Evolution Promotes Brutality

[AV1611VET]

If your theory is that thalidomide causes birth defects, aren't you forced to give thalidomide to women?

If I lived in the Fourth Reich ... yes.

Otherwise ... no.

 

[Loudmouth]

Otherwise ... no.

You believe that thalidomide causes birth defects, so you must use thalidomide to cause birth defects. That is the logic you are using with evolution and eugenics.

 

[AV1611VET]

You believe that thalidomide causes birth defects,

I don't know about now ... but it did.

... so you must use thalidomide to cause birth defects.

I don't even know what Thalidomide looks like.

That is the logic you are using with evolution and eugenics.

The "logic" I'm using is called "history."

 

[Loudmouth]

I don't know about now ... but it did.I don't even know what Thalidomide looks like.The "logic" I'm using is called "history."

You are arguing that a belief in evolution means that you must kill the weakest because evolution says that the strongest survive.

I am arguing that your belief in thalidomide means that you must use it to cause birth defects because the conclusion is that thalidomide causes birth defects.

Same logic.

 

[AV1611VET]

You are arguing that a belief in evolution means that you must kill the weakest because evolution says that the strongest survive.

I am arguing that your belief in thalidomide means that you must use it to cause birth defects because the conclusion is that thalidomide causes birth defects.

Same logic.

Oh, my.

What happened to a very important ingredient in my argument? the Fourth Reich?

Was it filtered out so your [imaginary] point can stand?

 

[Loudmouth]

Oh, my.

What happened to a very important ingredient in my argument? the Fourth Reich?

You have to belong to the Fourth Reich in order to believe that thalidomide causes birth defects?

 

[AV1611VET]

You have to belong to the Fourth Reich in order to believe that thalidomide causes birth defects?

Do you believe Thalidomide caused birth defects?

 

[expos4ever]

Evolution gives no solid platform for this datum. There is, actually no right, no wrong....

With God, there is no question. Rock solid datum for right and wrong. When followed, all benefit.

I have difficulty understanding your thinking. There is no reason why a person cannot accept that evolution has happened and yet still choose to accept the moral framework presented in the Bible.

And the atheist, just like the believer, is choosing to ascribe to a particular moral framework (in all likelihood it will be generally similar to a framework based on Jesus' teaching).

Now we can debate the values of the moral framework with that of the atheist on points where they differ. But I see absolutely no justification for your claim that the atheist's framework has no "platform" - his platform is collective human experience and yours is the prescriptions of a book.

Can you actually make a case as to why the Biblical moral framework is superior? And to answer that "it's God's framework" is to OBVIOUSLY engage in circular reasoning. Clearly, if the atheist believed in the existence of a morally perfect God, he would accept the Biblical moral model.

 

[TheBear]

To say that evolution "promotes" brutality is like saying that forensic science "promotes" murder. What a goofy notion.

Not worth a response, truthfully. You are blowing hot air, and playing alpha.

So I'm guessing you didn't like what I said? And what's with all this "playing alpha" nonsense? I saw the thread title and merely gave my opinion. I still think the notion is goofy, and I still equate it to claiming that forensic science "promotes" murder. If you disagree, that's fine. Just give me your reason for disagreeing. No need to assign motives or accusing others of "playing alpha". Just tell my why you disagree.

 

[Cute Tink]

Cute, it is called Abiogenesis.

In other words: not evolution. This thread is discussing evolution, which is what I was responding to.

 

[Loudmouth]

Do you believe Thalidomide caused birth defects?

Yes, but I don't use your logic whereby accepting a scientific conclusion means that you must act out that conclusion. If you think the theory of evolution commands us to kill the weak, then you must also think that thalidomide commands us to cause birth defects.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you think the theory of evolution commands us to kill the weak,

You must have me mixed up with Thomas Malthus.

Or Hitler.

 

[Loudmouth]

You must have me mixed up with Thomas Malthus.

Or Hitler.

That would be you, the one who thinks that the theory of evolution commands us to kill the weak.

 

[AV1611VET]

You must have me mixed up with Thomas Malthus.

Or Hitler.

That would be you, the one who thinks that the theory of evolution commands us to kill the weak.

All you had to do is say YES.

 

[Loudmouth]

All you had to do is say YES.

I didn't confuse you with them. You are them.

 

[Hoghead1]

Yes, AV1611, if God is omnipotent, the he is most definitely responsible for evil. Why? God is being viewed as a cosmic dictator who decides it all. That is why Calvin, for example, made a point of arguing that all evil events were predetermined by God.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, AV1611, if God is omnipotent, the he is most definitely responsible for evil. Why? God is being viewed as a cosmic dictator who decides it all.

Don't listen to their views.

That is why Calvin, for example, made a point of arguing that all evil events were predetermined by God.

Calvin would have burned me at the stake (or had someone else do it).

 

[JacksBratt]

Nowhere in any evolution class or biology class is it taught that we ought to kill of the weakest in any species.

I never said it did...

I said that people can use it to support their agenda.

 

[Hoghead1]

Well, if you disagreed with Calvin, you definitely risked being burnt. Michael Servet disagreed with Calvin on the Trinity. Calvin issued a death threat on him, saying if he ever tried to go through Geneva (Calvin's city), Calvin would have him executed. Poor Servet tried to sneak through, as all roads went through Geneva. Calvin's police caught him and Calvin had him burnt. Back to omnipotence. The latter means that God has complete and total monopolistic control over everything that happens. Hence, yes, it does mean that God is a cosmic dictator that that he is responsible for all evil events. If we have some real degree of freedom, then God cannot be omnipotent, as we have some real degree of power in our own right.

 

[JacksBratt]

By any rational or logical terms. Scientific theories don't tell us what we ought to do.

Where did these "rational and logical" terms come from? What are they based on? Logic and rational are terms based on a datum of accepted practices. Who set the datum?

What you are describing is obedience, not morality or ethics. "I'm just following orders" is what the Nazi's tried to get away with, since someone has already Godwin'ed the thread.

I don't think I am. I'm saying that the fact that it is wrong to take something that is not ours, kill another human, lie to someone, abuse someone, take the basic human rights from someone..... is based on ethics and morals. These came from somewhere.

We are all obedient to rules. Speeding, smoking in a non smoking area, not picking up after our dog... we are all obedient to these. If not we are, usually, punished in small or large ways.

When someone starts to make rules that bend or break the moral laws that society has deemed foundational, and, people follow them, you are witnessing the exact sort of thing that evolution, may not promote but it certainly does not have any leg to stand on against it.

As for creationists, we can say "that is wrong because it goes against the teachings of our creator who is superior to us"

Evolutionists can only say "that is wrong because some other evolved organism or group of organisms says so...... If that is the case then another organism or group of organisms must have the same right to oppose it. All organisms must have the same rank... unless.... some are superior to others.... then...your done.