To: gobucks
Most die hard evolutionists know that at root, ToE, gives a free pass for all 'immoral' acts, especially sexual ones.
No matter how often I see this lie, I am still astounded that so many dishonest creationists think that it's believable. Are they really that stupid, or is it just incurable dishonesty?
53 posted on
02/05/2005 1:05:54 PM PST by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: Dimensio
No matter how often I see this lie, I am still astounded that so many dishonest creationists think that it's believable. Are they really that stupid, or is it just incurable dishonesty? Well, if by definition, creationists are intrinsically dishonest, then that means nothing I'd post would be trustworthy. Nothing any creationist would post be trustworthy.
Funny how sure we are regarding our definitions. For evolutionists, are for certain, a bunch that loves to live by dishonesty too; at least on the surface it looks that way.
That is why Emma Darwin's death at a young age is never, ever discussed, nor its impact on Charles. Lies of omission are far worse than lies comission.
70 posted on
02/05/2005 1:22:19 PM PST by
gobucks
(http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
To: Dimensio
It' a symptom of projection.
88 posted on
02/05/2005 1:42:02 PM PST by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson