How the Democratic Party opposes Christian Principles

[The Bellman]

I believe that if people are presented an honest unbiased presentation of the Atheistic Lifestyle and the Christian Lifestyle, they would choose the Christian Lifestyle and the Atheistic Lifestyle would fade back into the closet.

There is no 'atheistic lifestyle'; it's entirely a figment of your imagination. The things you complain about are being done overwhelmingly by Christians.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

The Bellman quote

Question: If it were conclusively established tomorrow that a deity miraculously imbued the first cells with life, how much of evolutionary theory would change? Answer: zero.

Response

If it were conclusively established tomorrow that a deity miraculously imbued the first cells with life, Atheists would be lined up trying to get to a preacher to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Evolution would not be a subject worth discussing except that evolution directly attacks the Bible concerning the origin of life. The Bible states God breathed life into man and evolution states man came about when non living matter became living matter.

If Atheists cannot prove that non living matter can become living matter, then evolution is incorrect and the only thing left is adaptation of living things to their surroundings. If Atheists cannot prove that non living matter can become living matter, then evolution is incorrect and the word evolution should be replaced by the more accurate word adaptation.

The word adaptation is more correct and less offensive to Christians.

evolution doesn't attempt to deal with the origins of life, I'm at a loss as to why you insist evolution is somehow anti-Christian...

I'm a Christian, and I understand evolutionary theory... theres no conflict...

 

[clirus]

mpok1519 quote

but God also gives us the right of choice; our free will and ability to be loved while having flaws is one of the things that makes us so beautiful.

Response

If God loved flaws (sin), there would have been no need for Jesus Christ to die on the cross for sin, and there would be no need for hell.

Christians are told to love the sinner, but not the sin. I believe God loves the sinner, but not the sin (flaws).

There is nothing beautiful about extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle.

Let someone write a testimony of an abortion, or dying of AIDS, or of a divorce caused by pornography, or children neglected because of feminism, then tell me how beautiful flaws (sin) are.

God has a better plan, and that is the Christian Lifestyle that begins by accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

I believe that if people are presented an honest unbiased presentation of the Atheistic Lifestyle and the Christian Lifestyle, they would choose the Christian Lifestyle and the Atheistic Lifestyle would fade back into the closet.

 

[The Bellman]

If it were conclusively established tomorrow that a deity miraculously imbued the first cells with life, Atheists would be lined up trying to get to a preacher to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

That may be true; it has nothing to do with evolutionary theory.

Evolution would not be a subject worth discussing except that evolution directly attacks the Bible concerning the origin of life.

Nonsense. Evolution is worth discussing because it is the best scientific theory about the development of species.

The Bible states God breathed life into man and evolution states man came about when non living matter became living matter.

Evolution does not state this; you have been repeatedly told this. You are a liar.

If Atheists cannot prove that non living matter can become living matter, then evolution is incorrect and the only thing left is adaptation of living things to their surroundings. If Atheists cannot prove that non living matter can become living matter, then evolution is incorrect and the word evolution should be replaced by the more accurate word adaptation.

You are a liar. Evolution has nothing to do with non-living matter becoming living matter.

The word adaptation is more correct and less offensive to Christians.

No, it's not more correct and it's less offensive to some Christians who, like you, are ignorant about science in general and evolutionary theory in particular.

 

[ContentInHim]

our defense budget is somewhere near 80 percent.

80+50=%130=wrong.

Our social welfare is being cut, cut, cut more and more all the time and it is nowhere near half of our budget.

If our defense budget is near 80, how could welfare be close to fifty? Oh yeah, its not!

I don't know where you get your info but, I am politely saying thats wrong.

=)

Here is some info and a pie chart for you to prove my point. Please post your evidence that the military portion of the US Federal budget is 80%. Thanks!

http://www.kowaldesign.com/budget/percentages.html

Oops - it appears that I was too high - but the defense budget is clearly not 80%.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Only to those who know that their religion doesn't allow them to answer that question.

To which religion are you referring? I know lots of religions that have taboo topics, but few irrelevent ones.

Feel free to clarify, if you can.

 

[Nathan Poe]

No, as far as evolution goes, where life came from is completely irrelevant. That is the case whether you have a belief on whether that life came from (be that belief religious or not) or not.

Which would explain the vast numbers of Christian evolutionists and profesisonal scientists with Christian beliefs -- two things many fundies claim don't exist.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Who is the one with hate in their heart?

I state tolerance and you state smite.

Since when did you become pro-evil?

Evil can be tolerated, except where evil represents a threat to an individual or the society (as determined by congress, the authorized representatives of the people).

And Congress has spoken.

I believe that if people are presented an honest unbiased presentation of the Atheistic Lifestyle and the Christian Lifestyle, they would choose the Christian Lifestyle and the Atheistic Lifestyle would fade back into the closet.

Your belief has been proven wrong time and again -- I'm still here, after all.

 

[Nathan Poe]

If it were conclusively established tomorrow that a deity miraculously imbued the first cells with life, Atheists would be lined up trying to get to a preacher to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Not really -- Personally, I'd think the deity was Odin.

Evolution would not be a subject worth discussing except that evolution directly attacks the Bible concerning the origin of life. The Bible states God breathed life into man and evolution states man came about when non living matter became living matter.

Except that evolution doesn't state that -- abiogenesis does.

I repeat my invitation for you to come over to the Creation/Evolution forum -- preferably before you post another error.

If Atheists cannot prove that non living matter can become living matter, then evolution is incorrect and the only thing left is adaptation of living things to their surroundings.

Wrong.

If Atheists cannot prove that non living matter can become living matter, then evolution is incorrect and the word evolution should be replaced by the more accurate word adaptation.

Wrong again.

Creation/Evolution is waiting...

The word adaptation is more correct and less offensive to Christians.

Reality doesn't bend itself into pretzels in the name of political correctness.

 

[Nathan Poe]

If God loved flaws (sin), there would have been no need for Jesus Christ to die on the cross for sin, and there would be no need for hell.

There is nothing beautiful about extreme environmentalism, socialism, feminism, pornography, abortion, homosexuality and the Atheistic Lifestyle.

And yet, free will -- the ability to choose these things or reject them -- is the most beautiful thing of all.

Let someone write a testimony of an abortion, or dying of AIDS, or of a divorce caused by pornography, or children neglected because of feminism, then tell me how beautiful flaws (sin) are.

Let someone who's had their appendix removed, who has a gay relative in their family, who likes the occasional "blue" movie, or the woman who can hold a job and raise a child because her born-again husband left her for some cutie he met at a church picnic tell you how beautiful life is.

You could probably stand to hear it.

God has a better plan, and that is the Christian Lifestyle that begins by accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Which you have completely failed to promote as anything other than puritanical facism.

We have free will, and we have made our choices. You've failed, clirus -- America is still and shall remian on the "Atheistic Lifestyle."

What will you do now?

 

[Sphere]

He'll continue to spread lies.

 

[GettinInTune]

I apologiz Clirius. Somehow I missed this response. I thought you were giving me the cold shoulder

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.

Science is not going to by guided by theology. Granted some scientists can separate out their theology with respect to science, but we are not going to have tax payers' dollars supporting a pseudo-science.

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

In science we do not began on a wild and speculative claim based on hearsay and an ancient book. If you think that God created life, then you have that right. Let science do its job in explaining the material world. God will to explain the spiritual/supernatural world.

Christians need to make Atheists prove what they say.

Will you stop interchanging the word atheist with scientist. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods.

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.

They theory of gravity is just a theory. Granted Einstein's theory of gravity super-seeded Newton's theory of gravity, but the Newtonian theory of gravity works pretty darn well within our solar system. Pretty cool that this faith based scientific theory plants you firmly on the ground.

At singularities and black holes, Einstein's theory of gravity may not hold since gravity approaches infinity at a finite time. Pretty neat, huh? What does the Bible say about the theory of gravity. I am open to theological theories on gravity.

Good thing we have science to help explain the material workings of the world. Theology belongs in the spiritual plane.

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?

I do admit that the origins of life models and evolution are not my specialties, but I am learning with time permitting. I was reading up on the PAH world hypothesis. The PAH world hypothesis is a biological hypothesis that proposes that PAHs are a means for a pre-RNA World basis for the origin of life. To quote a source:

[FONT=&quot]While organic compounds have been discovered in meteorites that have landed on Earth, this is the first direct evidence for the presence of complex, important biogenic compounds in space. So far evidence suggests that PANHs are formed in the winds of dying stars and spread all over interstellar space.

"This stuff contains the building blocks of life, and now we can say they're abundant in space," Hudgins said. "And wherever there's a planet out there, we know that these things are going to be raining down on it. It did here and it does elsewhere...."

....But swap a carbon atom with a nitrogen and a PAH becomes a PANH, a class of molecules critical to humans. Without nitrogen, it would be impossible to build amino acids, proteins, DNA, RNA, hemoglobin, and many other important molecules.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT] Source: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/051018_science_tuesday.html

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

Again, I need to brush up on my evolution. Not my strong point, so hopefully someone else can step in if they have not done so already. I am short on time for the moment. Even if this was the case, then we go back and refine and amend scientific theories. The refinement and amendment stages are part of the scientific method and process. Creationism does not win by default.

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

We waited 1500 years for the Earth-centered model to be replaced by the sun-centered model. This is an extreme example how slowly paradigm shifts can occur. Sometimes scientific discoveries happen quickly and other times slowly.

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?

Let me get back to you on this. Or someone else can fill in.

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

It is possible. Just like Algebra could be taught only using positive numbers. American History could be taught without discussing the American Revolution. Why would we do that?

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

lol..no it is not being forced. The theory of evolution just makes certain theists revise the role of God. Why are you painting it that science is some sort of atheist propaganda? I don't care that you believe in your God, but it is bothersome when you try get your spiritual entity into the realms of science and the public school system. It is an infringement on my rights.

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.

No. Atheism is not a religion. Granted, I feel much more enlighten once I arrived at my atheism, but it is not a religion. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over non-religion.

Stop confusing scientist for atheist. Some scientists are atheist, deist, Christian, Muslim, etc.....

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

Creationism does not fit into the scientific method. It is not science.

 

[clirus]

EnemyPartyII quote

I'm a Christian, and I understand evolutionary theory... theres no conflict...

Response

Then please discuss the proof that non living matter became living matter.

 

[clirus]

Nathan Poe quote

We have free will, and we have made our choices. You've failed, clirus -- America is still and shall remian on the "Atheistic Lifestyle."

What will you do now?

Response

As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.

I will try to get Christians to get into politics, I will continue to vote Republican, and I will try to get others to vote for Christian Republicans by exposing the evil that the democratic party represents and goring the sacred cows of the Atheists.

 

[clirus]

GettinInTune quote

lol..no it is not being forced. The theory of evolution just makes certain theists revise the role of God. Why are you painting it that science is some sort of atheist propaganda? I don't care that you believe in your God, but it is bothersome when you try get your spiritual entity into the realms of science and the public school system. It is an infringement on my rights.

Response

Science yields reproducible facts. From facts, faith based theories can be produced. Atheists have used reproducible facts to create a theory of evolution that has a fatal flaw because no one can show that non living matter has become living matter.

Science is not the problem. The problem is Atheists that used the facts of science to attack the Bible.

I presented a long discussion on how the public school system is being used to force Atheism (homosexuality) on children in Massachusetts.

The teaching of Atheistic Principles and the government support of the Atheistic Religion is an infringement on my rights.

Either Creationism and evolution should both be taught in public schools, or neither should be taught, because both are faith based concepts.

 

[The Bellman]

Then please discuss the proof that non living matter became living matter.

Evolutionary theory is not concerned with how non-living matter became living matter. Stop spreading this lie.

...the evil that the democratic party represents

The evil is in people like you who lie and spread their paranoid delusions.

Atheists have used reproducible facts to create a theory of evolution that has a fatal flaw because no one can show that non living matter has become living matter.

Evolutionary theory is not concerned with how non-living matter became living matter. Stop spreading this lie.

Science is not the problem.

Correct. The problem is (a) the ignorant and (b) liars like you.

The teaching of Atheistic Principles and the government support of the Atheistic Religion is an infringement on my rights.

There are no 'atheistic principles'; there is no 'atheistic religion'.

Either Creationism and evolution should both be taught in public schools, or neither should be taught, because both are faith based concepts.

Evolution is a scientific theory and should be taught; creationism is a religious belief and should not be taught.

 

[kiwimac]

EnemyPartyII quote

I'm a Christian, and I understand evolutionary theory... theres no conflict...

Response

Then please discuss the proof that non living matter became living matter.

Evolution does NOT deal with this. This is called abiogenesis. Evolution deals with the changes in living things over time.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Then please discuss the proof that non living matter became living matter.

That's not evolution, clirus. EnemyPartyII understands evolutionary theory -- you still do not.

 

[Nathan Poe]

As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.

I will try to get Christians to get into politics, I will continue to vote Republican, and I will try to get others to vote for Christian Republicans by exposing the evil that the democratic party represents and goring the sacred cows of the Atheists.

And you'll continue to fail, as both Christians and Atheists choose freedom over theocracy.

Incidentally, which "sacred cows" have you gored?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Science yields reproducible facts. From facts, faith based theories can be produced. Atheists have used reproducible facts to create a theory of evolution that has a fatal flaw because no one can show that non living matter has become living matter.

Good thing that has nothing to do with evolution, hmmm?

Clirus, once more, please go to the Creation/Evolution forum -- they'd love to show you your mistakes.

Science is not the problem. The problem is Atheists that used the facts of science to attack the Bible.

Actually, the problem is that a small but loud minority of Christians are mistaking the Bible for science -- and insist that everyone else do likewise.

I presented a long discussion on how the public school system is being used to force Atheism (homosexuality) on children in Massachusetts.

And that discussion was refuted, as all your others commonly are.

The teaching of Atheistic Principles and the government support of the Atheistic Religion is an infringement on my rights.

How have your rights been infringed upon, clirus?

Either Creationism and evolution should both be taught in public schools, or neither should be taught, because both are faith based concepts.

Either geocentricism and heliocentricism should both be taught in public schools, or neither should be taught, because both are faith based concepts.

Seriously, clirus -- just go to any science forum. I say this as a friend: You're embarassing yourself.