Darwin on the Right: Why Christians and conservatives should accept evolution

Scientific American ^ | October 2006 issue | Michael Shermer

[ahayes]

So you're saying logic is relative?

[Doctor Stochastic]

...hijacking a discussion about science into a religious forum ...

Is the to some extent the view that much of the public has of Conservatism (here and in other countries.) It's similar to what happens in discussions with new-agers or postmoderndeconstructionists.

[Dimensio]

That, also, is only your interruption.

You have stated that an explanation alienates GOD because it does not address GOD. You have also stated that it is acceptable for an explanation of another subject not to mention GOD. How is this not a contradiction?

[balrog666]

Bless you, my son!

[balrog666]

Bless you, my son!

[balrog666]

Bless you, my son!

[Dimensio]

It would appear that he or she is assuming his or her conclusion, and refusing to accept that his or her claims should not be accepted as truth without evidence.

[PatrickHenry]

O how horrible!

[presently no screen name]

We were created in God's image . There's nothing mere about us, unless we don't try.

Yes, we were created in God's image. We can't believe just what we choose to believe and leave ANY of His Word unattended. However, many exercise their free will and lean unto their own understanding in certain areas.

WITHOUT HIM, we are mere - left to our own understanding. It's only under His covering by believing His Word and, thus, following and standing firm in His Truth can we claim His likeness. If we oppose Him we can't be like Him. However, when one gets to know their Savior through a personal relationship, they never want to oppose Him. Because you know that you know that you know.

[js1138]

Anyone who enables Democrat victories by turning against Republicans does not have our support and should leave.

The control of Washington is in the hands of about half of one percent of the population.

Pointing out that Republicans are slitting their own throats by abandoning science is not the same as supporting democrats.

Just for example: I guarantee that the climate is warming. The cause can be debated, but the event is happening. A couple more degrees, and the Republicans will be standing on the sidelines for the next hundred years, watching socialists manage the government.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Pointing out that Republicans are slitting their own throats by abandoning science is not the same as supporting democrats.

However, refusing to vote for Rinos is.

[King Prout]

on this thread, is there an apparent difference?

[King Prout]

sheyucks... ary taime, Paw!

[Elsie]

I guess my attempted humor in reference to DATING didn't compute too swell ;^)

[Elsie]

Speaking personally, when a group that I'm a member of receives a blanket insult it seems just as personal to me as when I receive a personal insult.

I know the feeing! ;^)

[Elsie]

;^)

[NewLand]

Republicans are slitting their own throats by abandoning science

You illustrate some of my points very well. Using the liberal spin tactics that say Republicans are abandoning science is hogwash.

Where have any Republican leaders stated the party's action plan to abandon science? As many here like to request, show me the data.

The Republican Majority leader in The Senate is a doctor, hardly someone who advocates "abandoning" science.

It is these style of tactics used here that smack of liberalism and turn off many FReepers to your "cause".

[King Prout]

Scientists who threaten to leave The Republican Party because of different opinions about evolution in particular, deserve the same treatment here that the single issue border fanatics have received, from JimRob on down. Anyone who enables Democrat victories by turning against Republicans does not have our support and should leave.

thank you for offering up your opinion for public scrutiny.
some would find merit in it.
however, conversely, and speaking in broad and completely non-specific terms of course:

Anyone who goes far and away beyond the call of whatever sectarian duty he could possibly operate under to make the Republican Party (and political conservatism more generally) appear to be the exclusive bailiwick of Luddites and theocrats ought to be drummed off the site as an obvious covert Donk operative/useful idiot.

[Elsie]

I said that.

[presently no screen name]

Two different subjects, as you are well aware. It was not contradictory but it suits your purpose to state otherwise.

You will have to carry on without me. Enjoy what is left of this glorious day.