How the Democratic Party opposes Christian Principles

[flicka]

There is no political party that will capture any faith based beliefs and ideals completely. What there is is propaganda, pretty words and empty promises all calculated to play on emotion and grab the minds and votes of people who lack the capacity to think logically. People who find it much easier to simply pick a party and project all their personal values onto it while ignoring things that conflict. It involves alot less critical thinking that way. We have seen a good example of that in this thread.

 

[GettinInTune]

The word "Theory" is basically a faith based concept. In the Theory of Evolution, the theory cannot be proven, but those who use Evolution to attack Christianity, have faith that Evolution is true.

Why should the faith based concept of Evolution be given more credibility in the public school system than the faith based concept of Creationism. Creationism of the Bible cannot be proven, but Evolution cannot be proven either.

Your use of the English language is disgusting. A theory is not a faith based concept! I am playing fast and loose by quoting wikipeida, but:

In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations which is predictive, logical and testable. In principle, scientific theories are always tentative, and subject to corrections or inclusion in a yet wider theory. Commonly, a large number of more specific hypotheses may be logically bound together by just one or two theories. As a general rule for use of the term, theories tend to deal with much broader sets of universals than do hypotheses, which ordinarily deal with much more specific sets of phenomena or specific applications of a theory.

The term theoretical

The term theoretical is sometimes used to describe a result which is predicted by theory but has not yet been adequately tested by observation or experiment. It is not uncommon for a theory to produce predictions which are later confirmed or proven incorrect by experiment.

Once you have proven your God to be true using science (not a ancient book and hearsay), then I will loosen up and you can have your creationism be taught in public schools.

Until you prove God to be true we are not going to revert to 'reverse scientific method': where you somehow determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit your conclusion, and then hail your findings as the only possible conclusion.

 

[Flynmonkie]

Why does it always come down to this: opponents of evolutionary theory always display a pitiful lack of knowledge about (a) science in general and (b) evolutionary theory in particular?

From the post above, it's clear that clirus is in no way even remotely qualified to have any sort of opinion on the issue.

I said that at the beginning of this thread. He pays no mind..

I still have no idea what to do with people like this. You tell them an egg is white, they can see it is white but insist that it is not, obviously not even looking to see if it is not.

It is like catching someone red handed in a lie, so they continue to insist that the lie is the truth?? Do they think they will drive the other person to madness, and control others by literal confusion? Well, it works, I have absolutely no idea what to do with people that wish to ignore fact and chase an imaginary tail? I just leave them in a corner somewhere. They are harmless when preoccupied I guess?

 

[Nathan Poe]

MassResistance

The following Email describes a situation in Massachusetts that should bring Christians to their knees, and scare every American. Massachusetts is being used to develop a homosexual legalization program that will be used to force homosexuality on all of America through the public school system.

Maybe you haven't heard, clirus, but homosexuality is already legal. Didn't you get the memo?

The Bible clearly call homosexuality evil and AIDS confirms that homosexuality leads to disease, death and destruction.

Seeing as how AIDS affects heterosexuals as well, I'd say the culprit is sex itself.

If Christians allow the homosexuals in Massachusetts to win the Cultural War, I believe America will be judged by God.

Bring Him on, clirus. I'm still here, still living the Atheist Lifestyle -- your God hasn't smote me yet; what will your government do?

 

[clirus]

GettinInTune quote

Once you have proven your God to be true using science (not a ancient book and hearsay), then I will loosen up and you can have your creationism be taught in public schools.

Until you prove God to be true we are not going to revert to 'reverse scientific method': where you somehow determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit your conclusion, and then hail your findings as the only possible conclusion.

Response

Once you have proven Evolution to be true using science, then I will loosen up and you can have your Evolution be taught in public schools.

Until you prove Evolution to be true we are not going to revert to 'reverse scientific method': where you somehow determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit your conclusion, and then hail your findings as the only possible conclusion.

I do not have to prove God, you have to prove Evolution. Christians need to make Atheists prove what they say. Christianity is faith based, but a lot of science and medicine is faith based. If there are alternate theories, all the theoretics need to be taught. Atheists cannot defend their position, so they try to prevent Christians from challenging them.

To be anything more than a faith based theory, the people that support Evolution need to answer the following questions.

1) Has there ever been any proof that any non living matter has ever become living?

2) Has there ever been any proof that any living species has evolved to another species?

3) How long should we wait for the faith based theory of evolution to be proven?

4) Isn't it true that the only thing Darwin proved was that things adapt to different situations and that the whole subject of evolution was an incorrect extrapolation of adaptation?

5) Couldn't biology and adaptation be taught in schools without ever discussing evolution?

6) Isn't the theory of evolution being forced on the children of America to discredit the Bible and religion?

7) Isn't the theory of evolution a religious construct of the Atheistic Religion and that presenting it to children in a public school science class thus violates the establishment clause of the first Amendment to the U. S. Constitution.

Either both Creationism and Evolution should be taught in public schools or neither should be taught.

 

[clirus]

flicka quote

There is no political party that will capture any faith based beliefs and ideals completely. What there is is propaganda, pretty words and empty promises all calculated to play on emotion and grab the minds and votes of people who lack the capacity to think logically. People who find it much easier to simply pick a party and project all their personal values onto it while ignoring things that conflict. It involves alot less critical thinking that way. We have seen a good example of that in this thread.

Response

Republicans have yet to prove to me that they really support Christian principles, but democrats have proven they do "not" support Christian Principles.

 

[kiwimac]

1) Has there ever been any proof that any non living matter has ever become living?

This is abiogenesis and has nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution.

As for your other questions they have been answered many times both on this board and on others. Perhaps a little basic research is in order?

 

[clirus]

Flynmonkie quote

I said that at the beginning of this thread. He pays no mind..

I still have no idea what to do with people like this. You tell them an egg is white, they can see it is white but insist that it is not, obviously not even looking to see if it is not.

It is like catching someone red handed in a lie, so they continue to insist that the lie is the truth?? Do they think they will drive the other person to madness, and control others by literal confusion? Well, it works, I have absolutely no idea what to do with people that wish to ignore fact and chase an imaginary tail? I just leave them in a corner somewhere. They are harmless when preoccupied I guess?

Response

One of us does have a closed mind.

There are brown eggs.

Something can be called a lie, but sometimes you don't know all the information.

I do not expect you to believe me, but rather to check what I say with the Bible.

 

[clirus]

Nathan Poe quote

Bring Him on, clirus. I'm still here, still living the Atheist Lifestyle -- your God hasn't smote me yet; what will your government do?

Response

Psalms 103:8 states, "The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger and plenteous in mercy."

Who knows, you could be the next Paul.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

2) Has there ever been any proof that any living species has evolved to another species?

would you like a list of observed speciation events?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Who knows, you could be the next Paul.

Me, an avatar of the Atheist Lifestyle? It'd be a noble pursuit, and I must confess, the notion of it pleases me, if for no other reason than to watch the fundies froth at the mouth.

Perhaps I could get my own TV show?

I might as well try, since neither God nor government has tried to stop me. What was it you were preaching again, clirus?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Once you have proven Evolution to be true using science, then I will loosen up and you can have your Evolution be taught in public schools.

Aren't you forgetting that nobody needs your permission to teach evolution as established science?

Until you prove Evolution to be true we are not going to revert to 'reverse scientific method': where you somehow determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit your conclusion, and then hail your findings as the only possible conclusion.

Well, there goes the last shreds creationism down the toilet. You can have the honor of the final flush.

I do not have to prove God, you have to prove Evolution.

What proof would you find satisfying?

Christians need to make Atheists prove what they say. Christianity is faith based, but a lot of science and medicine is faith based.

The difference being, science and medicine works. Bit of a differential there.

If there are alternate theories, all the theoretics need to be taught.

So, welcome flat Earth, Geocentricism, and invisible pixies holding everything down.

Atheists cannot defend their position, so they try to prevent Christians from challenging them.

When have "Christians" put up a challenge that passed the laugh test?

To be anything more than a faith based theory, the people that support Evolution need to answer the following questions.

1) Has there ever been any proof that any non living matter has ever become living?

Evolution does not address this question. You might as well ask an auto mechanic.

2) Has there ever been any proof that any living species has evolved to another species?

Does "we've seen it happen, both in the wild and in the lab" count as proof?

3) How long should we wait for the faith based theory of evolution to be proven?

If these are your criteria, it's already been proven, and you missed it -- again.

4) Isn't it true that the only thing Darwin proved was that things adapt to different situations and that the whole subject of evolution was an incorrect extrapolation of adaptation?

Not true. "Adaptation" is the creationist dodge to try to obfuscate evolution.

5) Couldn't biology and adaptation be taught in schools without ever discussing evolution?

Couldn't mathematics be taught in schools without ever discussing the addition sign?

Answer: Possibly, but why would you want to?

6) Isn't the theory of evolution being forced on the children of America to discredit the Bible and religion?

No. This is a rumor born of fundamentalist paranoia.

7) Isn't the theory of evolution a religious construct of the Atheistic Religion and that presenting it to children in a public school science class thus violates the establishment clause of the first Amendment to the U. S. Constitution.

See #6.

Either both Creationism and Evolution should be taught in public schools or neither should be taught.

Evolution has facts, predictions, and direct observations of nature supporting it. So far, Creationism has all but 3 of these things.

If you can provide some evidence for creationism that does not also support a competing "everything was created out of strawberry custard by Iggy the Magic Elf"
theory, let us know.

 

[clirus]

House of Cards

There is an old saying, "The blackest lies is 10% pure truth."

When discussing issues with Atheists I find they want Christians to prove Christian Principles, but are unwilling to prove Atheistic Principles.

Atheists do not want to try to prove the Atheistic Principles, because they know the Atheistic Principles are faith based the same as Christian Principles.

Atheists expect Christians to accept what they say as truth, and if that does not occur, they call the Christians stupid.

Atheistic Principles are like a house of cards, you pull one out and the whole thing falls down.

Atheists know issues like welfare, health care, stem cell research, evolution, etc. are just faith based promises/theories that are not based on proof.

The thing I like about the Bible is that it is a Basic Instruction Book for Living Everyday. It discusses the past, the present and the future. Some of the Bible is faith based, but nowhere is there a more complete presentation of humans nature, events and understanding.

Atheists pick something here and pick something there, but the pieces do no fit together.

I have no problem with science, so long as it is not used to attack the Bible. The place where science is used to attack the Bible, is where Christians should state, "prove it".

An example is evolution. Science has shown there is adaptation. Atheists took the information science had produced and extrapolated to the concept that living matter came for non living matter, which cannot be proven and is an attack on the Bible.

 

[Nathan Poe]

clirus, do you read the posts to you, or just cut-and-paste the same canned responses?

Because honestly, if you can't even respond to my own points, then you're just confirming my worst suspicions about fundamentalism.

 

[mpok1519]

Also, concerning welfare; The Bible teaches that prosperity is a good thing as long as one's wealth accumulated goes towards good causes, such as family, and charity, and it is made in an ethical, moral and honorable fashion. Jesus said that in order to truley become one of his disciples one must sell everything one owns and give it to someone who is poor. I think thats a great idea, although i feel guilty that I have so little to give in the way of wealth.

Welfare is our regulated way of giving to the poor. One should be slow to criticise the small piece of the budget pie that helps those in need; it is a relatively small piece of the pie compared to the outstanding price of bullets and laser-powered-technologies, stuff our republican administration has been keenly interested in.

 

[Sphere]

Clirus is a scientifically inept ignoramus. I addressed every one of his misconceived perceptions regarding evolution 2 pages ago, yet he just reposted his copy & pasted list of PRATTS. He's not reading anyones posts. Stumbling in here as a Warrior of Christ to enlighten all us heathens and heretics, about the Truth®. While similtanously raping science with his sheer ignorance. Nathan Poe, he is just a typical run-of-the-mill fundie.

 

[tulc]

Who knows, you could be the next Paul.

...why would we need another Paul?
tulc(thinks the first one was just fine)

 

[Nathan Poe]

...why would we need another Paul?
tulc(thinks the first one was just fine)

Agreed -- although "Saint Poe" does have a nice ring to it.

 

[GettinInTune]

Clirius, I see that you continue to ignore me. Why is this?

House of Cards

There is an old saying, "The blackest lies is 10% pure truth."

This is gibberish

When discussing issues with Atheists I find they want Christians to prove Christian Principles, but are unwilling to prove Atheistic Principles.

Atheists do not want to try to prove the Atheistic Principles, because they know the Atheistic Principles are faith based the same as Christian Principles.

What are atheist principles? Atheists do not have universal principles like Roman Catholicism. Your attempt to categorize atheistic principles is going to die in vain. Atheism is just a historically bigoted word that looks at agnostics, anti theist, non-theist, and Buddhists as the same. There are really two definitions of atheism. First, the lack of belief in a god and second the belief that there is no god.

I know it is hard to understand, but atheist do not have universal principles.

Atheists expect Christians to accept what they say as truth, and if that does not occur, they call the Christians stupid.

Not all Christians are stupid. I live among and know many smart Christians, but I do not believe in their God. As a non-theist, it is thoroughly upsetting to to witness creationists to try and fabricate creationism into a science when it is clearly not.

Stop wasting public resources!

Atheistic Principles are like a house of cards, you pull one out and the whole thing falls down.

Atheists know issues like welfare, health care, stem cell research, evolution, etc. are just faith based promises/theories that are not based on proof.

Again please define atheist principles.... you can't. Issues like welfare, health care, stem cell research, and evolution deserve our utmost attention and should not be polluted by various and inane interpretations of the Bible.

The thing I like about the Bible is that it is a Basic Instruction Book for Living Everyday. It discusses the past, the present and the future. Some of the Bible is faith based, but nowhere is there a more complete presentation of humans nature, events and understanding.

Understood in the proper light, the Bible can and does offer some good principles. It also contain a plethora of supernaturalism that still plagues humanity to the present day.

Atheists pick something here and pick something there, but the pieces do no fit together.

Your definition of atheism is both sloppy and insulting. Many atheist don't revert to miracles and supernaturalism. If we do not know something we say, "I don't know, but lets figure it out." Atheism is challenging in the respect that we can not conveniently resort to miracles, supernaturalism, and placing God into the gaps of unknown knowledge.

I have no problem with science, so long as it is not used to attack the Bible. The place where science is used to attack the Bible, is where Christians should state, "prove it".

Science should not be guided by theology. Christianity and the Bible is filled with bold claims that cannot even be remotely proven.

An example is evolution. Science has shown there is adaptation. Atheists took the information science had produced and extrapolated to the concept that living matter came for non living matter, which cannot be proven and is an attack on the Bible.

Again, your use of the English language is frightening. Scientists, whether they are atheist or not, are using cutting theories and speculation based on reason to deduce various theories of evolution and the origin of life.

As you previously stated, the Bible has conveniently told you the future. Therefore, is using science to attempt and explain the origin of life useless?

The origin of life has great metaphysical implications. As an atheist and someone who "does not now, but wants to find out" the Bible needs to be challenge.

 

[ContentInHim]

Also, concerning welfare; The Bible teaches that prosperity is a good thing as long as one's wealth accumulated goes towards good causes, such as family, and charity, and it is made in an ethical, moral and honorable fashion. Jesus said that in order to truley become one of his disciples one must sell everything one owns and give it to someone who is poor. I think thats a great idea, although i feel guilty that I have so little to give in the way of wealth.

Welfare is our regulated way of giving to the poor. One should be slow to criticise the small piece of the budget pie that helps those in need; it is a relatively small piece of the pie compared to the outstanding price of bullets and laser-powered-technologies, stuff our republican administration has been keenly interested in.

Actually, all welfare programs including Social Security comprises over 50% of the Federal budget.