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

To: mlc9852
It does not say he created ape-like creatures, then turned them into humans,

It also doesn't say He created DNA. It doesn't say how he changed the atomic structure of "dust" into H2O, the primary component of living creatures. Genesis leaves out lots and lots of details, including the one how God created man at the end of a long chain of evolution.

And spare me that the Bible isn't a science book, blah blah blah. I realize that.

No, you don't, or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I have to wonder if maybe God didn't anticipate these arguments so he made it clear what he did.

No, Genesis is not clear at all. The description of something as huge and complex as the universe and all the life in it would take libraries bigger than earth has ever seen to completely document. And that's ignoring how all that was *created*, I'm just talking about complete documentation of all that exists.

You claiming that God "made it clear what he did" in a few pages of Genesis makes me wonder if you understand the difference between reality and fantasy.

And I wouldn't vote for a communist, socialist, atheist, and probably some more "ists" that escape me now.

That's why they don't tell you what they are, so they don't lose the votes of people like you. My original point was that when someone outs themselves as a creationist, they lose the votes of entire segments of the population, just as if they had outed themselves as a communist. The only difference is which segment of the population will now refuse to vote for them.

*Now* do you understand why it is important for conservative politicians, even creationist conservative politicians, to avoid the subject of ID and creationism, and focus on other important issues that have broader appeal?

You can disagree if you want, but if you do, the discussion should be about why it is *not* damaging to the conservative agenda for politicians to endorse creationism and ID.

195 posted on 01/19/2006 2:08:52 PM PST by narby (Hillary! The Wicked Witch of the Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies ]


To: narby
I wouldn't vote for anyone who said evolution shouldn't be taught, only ID or whatever you wish to call it. I want both taught. And I agree that politicians would be better off staying out of it. However, Jeb Bush said he thinks both should be taught and I'm very glad he said it. Of course, others disagree. But I'm not sure it actually lost him any votes (if he runs for an office again)and I haven't heard an outcry from Floridians to have him tossed out of office. He took much more heat during the Schiavo case. I just don't think that people would refuse to vote for someone because they think it's okay to teach both.
204 posted on 01/19/2006 2:53:12 PM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies ]

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