and again and again they say it’s only because someone disagrees with them.
Please.
It’s a lie just like “religious attacks on science”, or “you hate me just because I understand science”.
No one calls anyone a liberal on mere disagreements, then they pretend to go on and on about the “complexity of origins, evolution”, etc. etc. etc.
As if that’s somehow all there is to it.
No, they either support big liberal govt, like you said, or defend bad liberal behaviour, like I’ve been pointing out, and/or ignore the evolutionists shouting down GGG and others, or actually engage in that themselves directly and so on.
As I’ve said, I only call a liberal a liberal based on their earning it.
Their trouble is, they’re in here earning it every single second of every single day on these threads!
Nevertheless, you’re right. As usual. ;)
I’ve also noticed an increase in the use of the strawman tactic, this notion that you can’t be a Christian unless you reject evolutionism.
Or you have to agree with creationists to be saved.
Of course there’s no mention whatsoever of certain evos that assert that anyone that accepts scripture is practicing idolatry, etc.
Or any acknowledgement of the Christian taliban comments...you know...what you’re called if you reject evolution...the ACTUAL reality of just who it is being the extremists.
So naturally, when creationists and Christians defend themselves and call out such nonsense, well... their fellow evos will magically find the creationists to be the extremists that assert “you have to be a creationist to be saved”...and poor poor them.
I guess the real question is, is this all coordinated?
This is the reason liberals can never be taken seriously...everyone sees right through their tactics.
Not only do many of them choose these extreme views, the others ignore them, and then they turn around and pretend like the majority of creationists are extreme by creating various strawmen to label all creationists with.
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.