Posted on 07/25/2009 10:11:21 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
You really don’t understand do you?
Allmendream, if you’re indeed a Christian, then you believe God created all we know or ever will know...that’s simply not a debatable ‘pick and choose’ option for you or anyone else!
So how is it you justify to a child that His creation isn’t His creation after all, much less He has no place in His own creation?
The simple fact is you just can’t. So again we all see and understand your desperation here.
Understand this will always ALWAYS be a ‘YOU’ problem allmendream.
It’s just how it is allmendream! And it’s why soooo many others have called you on it and will continue to do so, I suspect.
But you be sure and keep dancing now!
Your permanent spin cycle is making you dizzy! LOL
Obviously you didn't get what I was getting at.
You were appealing, in terms of a YEC scheme, to post-flood geographical isolation of members of a "kind" to explain the emergence of the various and diverse living species from the "kinds" preserved on the ark; precisely because small, isolated populations lose diversity (genetic information) and in such genetic losses the more finely characterized species could emerge within their "kind".
But how, I was pointing out, is any possible natural population ever smaller or more isolated than being the only pair of their kind (or, at most, only one of seven pairs) in the entire world!!! IOW, Noah's ark (had it been real, would have) represented the mother of all populational isolations!
You're arguing that species emerge from kinds when members of the kind lose genetic information, and that can happen when members of a kind become isolated. At the same time, you are attributing maximal genetic information to the pairs aboard Noah's ark, even though they represent the smallest and most isolated populations EVER. Do you not see how this is absolutely self-contradictory?
If an individual carried 100% useful DNA, no junk DNA and no mutations, why is that improbable?
It's still only two alleles per locus. I repeat, many human genes have dozens of alleles per locus, and some have hundreds. You can't even get the typical diversity of a single species into one (or several) individuals, let alone the diversity to generate dozens or hundreds of species, with different coloration, markings, sizes, mating rituals, food sources and feeding habits, other environmental adaptations, etc, etc, etc.
Just take the "horse kind," to again employ the most common example creationists themselves use. Those seven species of living horses I listed for you earlier, they all have different numbers of chromosomes (n numbers). How was THAT encoded into a single pair representing the "horse kind" on Noah's ark? In fact, there are ubiquitous and varied "chromosomal races" even within some single species, for instance the common house mouse.
So, major chromosomal mutations DO occur, even commonly in some species. You'd have to admit that, once aware of the facts. But you're going to strain at allowing comparatively simple point mutations to build genetic diversity?
Yes that particular suit sure...
It is ironic that a religion enjoying the largest following in this nation is consigned by the city of New York to a least-favored status," he said. "It's a shame that we have reached a point in our nation's history that 'respect for diverse beliefs and customs' has come to mean discrimination against Christians – at Christmastime, no less."
but as I said there are others:
Wikipedia under Christmas tree controversies...liberals are so uptight they demand the tree be called Holiday Tree, just as I told you in the example of kids being forced to sing the ridiculous politically correct 'O Holiday Tree' in their Christmas...errrrrrrr...HOLIDAY carol.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas_controversy
So I guess, yeah the trees were allowed, you just have to somehow overlook all the silly liberal efforts to force others to call them holiday trees I suppose...speaking of "grasping distinctions"!
Which reminds me of the word 'Christmas' itself being banned from school calendars in schools right here in our district. Just nevermind it's a Federal holiday, huh??!!
And there are other sites...CatholicLeague.org for instance.
Why don't you just admit it? It's not enough for you that students have the right to free exercise of their religion, whatever it is. You won't be happy unless the school officially endorses your religion.
Nobody said that, of course.
A veritable fountain of irony you are!
How is exercising my religious rights, like everyone else in the examples btw, and very PLAINLY all I've indicated, leading you to such fantastical paranoid delusions?
It seems the answer to this question is all about your own paranoid insecurities more than anything else.
But I understand you're trapped here.
The menorah part seems a little iffy, but the rest is spot on. I don't expect you to grasp that distinction, of course.
The irony!
I didn't ignore them I just picked one to look at! I picked it because it was about schools! That's what we were talking about, remember, because you brought it up. Some stupid suit against a town in New Mexico doesn't have anything to do with the free exercise of religion in schools.
There are many about schools, for instance how about the O' Christmas tree example? Or the principal threatening a kid with arrest if he dared thank Jesus for getting him through such a liberal NEA debacle at graduation? The other examples simply illustrate exactly what I was talking about: liberals don't stop at just schools, they're uncomfortable with God to the point they get offended for just about any and everything across the board...IGWT on our money, the town logos, songs, the pledge, 10 commandments in courthouses, crosses in cemeteries (REALLY bizarre) and even chapels of all places (Wm & Mary)!
You're floundering.
Minimizing liberal political correctness on FR. Way to go, and again, TWO THUMBS UP!
BTW...you never did indicate how you'd like to see tax money spent on removing any and all things Christian from the public. Do you think that's acceptable and should be minimized and ignored the way you are doing or perhaps there are more important things to be spending public money on right now?
Why don't YOU go on and finally admit you're a liberal offended by Christianity while all the other minority religions get a free pass???
Yeahhhh...I'm not the one having trouble sticking to a topic they brought up themselves.
I tried to find the instance of kids being forced to sing "O Holiday Tree," and I can't.
I found one case where someone was told she couldn't mention Jesus in her "what I've learned" graduation remarks because all the graduates' remarks were to be read by a member of the faculty, and that person was worried that it would put the official stamp of the institution on the words about Jesus. The school later changed its mind and decided just to emphasize to the audience that the remarks were personal statements, not positions of the school. I support that decision.
I found another case in which a high school student didn't deliver the prepared valedictorian speech that the principal had approved and instead started preaching about Jesus. The school withheld her diploma until she wrote an apology. She sued. The first court threw out her case; she appealed, and she lost her appeal on a unanimous decison. I also support that decision.
You still haven't said what you want students to be able to do besides the things I listed above. Does bringing up this case mean you want them to be able to preach from the stage at official school events?
Well there is no need to wonder at that--it's precisely what an atheist would say. The theory of evolution denies that there is any intelligent plan, intent, purpose or guidance in nature. That's the point of it. So teaching evolution in schools amounts to state-sanctioned atheism. Aside from being the cornerstone of atheism, the denial of design in nature is contrary to common sense. But I guess we need to keep teaching it to kids, to make sure we grinding out good atheists.
No. I participated. And you couldn’t end your post without a snide remark, which is pretty much my point here. There is always a snide remark.
Ummmm don't look now but almost everything we're talking about is what's occured in schools! LOL!!!
And it's not enough you're the police for eveyrthing now you're the topic police too? SHEESH!
The O Holiday tree was in Florida but I can't remember all the details now.
Intersting because it was a male that had difficulty with being allowed to thank Jesus that I read about. It's insane that it has to happen once, but now you're confirming for me it's happened at least three times.
And all this liberal talk aboiut religious freedom allowed in schools! Riiiiiiiiight!!!!
Since when is thanking Jesus preaching?
I think you libs have a serious problem with distinguishing between preaching, teaching and so on, and also what it means for someone to engage in their rights and "free exercise thereof"...people exercising their rights in no way infringes upon yours.
And you still haven't answered what you'd prefer to see public money spent on, further destroying any evidence found in the public square of any and all things Christian or something else.
Wait...you partticipated in dismantling the country and you’re shocked you get snide remarks?
Dismantling the country? Where did you get that from?! I took an oath to defend the Constitution! You just make my point with remarks like that!
When the person stands in front of an audience who did not come for a religious purpose and who cannot comfortably leave, and deviates from her prepared and approved speech to say, "I need to tell you about someone who loves you more than you could ever imagine. He died for you on a cross over 2,000 years ago, yet was resurrected and is living today in heaven. His name is Jesus Christ. If you don’t already know Him personally I encourage you to find out more about the sacrifice He made for you so that you now have the opportunity to live in eternity with Him": that's preaching.
.people exercising their rights in no way infringes upon yours.
If I'm in the audience for my son's graduation and somebody on stage starts promoting their personal religious beliefs, I'd say yes it does.
Quick consistency check: would it also be okay with you if she had said, "There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet"? Or is this another of those things Christians get to do and others have to put up with because they're in the minority and not really Americans anyway?
And you still haven't answered what you'd prefer to see public money spent on, further destroying any evidence found in the public square of any and all things Christian or something else.
I don't understand the question.
Meanwhile, you still haven't said what you want students to be able to do beyond what the guidelines I posted say they can do.
Creationism/I.D. is not just the notion that God created all we know or will ever know, it is a specific religious doctrine that suborns observation to flawed scriptural interpretation.
You are just pretending to be a Christian.
I was told by another FReeper when discussing chromosome number differences between humans and apes, that that was not really significant, what was really important was that most of the DNA was the same, not how it was divided up into chromosomes.
Evolutionists claim a common ancestor for all the horse kinds, ultimately for ALL animals really. How is that much, or any different, than what creationists are saying?
Seems that the criticism against the common ancestor of kinds (family level basically), could equally apply to the common ancestor of ALL animals, the one at the phyla or class level.
I'm sure Stultis can give a more complete answer, but my take is that evolution claims the various horses developed from the common ancestor evolving new and different genetic information than the common ancestor had. As a crude analogy, maybe the common ancestor had ABCDE, and one descendant has ABCDF and another is ABDEF and another is ABCDG and so on. Same amount of information, just different.
Creationists, on the other hand, insist that the original kind/common ancestor must have had ABCDEFG and that the descendants developed only by dropping bits of information. I think they'd have to show where there was room for F and G in the original kind's genome, and it'd be nice if they found a species that had, say, ABCDEF to show a "transitional."
So by shutting down teaching the very religion this country was founded upon is your idea of religious freedom?
Good look with all your inconsistent incoherencies and profound problems with comprehension.
No. I particpated in the prayer. See what happens when you assume. But I get the impression that you think you really know the truth behind all mankind.
Well then you’d be projecting about assumptions then.
BTW, I assumed nothing, I merely asked you a question. Since you only said you participated, and didn’t specify what it was exactly it was you participated in, I asked you.
And since you cherry picked the creationists to attack, I figured I’d ask the question I did...and if I assumed anything (via the question I asked) that would be why.
And thanks for the prayers!
Dismantling the country? Where did you get that from?! I took an oath to defend the Constitution! You just make my point with remarks like that!
Well the subject we were talking about was secular liberals squashing religious freedoms in public schools...you indicated you participated in that.
So I asked a question to clarify.
I took an oath as well but this has nothing to do with liberals squashing religious freedoms in public schools, etc. Which is what I meant by dismantling the country.
Nevertheless, thanks for your service!
I agree with you that’s preaching. The example I was thinking of though was a male that merely thanked Jesus for getting him through the debacle and he was threatened with arrest.
And you still haven’t answered what you’d prefer to see public money spent on, further destroying any evidence found in the public square of any and all things Christian or something else.
“I don’t understand the question”.
Do you think public money should be spent on dismantling all evidence of Christianity in this country; for instance: removing the 10 commandments wherever it’s found in public, chiseling off the 10 commandments over the portico of the supreme court building, yanking crosses out of gov. cemeteries, because some secular humanist liberals are oh so offended everywhere they turn...
OR do you think public money could and should be better spent?
Your question is best answered by: I would like to see the rules be enforced and these guidelines actually be followed by liberal secular humanists in the first place!
I agree with you that’s preaching. The example I was thinking of though was a male that merely thanked Jesus for getting him through the debacle and he was threatened with arrest.
And you still haven’t answered what you’d prefer to see public money spent on, further destroying any evidence found in the public square of any and all things Christian or something else.
“I don’t understand the question”.
Do you think public money should be spent on dismantling all evidence of Christianity in this country; for instance: removing the 10 commandments wherever it’s found in public, chiseling off the 10 commandments over the portico of the supreme court building, yanking crosses out of gov. cemeteries, because some secular humanist liberals are oh so offended everywhere they turn...
OR do you think public money could and should be better spent?
Your question is best answered by: I would like to see the rules be enforced and these guidelines actually be followed by liberal secular humanists in the first place!
As that’s the actual issue.
So unless government officials are promoting your particular religious creed (Creationism/I.D.) it is being ‘shut down’?
Unless I am for government officials teaching your particular peculiar religious creed (Creationism/I.D.) then I am for “shutting down” Christianity?
You are a Creationist at the expense of your Christianity, your logic, your civility, and your intellect; assuming you ever had any of either.
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.