Skip to comments.
Darwin on the Right: Why Christians and conservatives should accept evolution
Scientific American ^
| October 2006 issue
| Michael Shermer
Posted on 09/18/2006 1:51:27 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660, 661-680, 681-700 ... 2,001-2,015 next last
To: presently no screen name
So you're saying logic is relative?
661
posted on
09/20/2006 1:36:00 PM PDT
by
ahayes
(My strength is as the strength of ten because my heart is pure.)
To: donh
...hijacking a discussion about science into a religious forum ...Is the to some extent the view that much of the public has of Conservatism (here and in other countries.) It's similar to what happens in discussions with new-agers or postmoderndeconstructionists.
662
posted on
09/20/2006 1:39:34 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: presently no screen name
That, also, is only your interruption.
You have stated that an explanation alienates GOD because it does not address GOD. You have also stated that it is acceptable for an explanation of another subject not to mention GOD. How is this not a contradiction?
663
posted on
09/20/2006 1:46:33 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: King Prout
Bless you, my son!
664
posted on
09/20/2006 1:51:08 PM PDT
by
balrog666
(Ignorance is never better than knowledge. - Enrico Fermi)
To: King Prout
Bless you, my son!
665
posted on
09/20/2006 1:51:12 PM PDT
by
balrog666
(Ignorance is never better than knowledge. - Enrico Fermi)
To: King Prout
Bless you, my son!
666
posted on
09/20/2006 1:51:18 PM PDT
by
balrog666
(Ignorance is never better than knowledge. - Enrico Fermi)
To: ahayes
It would appear that he or she is assuming his or her conclusion, and refusing to accept that his or her claims should not be accepted as truth without evidence.
667
posted on
09/20/2006 1:52:37 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: balrog666
668
posted on
09/20/2006 1:53:36 PM PDT
by
PatrickHenry
(Science-denial is not conservative. It's reality-denial and it's unhealthy.)
To: Celtjew Libertarian
We were created in God's image . There's nothing mere about us, unless we don't try.
Yes, we were created in God's image. We can't believe just what we choose to believe and leave ANY of His Word unattended. However, many exercise their free will and lean unto their own understanding in certain areas.
WITHOUT HIM, we are mere - left to our own understanding. It's only under His covering by believing His Word and, thus, following and standing firm in His Truth can we claim His likeness. If we oppose Him we can't be like Him. However, when one gets to know their Savior through a personal relationship, they never want to oppose Him. Because you know that you know that you know.
To: NewLand
Anyone who enables Democrat victories by turning against Republicans does not have our support and should leave. The control of Washington is in the hands of about half of one percent of the population.
Pointing out that Republicans are slitting their own throats by abandoning science is not the same as supporting democrats.
Just for example: I guarantee that the climate is warming. The cause can be debated, but the event is happening. A couple more degrees, and the Republicans will be standing on the sidelines for the next hundred years, watching socialists manage the government.
670
posted on
09/20/2006 1:56:33 PM PDT
by
js1138
(The absolute seriousness of someone who is terminally deluded.)
To: js1138
Pointing out that Republicans are slitting their own throats by abandoning science is not the same as supporting democrats.However, refusing to vote for Rinos is.
671
posted on
09/20/2006 2:01:36 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: js1138
on this thread, is there an apparent difference?
672
posted on
09/20/2006 2:05:02 PM PDT
by
King Prout
(many complain I am overly literal... this would not be a problem if fewer people were under-precise)
To: balrog666
sheyucks... ary taime, Paw!
673
posted on
09/20/2006 2:05:54 PM PDT
by
King Prout
(many complain I am overly literal... this would not be a problem if fewer people were under-precise)
To: Liberal Classic
I guess my attempted humor in reference to DATING didn't compute too swell ;^)
674
posted on
09/20/2006 2:11:39 PM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: Thatcherite
Speaking personally, when a group that I'm a member of receives a blanket insult it seems just as personal to me as when I receive a personal insult.I know the feeing! ;^)
675
posted on
09/20/2006 2:13:00 PM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: Religion Moderator
676
posted on
09/20/2006 2:13:53 PM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: js1138
Republicans are slitting their own throats by abandoning science You illustrate some of my points very well. Using the liberal spin tactics that say Republicans are abandoning science is hogwash.
Where have any Republican leaders stated the party's action plan to abandon science? As many here like to request, show me the data.
The Republican Majority leader in The Senate is a doctor, hardly someone who advocates "abandoning" science.
It is these style of tactics used here that smack of liberalism and turn off many FReepers to your "cause".
677
posted on
09/20/2006 2:14:17 PM PDT
by
NewLand
(Always Remember September 11, 2001)
To: NewLand; Religion Moderator
Scientists who threaten to leave The Republican Party because of different opinions about evolution in particular, deserve the same treatment here that the single issue border fanatics have received, from JimRob on down. Anyone who enables Democrat victories by turning against Republicans does not have our support and should leave. thank you for offering up your opinion for public scrutiny.
some would find merit in it.
however, conversely, and speaking in broad and completely non-specific terms of course:
Anyone who goes far and away beyond the call of whatever sectarian duty he could possibly operate under to make the Republican Party (and political conservatism more generally) appear to be the exclusive bailiwick of Luddites and theocrats ought to be drummed off the site as an obvious covert Donk operative/useful idiot.
678
posted on
09/20/2006 2:14:17 PM PDT
by
King Prout
(many complain I am overly literal... this would not be a problem if fewer people were under-precise)
To: Dimensio
679
posted on
09/20/2006 2:14:54 PM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: Dimensio
Two different subjects, as you are well aware. It was not contradictory but it suits your purpose to state otherwise.
You will have to carry on without me. Enjoy what is left of this glorious day.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660, 661-680, 681-700 ... 2,001-2,015 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson