walkingxshadow said:
darwin himself never tried to refute the bible or christianity. he got disenchanted with organized church because of their closed minded ideals. and while its all well and good to say that most of the educated world accepts christianity and evolution as compatable. its a completely different thing to actually express your beliefs to a church group and see the looks of horror cross the faces. i live in the bible belt and my beliefs are seen as heretical.
Yep. My in-laws are in the bible belt. It's... Interesting.
Darwin observed that animals adapt to their surroundings, but then Atheists extrapolated back to non living matter becoming living matter which is refutation of the Bible which states God created man.
Er... No. That's something else, and it doesn't have anything to do with atheism. We've shown you that before, so stop lying.
The problem is that the Atheists cannot prove that non living matter became living matter so the whole subject stays the "Theory of Evolution".
That isn't even the theory of evolution, Clirus. It's abiogenesis. Which is something else, per now.
Since the Theory of Evolution cannot be proved nor can Creationism, either both should be taught in pubic schools or neither.
Nonsense. ToE isn't what you make it out to be, Clirus. It's something else entirely. Creationism however is thoroughly falsified and has no place in any school.
It is wrong for the government to discriminate against Christians in this matter of the Theory of Evolution, by restricting the teaching of Creationism in public schools.
The government doesn't Clirus. No more than it discriminates against flat worlders or geocentrists. Which is to say: Not at all!
If a banker is wanting to hire someone for some economics related work and an applicant is someone who thinks pi=3 and is a strict adherer to a perception that the only value is cattle, and that numbers are meaningless. Apart from pi. Which he thinks is 3.
Should said banker hire this person? No of course not. He's utterly incompetent and as wrong as can be. The same way it's not really the banker discriminating against this hypothetical person, the government doesn't discriminate against creationists. Your positions is simply not right, and anyone in his or her right mind with a decent level of understanding will see this. So of course you won't get your views aired as kosher curriculum. It isn't. It's that simple.
sdmsanjose quote
Zongerfield, you seem to have your mind made up on a lot of things without considering the facts.
Response
sdmsanjose, you seem to have your mind made up on a lot of things without considering the facts.
I am pleased to see people loving their country, but does that make their opinions on the issues more correct?
I think America is the greatest nation in existence because of opportunity, but then I see America accepting Atheism. I want to see the spread of Atheism stopped, and the opportunity return.
If you do Clirus, stop promoting it so thoroughly with your hatred. You say you love America because of those things. Shouldn't you love other countries which are better at those things even more then?
sdmsanjose quote
The giving to the sick and hungry are specifically taught by Christ in Matthew 25 and Luke 10.
Response
I am not sure what verses you are referring to in Matthew and Luke, but the entire New Testament deals with brothers in Christ, thus Christian charity means giving to the sick and hungry that are fellow Christians.
Nonsense. Read it, will you? Jesus helped non-Jews all the time. Which is one of the core parts of the samaritan parable. Also it's what we see when Jesus meets the woman at the well, tax collectors, prostitutes, soldiers in an occupying force and so on.
Not believers necessarily, but people in need of help.
Socialism is evil because it feeds both the Christian and the Atheist. The Christian does not need Socialism because they have fellow Christians and the Atheists do not deserve anything.
Jesus died for them. Why do you want to kill them? How is that not anti-christian in the sense that it goes directly againt Jesus' teachings?
I believe feeding sick and hungry Atheists is evil.
I believe that statement shows a great evil indeed. Christianity got a serious boost during plague times some places because Christians stayed and helped whoever needed it. If they had thought as you do, Christianity might not be around.
How does a person starve to death when they are being given fish?
If a person is starving. Do you let him starve, or do you help him with food and care until he is ready to provide for himself? Which comes first, Clirus? Helping a man get the ability to learn and work, or learning and working?
Surely you agree that a person on his or her death bed can hardly be required to work? And if said person is on their death bed because of some trivial matter like hunger or thirst, why do you insist upon letting him or her die as opposed to helping them until they are past danger?
Is is better to put out fires or to teach fire prevention?
If there IS a fire you should probably put it out and then teach fire prevention.
I believe the Bible teaches people to avoid the sin that leads to disease, death destruction and poverty, thus Christians do not need Socialism.
Christianity is socialism Clirus. Or supposed to be anyway. Well, not really. But in the sense that it is about caring for one another, and sharing what we have it is.
A great evil of Socialism is that it prevents a person from examining them self and removing the evil that is producing the problems they are having.
I do not see how this is so.
Yes... creating jobs. Like the $35,000 a year job they created for my father, so he could create a product that would bring the parent company billions of dollars, to that they could lay him off and he could die in poverty.
The rich corporations don't care about creating jobs. They care about exploiting people.
They would still be sending children to work in coal mines, if they could, and it is only because of regulation that they can't. Regulations are necessary. More regulations are necessary.
Further, the rich corporations should have their incomes taxed according to how much they make... no sweetheart deals that allow a company that made billions of dollars in profit to pay no taxes while the company's employee who makes $50,000 pays nearly a third of what he makes.
The corporations are robbing us blind, and the rich at the top of it are taking the milk of our hard earned labor, and not living up to their responsibility to society.
Jesus had a few things to say about the rich in the Bible.
Charlie
I think it's not so much that they actively care about exploiting people, I think it's that their sense of ethics is anti-kantian, i.e. that they use human beings as tools to be used and discarded. So, I think it might actually be worse than what you say. In a way anyway. I don't think they actually have a goal to exploit people. I think their goal is making money and that people simply become means to an end in that hunt. No more special than a bolt or a wrench. Maybe less so. Sort of like the dirt you walk on to get from A to B. You don't give it a second thought, you just walk or run or crawl or whatever across it. Whatever gets trampled underfoot is of no concern to them any more than it is to us when we step on a part of a sidewalk or a path of some kind.
