Posted on 03/08/2002 7:55:48 AM PST by JediGirl
Oh, we're very tolerant of others' views. However, we do draw the line when someone tries to pawn off mythology as science without the rigors of scientific investigation, and then insists that our children be indoctrinated in these religious beliefs. At least evolution is constantly being tested by the scientific method. Creationism simply declares itself true by fiat.
First five words fail to be supported in the article. Neither common Creationist argument canonical form is presented, attempted, nor argued,...merely a rant.
1st rant: Religious bigotry
Creationists typically consider their religious beliefs more akin to a relationship with God and studies of that relationship. There is no premise, faith, presupposition or implied argument that their relationship is based upon religion. They seek a relationship with God.
The comment of Religious Bigotry reflects more upon an outside view of a person who has sought to understand a relationship with God based upon a precept that any attempt to consider God is based upon false premises. The argument is fundamentally flawed and premised with the presupposition that God doesn't exist or that such existance is based upon an ability by man to prove such existence,...no foundational substantiation.
Even from a position of secular wherewithal, which in itself assumes that God doesn't exist but may be proven, the argument of 'religious bigotry' is by definition bigoted in itself towards the subject matter. No room is made for wherewithal or attempting to honor God which might be one object beyond the power of the observer to claim an inate ability to evaluate.
Obviously a take off on the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States of America. Honorable men will seek to honor both manmade and God-made things. Not all things are manmade so there's nothing hyposritical in such a stance. Insofar as a Struggle between Democracy and Theocracy, it might be remembered that if God exists, such a struggle is a bit moot. (an extremely gross underexaggeration)
According to Dan Quayle and the other hate mongers
Oops, there we go, labeling Dan Quayle as a hate monger by implication without justification nor essay. Not proved.
...at this conference, only those who believe deserve the right to life and liberty.
Again another assumption without proof or justification,...hmmm not a very unbiased piece.
...I guess that means the rest of us can die in chains, just as we did in the Dark Ages.
Actually during the Dark Ages, those who died in chains frequently were those who sought knowledge of Scripture and a relationship with God, while denied by those who refused Scripture to those who sought the Light.
|
To find all articles tagged or indexed using |
||||
| click here >>> |
SASU™ |
<<< click here | ||
|
Master Bump List |
||||
Thank you for using the ellipsis and not a comma. Then again, with your punctuation, who knows?
Anyway, my source is a page I looked up and linked just previously on this thread. I can see how you would miss that.
The Earth's Rotation is Slowing Down! (And the sky is falling.)
Well that was informative!
How dare you impugn the "Zit on Uranus" by demoting it to the lowly status of a "Theory"?
It, like the "Face on Mars" is a FACT, not a "Theory"! Pure Geometric Logic has given proof of this!
I swear it is true, upon the Mighty Sword of Zeus and the Sanctity of my Precious Bodily Fluids, but all the evidence was stolen by Government agents, and the Uranian Truth is denied by evil Satanic scientists pushing wheelbarrows full of Green mice.
Time is the because with which some dolls are stuffed! You cannot deny it! Submit to the Truth of the Zit, or be vanquished forever, Heathen, before I have to respond to you again using a mighty blue font!
</psycho-ceramic Lunatic Luddite mode>
It certainly wouldn't hurt if you did a little research of your own instead of relying exclusively on those badly drawn comic book pamphlets they pass out at the shelter.
Your statement above is a plain falsehood in complete violation of the commandment "Thou shalt not bear false witness." Recant your testimony, repent of your sin, and trouble us no more with these villainous lies.
Yours is a theory in crisis, and all learned authorities in the field now accept Mons Venus as being vastly superior. The followers of the Zit are only a ragged, and probably perveted few. You among them. [Deletethis, Mr. Moderator!]
I gave you FACTS, I gave you Geometric Logic, I gave you Thorazine Certitude; all you can give in return is SLIME! This alone is proof that the "Zit on Uranus" is real!
Your "Mons Venus" theory is nothing but a clever trick to deceive the unwary, and to pervert the minds of the youth of America and pollute the Purity of their Essence.
You've been warned; no holding back next time -- I'll let you have it with the baby blue font unless you mend your ways!
You better think twice before calling me a liar, viper.
Being an honorable man has nothing to do with a desire to honor things. In fact, the very opposite would be expected of such a person. Then again, I haven't any idea what it is you are trying to convey with that statement.
"Insofar as a Struggle between Democracy and Theocracy, it might be remembered that if God exists, such a struggle is a bit moot." -- Cvengr
That rather depends on the properties of the god in question and whether or not it ever plans to intervene (unlikely in Aristotle's estimation).
For those of us who live in the real world the struggle has profound implications of a more immediate nature. Mainstream Christianity has managed to evolve into a relatively benign form that is tolerable to modern civilization. That might change. There are virulent Islamic fundamentalists who pose a considerable threat to civilization. The great worry is that the fundamentalist forms of Christianity spawned in the rural South following the Civil War will anastamose under the influence of their new rivalry with Islam into a virulent form indistinguishable in its effects on society from the Taliban, for example.
"Oops, there we go, labeling Dan Quayle as a hate monger by implication without justification nor essay. Not proved." -- Cvengr
Dan is a politician. If he really meant the pledge as he recited it then he is indeed a deluded and dangerous man. More likely is that he said it because they asked him to and he thought he might need their votes someday. If he just said it because everyone else was saying it then he is just the village idiot (most likely scenario).
Your lie has nothing to do with the Piltdown Man Hoax which everyone knows is a hoax. It has rather to do with the purposeful intent to deceive by grouping all hominid fossils under the rubric of a hoax. In that sense you are indeed a liar. I would be happy to withdraw my accusation but I am afraid that the alternative explanation for your post would be even more unflattering.
You might prove your innocence by admitting to being either extraordinarily stupid or horribly misinformed or some less remarkable combination of the two. That would satisfy me and I would then be happy to apologize for wrongly accusing you of dishonesty.
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.