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

Skip to comments.

THE "BABY DOCTOR," BENJAMIN SPOCK, ON DARWIN AND MORALITY
Institute for Creation Research ^ | February 2003 | Jerry Bergman

Posted on 02/10/2003 1:34:15 PM PST by Remedy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 last
To: stanz
I was as misinformed as you until I actually read the most widely relied on book in human history. There are no dates, for example, as you appear to believe.
I perused the list of subjects and sources you rely on and find no explanation as to how life counters the physico-chemical tendency toward equilibrium. Algae to ecosystem is an alchemy-like transformation and evolution is just an old myth that modern evidence is failing to support.
What 'creationist' books have you read?
81 posted on 02/13/2003 5:42:21 AM PST by metacognative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: metacognative
I didn't supply any sources.
If you rely on the Bible to tell you about how life developed on this planet, then it is you who will wind up being misinformed. What do you mean "there are no dates"? I don't read creationist books because there is no creator.
82 posted on 02/13/2003 8:00:10 AM PST by stanz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: stanz
You're hung up on this bible and the creator obsession.
Typical Darwinite True Believer. No point arguing with a zealot. You probaly accept Spontaneous Generation from molecules to man.
83 posted on 02/13/2003 3:49:55 PM PST by metacognative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion....Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. (Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. 1854), Vol. IX, p. 229, October 11, 1798.)

Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime & pure, [and] which denounces against the wicked eternal misery, and [which] insured to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments. (Source: Bernard C. Steiner, The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry (Cleveland: The Burrows Brothers, 1907), p. 475. In a letter from Charles Carroll to James McHenry of November 4, 1800.)

[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. Source: Benjamin Franklin, The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, editor (Boston: Tappan, Whittemore and Mason, 1840), Vol. X, p. 297, April 17, 1787.

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of man and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connexions with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?

And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who, that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric? (Source: George Washington, Address of George Washington, President of the United States . . . Preparatory to His Declination (Baltimore: George and Henry S. Keatinge), pp. 22-23. In his Farewell Address to the United States in 1796.)

84 posted on 02/13/2003 4:20:52 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: metacognative
Right...no use arguing. Let's agree to disagree.
85 posted on 02/13/2003 6:20:50 PM PST by stanz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke; VadeRetro; PatrickHenry; Dataman
Are All Creationists Liars? A Response to "Professor Dr. Dr. Gerhard Besier"

For a long time, I ignored the false charges against me, reasoning, "Why should I dignify slander and libel by a response?" I now believe that it is important to respond to these charges, because they illustrate the bankruptcy of the tactics commonly used by certain Darwinists, atheists, and secular humanists in trying to suppress those persons who have found scientific and logical problems with the "goo to you by the way of the zoo" dogma. Many Darwinists evidently feel that the most effective way to respond to the many challenges to Darwinism, or at least an important approach, is to try to marginalize the opposition by attacking their credibility. Under the subtitle "Baloney Detector Kits," Jan Covey lists several methods Darwinists use in an attempt to win arguments, including the ad hominem attacks. For example, he says

evolutionists claim Dr. Duane Gish is a liar, and because he’s a liar, nothing he says can be trusted. Evolutionists tend to believe all creationists are either liars or deluded by the lies of other creationists. This kind of personal attack distracts attention from good arguments (2002, p. 1).

In this paper, I will examine only one of the claims leveled against me, namely that found in a footnote on page 458 of the book Die Neuen Inquisitoren - Religionsfreiheit und Glaubensneid Band II (The New Inquisitors - Freedom of Religion and Envy of Faith Vol. II) Verlag A. Fromm, Zürich, 1999 by Gerhard Besier and Erwin K. Scheuch (I will discuss Besier later; Scheuch is a professor of sociology at Harvard University and Cologne, Germany). In this footnote, Besier makes the following statement:

In the 1980s Bergman was in conflict with the law more than once for using academic titles that he had no right to use (U.S. District Court, Toledo, Ohio No. C 80-390, Dec. 5, 1985, p. 2, Findings of Facts 1; Dec. 6,1985, p.12, Finding of Facts 35). Bergman also falsely claimed to have more than 400 published articles (Source: Memos Background Information and Discrepancies regarding Published Works, pp. 1f., in the archives of Prof. Besier) and he also falsely claimed to be the author of books that were never written (solemn declaration by Harriet P. Stockanes, University of Illinois Press, December 12, 1988, in the archives of Prof. Besier)[ii]

86 posted on 04/20/2003 9:40:56 AM PDT by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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