[oldcats]

"Religion does not claim to be science, therefore no scientific proof is required for it."
Then why do so many want it taught as a science along with evolution?
"Evolution however, not only claims to be science, but also claims to disprove God's existence through scientific proofs."
It does claim to be a science...it IS a science. I have looked and looked, and have found no claims that evolution disproves God's exsistence. If you would please show me where a reputable source says that, I will gladly read it.
"You of course did not respond to it and now act as if you had "forgotten" it."
Sorry if you think I ignored your post, but I have been installing a new computer at home and just didn't get around to it. "Seems you evolutionists keep just repeating the same mantras and ignore the responses as if they never had been made."
Both sides of the discussion have their mantras..The Bible says so seems the be the one for creationists. Perhaps what you see as repeating mantras is mearly restating the facts as we see them?
1268 posted on 3/1/02 9:35 PM Pacific by gore3000 [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1122 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

[medved]

Then why do so many want it taught as a science along with evolution?

Because evolution is an ideological doctrine, similar to a religion. The problem is that in order to have a religion taught alongside evolution on an equitable basis, you'd have to have a religion which operated on a comparable intelectual level to evolution, and the only two feasible candidates are rastifari and voodoo.