"US 'doomed' if creationist president elected: scientists"

[LittleNipper]

Paul is also a Creationist, unfortunatly. And apparently against seperation of church and state. What a shame.

One cannot separate people (who are members of the "state") from their beliefs (for the sake of the "state"). People of conscience make superior citizens, and not the opposite is true. The Supreme Court of 1963 should have thought that out further. Obviously, the Supreme Court of 1789 had another way of thinking than their future affiliates did.

 

[LittleNipper]

Although I can't speak for anyone else, I know that I, as an evolutionist, love my family far more than natural science.

And I'm pretty sure the same goes for the majority of people in C&E.

But do you love GOD more than your family?

 

[TheOutsider]

What Christ is saying, is that a christian's love of GOD should surpass that of any other individual to the point of making that love one shares with them seem as hate. I do not see this with regard to evolutionists---they seem to love "natural" science far too much. I may be wrong. Perhaps the "christian" evolutionist is still an infant in CHRIST. But the reality is that in many cases, I see such christians never maturing in their faith.

So basically you have to reject objective reality to become a "mature Christian"? I will refer you to the bottom quote in my sig.

One cannot separate people (who are members of the "state") from their beliefs (for the sake of the "state"). People of conscience make superior citizens, and not the opposite is true.

That's not what Separation of Church and State is about. It is about not using government funds/resources to promote one religion over another. Lawmakers and other government officials are allowed to believe whatever they wantto* but they cannot not use their position to favor one religion over another.

*- unless they are an atheist in certain states

 

[LittleNipper]

So basically you have to reject objective reality to become a "mature Christian"? I will refer you to the bottom quote in my sig.

That's not what Separation of Church and State is about. It is about not using government funds/resources to promote one religion over another. Lawmakers and other government officials are allowed to believe whatever they wantto* but they cannot not use their position to favor one religion over another.

*- unless they are an atheist in certain states

Opening the day of class with a moment of silence or a reading of a few verses of scripture, or have the local minister of one of the area churches say a prayer at commencement, cost very little if anything at all. Disallowing such has been far more expensive.

 

[arunma]

What about those of us who just aren't convinced that any god(s) exist?

When I say that "atheists worship science," I hope it's implicit that I'm referring to those atheists who obey the philosophy of anti-religious groups such as American Atheists. There are many atheists out there who don't even put much trust in science. But it's important to recognize that there is a large number of atheists in America whose reverence of science resembles religious worship.

Science is not scriptural. It is man trying to reveal for himself, disregarding divine revelation. I totally disagree with you.

Well to be fair, there are a few scientists out there who trust in God and not their own ability to discern truth from general revelation (i.e. nature). But a large number of the scientists I know of are atheists, and I would tend not to trust them on anything that is unrelated to their field of expertise. Of course even in this group there are a few exceptions. Some scientists don't let their atheism get in the way of their science; my research advisor is one such example.

Wow, you'd actually vote for a crappy candidate and see the country cumble just to spite Dawkins. Wow. Thats like an anti-wasted vote or something.

I'll admit that there's a certain sarcasm to my earlier post. I do have other reasons for voting Huckabee. Most importantly he is opposed to offshore outsourcing. But I don't want to derail this thread by discussing other political issues. Huckabee's belief in creationism is an important factor to me. It is not that I am in support of creation science. In fact I've spoken against certain brands of creation science in the past (on this forum). One of the major reasons I've decided to vote Huckabee is because he will most likely infuse the government with a certain Christian influence.

(Yes, it may be unconstitutional. Good thing I don't believe in the Constitution.)

 

[TheOutsider]

Opening the day of class with a moment of silence or a reading of a few verses of scripture, or have the local minister of one of the area churches say a prayer at commencement, cost very little if anything at all. Disallowing such has been far more costly.

But that is the government promoting one religion over another. Unless you would like to allow the reading of the Koran, the Vedas, Tao te Ching, Principia Discordia, the Book of Mormons, Dianetics, the Egyptians Book of the Dead or any other of the thousands of religious texts in the world this would be a clear cut case of the US government showing favoritism to one specific religion. I really can't understand how you don't see this.

 

[Chalnoth]

If I recall correctly, I've made a more general claim than this: specifically that many atheists employ a religious treatment of the natural sciences (including evolution). As evidence I have cited the American Atheists Logo, which, as the group specifically states, has a clear basis in science. Here we see that an atheist group gives special reverence to science, which in some sense resembles religiosity.

A logo!? That's the best you've got? Companies have logos. Does that mean all companies are religious too?

 

[Naraoia]

JESUS CHRIST said, " If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brother and sisters----yes, even his own life---he cannot be my disciple."

How much less science...............?

What the...

 

[Chalnoth]

I'm not sure I've adequately conveyed my point. As you know, atheists fall into at least two categories: those who are atheists out of apathy, and those who actively oppose theism. The latter tend to give their atheism the role that is normally filled by religion. And as I've already suggested, this form of atheism portrays itself as founded in science. For this reason, I say that atheists effectively worship science.

How is this, pray tell? Unfounded assertions will get you nowhere. In what way is this like a religion? In what way do such atheists "worship science"?

 

[Naraoia]

I'm not sure I've adequately conveyed my point. As you know, atheists fall into at least two categories: those who are atheists out of apathy, and those who actively oppose theism.

I'm glad you've said "at least". I know at least one person who is neither

The latter tend to give their atheism the role that is normally filled by religion. And as I've already suggested, this form of atheism portrays itself as founded in science. For this reason, I say that atheists effectively worship science.

Heh? How does the fact that there are atheists who make science-based atheism their religion-of-sorts (I doubt they are the majority, BTW, although you certainly hear more of Dawkins than you hear of your average peaceful atheist) lead to the conclusion that "atheists effectively worship science"? It's like saying "Muslims are effectively brainwashed terrorists" based on the fact that there are some Muslims who gladly blow themselves up on a crowded bus. I think this is hasty generalisation.

Just FYI, I'm completely against Dawkins's attitude on religion

 

[NOTW]

"A day after ordained Baptist minister Mike Huckabee finished first in the opening round to choose a Republican candidate for the White House, scientists warned Americans against electing a leader who doubts evolution.​

"The logic that convinces us that evolution is a fact is the same logic we use to say smoking is hazardous to your health or we have serious energy policy issues because of global warming," University of Michigan professor Gilbert Omenn told reporters at the launch of a book on evolution by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).​

"I would worry that a president who didn't believe in the evolution arguments wouldn't believe in those other arguments either. This is a way of leading our country to ruin," added Omenn, who was part of a panel of experts at the launch of "Science, Evolution and Creationism."​

Former Arkansas governor Huckabee said in a debate in May that he did not believe in evolution."​

source​

First of all, just cause the article presented Gilbert Omenn as a "professor" does not mean what he says is valid. Scientists are in no authoritative position to say what will be the effects of having a Creationist president on an entire nation.
Second of all, Mr. Omenn, unfortunately, has fell for multiple fallacies, like ...
1] Appeal to consequences of a belief
2] Confusing cause and effect
3] Slippery slope.

I would be careful of what I read or hear in the news.

 

[MacCoyle]

"As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"
-- Treaty of Tripoli, 1797. Presented to Congress and signed by everyone in attendance.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibit the free exercise thereof"
-- First Amendment of the Constitution

 

[Chalnoth]

(I doubt they are the majority, BTW, although you certainly hear more of Dawkins than you hear of your average peaceful atheist)

How is Dawkins not a peaceful atheist?

 

[LittleNipper]

But that is the government promoting one religion over another. Unless you would like to allow the reading of the Koran, the Vedas, Tao te Ching, Principia Discordia, the Book of Mormons, Dianetics, the Egyptians Book of the Dead or any other of the thousands of religious texts in the world this would be a clear cut case of the US government showing favoritism to one specific religion. I really can't understand how you don't see this.

No, that is the consensus of the township/community. Not all communities need to start their school day accordingly. It should be the MAJORITY choice of each given town as to how they run THEIR community school. It should not be the regulation of the government. That is education without representation.

 

[LittleNipper]

"As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"
-- Treaty of Tripoli, 1797. Presented to Congress and signed by everyone in attendance.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibit the free exercise thereof"
-- First Amendment of the Constitution

It must be understood that the United States was being DIPLOMATIC towards a Moslem nation. What was not said is that our people and governmental officials are not on the whole christian in character.

You also seem to forget the part where Congress shall make no law that prohibits the free excercise of religion. The major part of the free excercise of religion is proselyizing through education.

 

[Schroeder]

Holy Moly I agree with Schroeder about something!

thats just SCARY isnt it.

 

[MacCoyle]

It must be understood that the United States was being DIPLOMATIC towards a Moslem nation. What was not said is that our people and governmental officials are not on the whole christian in character.

Being Christian has nothing to do with character.

It is Muslim.

Jefferson and Franklin were not really Christian. Many others weren't too.

 

[NOTW]

Paul is also a Creationist, unfortunatly. And apparently against seperation of church and state. What a shame.

You know why he's against "separation of church and state"?
Because it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
I would be glad to discuss this with anyone who is interested.

 

[LittleNipper]

Being Christian has nothing to do with character.

It is Muslim.

Jefferson and Franklin were not really Christian. Many others weren't too.

Character is based on one's ideals. If one's ideals are "christian" they will affect one's perceptions of one's duty. Always remember that well before the red crescent there existed the red cross. Franklin attended CHRIST's CHURCH in PHILADELPHIA. That does not make him a christian, but it did affect his ideals. Jefferson wrote his own version of the Bible. That doesn't make him correct, but it does indicate what he considered important enough to spend his time on.

 

[Skaloop]

The major part of the free excercise of religion is proselyizing through education.

Which you are free to do in church, in Sunday School, at Bible camp, and in the home. Just not in government-run schools. Outside of that, you are more than free to proselytize and educate however you see fit.