Replies

"Only G-d can decide what is and is not a "should."

You don't believe you have the ability to rationally choose what is good or bad? How odd. Especially when the quote you are referring to has to do with what should be taught in a science class. Only God can say that? Do you even read what you post?

"That's the whole point, isn't it?"

You asked why care about anything at all, and I said because I do care. I value things because I can, and because I conclude it is rational to do so.

"Then why do you crusade against "Intelligent Design," a form of Theistic evolution that merely teaches that a Creator is a scientific certainty indicated by the evidence?"

Because a Creator isn't a scientific certainty indicated by the evidence. In fact, the existence of a Creator is outside of the scope of science. ID is a purely theological claim, which is fine in itself. Theological claims have no place in a science classroom.

"But your "non-atheistic" philosophy is not content with a non-literal, evolutionary interpretation of Genesis. It has to insist that there is no Creator as well."

That's not true at all. ID makes a claim that can't be tested; it says that an unknown designer did unknown things at an unknown time in an untestable way. It's junk science, and junk theology.

"You self-hating Southerners."

You presumptuous ass.

"Why don't you move somewhere else?"

Why would I be ashamed? I love the South.

"But then you'd miss out on insulting your "neanderthal" neighbors and relatives, wouldn't you?"

You really have no clue. I hope you keep up this part of the conversation. You are digging yourself into a ridiculous hole. :)

You don't believe you have the ability to rationally choose what is good or bad? How odd. Especially when the quote you are referring to has to do with what should be taught in a science class. Only God can say that? Do you even read what you post?

I have the ability to chose good or bad, but I don't have the ability to decide which is which. That depends entirely upon Divine decree.

You asked why care about anything at all, and I said because I do care. I value things because I can, and because I conclude it is rational to do so.

Wow. There's no higher authority than one's self, I suppose.

Because a Creator isn't a scientific certainty indicated by the evidence. In fact, the existence of a Creator is outside of the scope of science. ID is a purely theological claim, which is fine in itself. Theological claims have no place in a science classroom.

Okay . . . so evolution isn't atheistic, but it precludes the existence of a Creator anywhere outside a philosophy class. Ironically, in an earlier post when I said that it wasn't classification that mattered but "what actually happened" you said that this was precisely what "science" does. So what does the "religion" that your evolutionism doesn't oppose do? Anything other than provide a nice cushy job for professional clergy?

That's not true at all. ID makes a claim that can't be tested; it says that an unknown designer did unknown things at an unknown time in an untestable way. It's junk science, and junk theology.

Hmmm. I get the "junk science" dig but not the "junk theology." So according to you theology shouldn't deal with a theoretical Creator who in some sense actually created the world? Then how do you defend your previous claim that "evolution isn't atheistic?" Exactly what sort of "gxd" and "theology" isn't "junk" and exists in harmony with your evolutionism? That's some "gxd" that your philosophy doesn't contradict! (Sounds kinda like the "gxd" and "chr*stianity" of Thomas Jefferson.)

You presumptuous ass.

Now, now . . .

Why would I be ashamed? I love the South.

Hence your choice to initiate this argument with me, a well-known Southerner on this forum, because my beliefs embarrass you. Believe me, I am well acquainted with the phenomenon. And I note that such Southerners never seem to be offended by transubstantiation or the aboriginal dreamtime or the Greek Orthodox "miracle of the holy fire." Those beliefs are accorded full respect. Genesis alone is attacked because Genesis is "the redneck book."

Of course, it is quite possible you love the old ante-bellum pre-fundamentalist South of Thomas Jefferson. Thank G-d the Puritans converted us!

But since (according to science) all our thoughts, ideals, beliefs, and opinions are merely the products of brain biochemistry, I wonder why science condemns people for the way their brain chemistry works. I suppose because the brain chemistry of scientists compels them to do so.