And the games continue without any sign of a future let-down:
In the recent skirmishes over evolution, advocates who have pushed to dilute its teaching have regularly pointed to a petition signed by 514 scientists and engineers.
The petition, they say, is proof that scientific doubt over evolution persists. But random interviews with 20 people who signed the petition and a review of the public statements of more than a dozen others suggest that many are evangelical Christians, whose doubts about evolution grew out of their religious beliefs. And even the petition’s sponsor, the Discovery Institute in Seattle, says that only a quarter of the signers are biologists, whose field is most directly concerned with evolution. The other signers include 76 chemists, 75 engineers, 63 physicists and 24 professors of medicine.
Ahhh. The good old Discovery Institute.
Scott R. Fulton, a professor of mathematics and computer science at Clarkson University in Potsdam, N.Y., who signed the petition, said that the argument for intelligent design was “very interesting and promising.”
He said he thought his religious belief was “not particularly relevant” in how he judged intelligent design. “It probably influences in the sense in that it makes me very interested in the questions,” he said. “When I see scientific evidence that points to God, I find that encouraging.”
Roger J. Lien, a professor of poultry science at Auburn, said he received a copy of the petition from Christian friends.
“I stuck my name on it,” he said. “Basically, it states what I believe.”
Dr. Lien said that he grew up in California in a family that was not deeply religious and that he accepted evolution through much of his scientific career. He said he became a Christian about a decade ago, six years after he joined the Auburn faculty.
“The world is broken, and we humans and our science can’t fix it,” Dr. Lien said. “I was brought to Jesus Christ and God and creationism and believing in the Bible.”
He also said he thought that evolution was “inconsistent with what the Bible says.”
So there you have it. In the interest of science, if you will. And just for a taste of the type of consistency we get from these Discovery Institute frauds, check out these competing quotes:
“Early on, the critics said there was nobody who disbelieved Darwin’s theory except for rubes in the woods,” said Bruce Chapman, president of the institute. “How many does it take to be a noticeable minority — 10, 50, 100, 500?”
Mr. Chapman said the petition showed “there is a minority of scientists who disagree with Darwin’s theory, and it is not just a handful.”
And this:
Opposing petitions have sprung up. The National Center for Science Education, which has battled efforts to dilute the teaching of evolution, has sponsored a pro-evolution petition signed by 700 scientists named Steve, in honor of Stephen Jay Gould, the Harvard paleontologist who died in 2002.
The petition affirms that evolution is “a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences.”
Mr. Chapman of that institute said the opposing petitions were beside the point. “We never claimed we’re in a fight for numbers,” he said.
The only reason to take these liars seriously is because of the damage they can cause to society as a whole.
BTW- These folks sure are waging a lot of simultaneous battles in this culture war- the war on gay, the war on abortion, the war on sicence and evil ‘Darwinists.’ If they win these battles, maybe they can go fight some new ones- like putting out fatwahs on cartoonists who draw pictures of Jesus. Or stoning women who don’t respect their husband.
Here is to hoping they keep losing their chosen battles.
Steve
I am, naturally, a big supporter of Project Steve.
Zifnab
Haha. That is truely awesome. I wonder how many scientists named Steve there actually are.
Probably the best quote I’ve seen on anti-Darwinism in a while. Can they ever not lie?
Don Surber
John: “BTW- These folks sure are waging a lot of simultaneous battles in this culture war- the war on gay, the war on abortion, the war on sicence and evil ‘Darwinists.’ If they win these battles, maybe they can go fight some new ones- like putting out fatwahs on cartoonists who draw pictures of Jesus. Or stoning women who don’t respect their husband.”
The pattern, John: Gay — Abortion — Evolution
In each case they are trying to tell others how to behave or believe
It is the shove-it-down-their-throats mentality that I most dislike
Don Surber
Off topic but: “And even the petition’s sponsor, the Discovery Institute in Seattle, says that only a quarter of the signers are biologists, whose field is most directly concerned with evolution. The other signers include 76 chemists, 75 engineers, 63 physicists and 24 professors of medicine.”
That is similar to these arguments that X number of scientists agree that global warming is true. Even then, since when is science a popularity contest?
dorkafork
A “professor of poultry science”?
Jorge
My 3 year old likes to memorize passages out of the kid Bible I read to him at night. I sort of discovered this by accident when he recited the entire story of Cain and Abel back to me (We’d read it every night for over a week.) Currently, he is memorizing the story about the fall of Adam and Eve.
Now, the story of Adam and Eve that he is learning does not use the language of the New King James version. The story is the same but it is written in language that a child can understand. It is simpler, lacking in detail and much more direct.
I wish my fellow believers in the inerrant truth of the Bible would come to see the lesson that is so apparent to me in reading the Word with my son. God gave the Bible to ancient Jews in a language and manner that they could understand. If God were to give us the Bible today, it would sound and read very differently. Why would Christians believe that God wants us to filter his message through the limited scientific understanding of folks who lived over 2000 years ago?
SeesThroughIt
It’s not, and it never should be. Of course, creationists want to make it that way because appealing to the uninformed masses is the only way they can make progress with their bullshit stances, so it’s kind of funny when they lose in popularity contests as well as the usual utter ass-kicking they get in the scientific realm.
FYI, John, Scientists at Meeting Rally for Evolution. Good for them–the butt-hurt responses from the Discovery Institute are a nice capper to the proceedings.
BlogReeder
That’s a rather slippery thing to say.
Joel B.
Because you know, like it’s only a matter of time from one to the other. Because, heck if we teach people that God created them, then like that’ll make them even more willing to kill other beings created in the image of God, or something like that.
It’s not a matter of waging “battles” in the culture war. All these issues are bound up, in to the question of Will man continue his rebellion against God? And of course, the answer is yes, until the end, but until then man will rebel, the goal of every Christian then, is to help people see that truth, that man lives in rebellion, but is reconciled to God through Christ, not kill them if they don’t. Have some been misguided, yes, but that’s the way all things are.
If someone wishes to kill me for what I believe that’s fine, I’m satisfied with my future, but I would not want to at all take the life of someone else who has not yet repented, why be one who reduces that others opportunity for repentance.
scs
Who said Christian bashing exists?
LITBMueller
I’m still trying to figure out where this Intelligent Designer came from? Was he, in turn, designed intelligently?
I’m so confused…. Guess I’ll stick with the Flying Spaghetti Monster!
scs
By the way Disenfranchised Voter
– I have a reply to you on this subject on the next page in case you haven’t seen it yet – under the “Math Haters” post. That goes for you too Krista.
tzs
Joel, why in the fuck should I repent? I refuse to go around with a huge load of guilt simply because some religious power structure discovered it was a great way of controlling the masses: make them feel guilty–>offer the “only way out”–> power and money! Surprise!
Religious authority is nothing more than a mass hallucination. You chose to live in the world it creates. I don’t. Me, I’m on the side the the Snake (which in the Gnostic Gospels is a sign of wisdom.)
The only reason present-day Christianity has the belief system it does is because all the other believers (e.g. Gnostics and Cathars) were killed.
scs
Might have come from the same place the first matter and energy came from. Where was that again?
I’m so confused…. Guess I’ll stick with the Flying Spaghetti Monster!
Steve
Hahahahaha! Once again, if you malign the extremist movement that wants to use the power of government to enforce their religious beliefs on the rest of us, you’ve bashed all Christians! So sad, so predictable.
Pooh
Seems like a good time to quote an oldie but goodie:
et seq.
DougJ
I’m surprised they could only get 514 to sign it, frankly. There are probably at least a 500,000 credentialed scientists in the country. I would have to think a good 2-3% of them are completely nuts (I’d put the figure in the general population at 10% so I’m giving scientists a lot — probably too much credit — there) enough to buy this creationsim crap. I’m a research scientist and the guy the down the hall from me is always talking about being born again. I think it’s 50-50 he doesn’t believe in evolution.
They should be able to get a good 5-10 thousand signatures at least if they work at it.
Steve
I think someone who goes through as many identity changes as DougJ has no business criticizing anyone who is “born again.”
Joel B.
tzs,
If it is not what you want to do, then you should not do it, because you are not truly repenting, but I can at least hope that maybe someday, you will.
I don’t ask you to go around with a load of guilt on your head or anything else, no one should. Everyone should instead be amazed at the gifts bestowed upon us by our creator, gifts that we did nothing to earn, nor ever deserved. This includes, perhaps the most complex of gifts, that of our existence, God had no need to create, and yet he did.
It’s not about a power structure or any other such thing, although certainly at times, the power structure took more power to itself as any bureaucracy tends to do.
The question I suppose comes down to, now that you have been created, do you thank the one who created you? Or do you rebel against him, deny his existence or something else.
Someday, computers may obtain sentience and we will have created them, these computers after becoming sentient will have the choice much as we do, to thank their creator, or to rebel against them. And probably unlike God, we probably won’t have the grace to forgive the AI, if it does rebel against us.`
scs
People who have those beliefs, outlined above, are “Christians”. Albeit conservative Christians, but Christians none the less, because that is what traditional Christianity teaches – that homosexuality is wrong. You or I may not agree with those beliefs, but that’s why we call it “religion” and as such are entitled to their religious beliefs, just like Jews don’t like to mix cheese and meat and Muslims don’t like to eat ham and the Amish don’t like electricity.
The more relevant question is – are these conservative Christians using violence or repression to force their beliefs on others, or are they taking advantage of their rights under a democracy and peacefully organizing for what they believe? On balance, I would say such activity is peaceful. To convince me otherwise, you have to point out a systematic organized movement condoned by the top leadership of a church to engage in violence. To compare people who are taking advantages of their rights, to people engaging in violence, is what I would safely call Christian bashing.
Ancient Purple
Here’s a clue for you, scs: You don’t speak for all of Christendom.
Pooh
Hey scs, if the majority of posters here peacefully voted that you should stop posting, than you should stop posting, right? That’s different? How?
jaime
Waaaah. Go cry in your comfortable house, or your luxury vehicle or maybe in one of the tens of thousands of churches throughout the land.
The irony of an insurgent religion created for the powerless now being used as a political wedge by fat, powerful, lazy, middle class Americans is delicious.
scs
Who said the Democrats don’t stand for the middle class?
scs
Pooh, if I weren’t around, who would you bash then?
SeesThroughIt
Oh yeah, I definitely appreciate my mom and dad and thank them for all they have done for me.
By the way, Joel, you are aware that more people have been murdered in the name of your god than for just about any other reason, right? The idea that faith makes you less likely to kill is completely unsupported–contradicted, even.
Pooh
Someone who understood the point I was trying to make, except it wouldn’t be bashing it would be discussing. Was I too subtle?
scs
Do you get a humourous remark, Pooh, or was I too subtle?
And also, sorry, but, this blog ain’t no democracy and you get no votes here. It’s a dictatorship run by our own Dear Leader, John Cole. The only votes that count are his and if he votes me off the island, then off I go.
Jorge
SCS –
It rings hollow to turn a thread about how many of my fellow Christians are using the tyranny of the majority to codify their narrow interpretation of the Bible into a thread about how people should be nice to the folks attempting to pass bigoted laws.
As a Christian, I’m much more concerned about the behavior of my fellow Christians than I am about some silly statement. Simply put, it seems like these kinds of Christians are much more concerned about the earthly behaviors of homosexuals than they are with sharing the Good News of Jesus Christ with homosexuals or anyone else. If you look at Christ’s ministry, the sinners who accepted Christ as their savior changed their sinful ways AFTER being saved. Paul stopped prosecuting Christians after becoming one himself.
Maybe the reason there is Christian bashing is because not enough people are being exposed to Christ’s love and redemption instead of Christians’ judgments and rejection.
Pb
scs,
Repression amongst conservative Christians? What a concept. I’ll assume for the moment that that wasn’t rhetorical and just state that the answer to your question is yes.
FYI.
Now here’s an entertaining thought: given Bush’s lax definition of terrorism, if a conservative Christian threatens someone with eternal damnation if said person doesn’t adopt their conservative Christian ways, does that qualify? I’d say that at the least, it’s certainly a threat intended to coerce.
scs
Well I suppose everyone has freedom of speech and can criticize or Christian bash as they see fit. However I am also allowed to try and point out the error of their thinking as I see it. Anyway, this “tyranny of the majority” as you call it, is basically another word for democracy. And while democracies don’t always get it right (i.e. slavery) I would think eventually democracies do get it right. If there is a group of people who are organizing to impose their beliefs on others (also otherwise known as democracy) then the best answer to that is to defeat them at the polls. If their views of this group are not acceptable to most people, then I don’t think the majority should have a difficult time of defeating them. (unless Iran gets involved in out elections as well -jk)
Ancient Purple
It’s called “shotgun theology” and it is horrible theological paradigm. In essence, you are turning someone into a fearful slave that tows the line only out of fear and dressing it up with the word “love.”
I am extremely dubious of the sincerity of any Christian that states they became “born again” out of fear of burning in Hell. None of the great Mystics, Martin Luther, Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, etc. ever recounted their conversion experiences as being a matter of “turn or burn.”
I fail to understand how sincere one’s love for God can be if their only motive for love is fear.
LITBMueller
Hey, that’s Battlestar Galactica!!! :)
Matter and energy? Eh. Who cares? Its just there, doin’ its thing. It doesn’t matter where it “came from.” Pass the Pabst!
Perry Como
Meet your new science teacher.
The Other Steve
I thought Dick Cheney practiced shotgun theology.
The Other Steve
Fine. Are these intelligent Christians using violence or repression in keeping the idiot Christians from forcing their beliefs on others?
Nope. That seems to be the relevant point doesn’t it. That in our Democracy, intelligent people can get together and tell idiot moonbats “shut the fuck up, you don’t know what you are talking about.”
Now quit your whining, go suck on your pacifier or something.
jaime
Were you there?????
Steve
Your incorrect assumption is that Christianity teaches that homosexuality is wrong. Yes, it’s there in the Bible, right next to the prohibition on shellfish, and there are some fundamentalist Christians – who don’t speak for all Christians – who take it as an important part of God’s message. Other Christians, including the ones in my own family, disagree and think Jesus’s message was about love and tolerance.
And no matter what someone’s individual beliefs may be, it does not follow that they are forced to use political power to try and force those beliefs on others. Where I come from, people keep their beliefs to themselves, they don’t try to force everyone to live by their own set of rules.
When you try to portray all of Christianity, or all of “traditional” Christianity, as being about anti-gay legislation and the like, it is you, not me, who is bashing the name of a beautiful religion.
Joey
I would put the “Crazy ratio” closer to thirty percent myself.
BIRDZILLA
Evolution is nothing more then a rediclous crack-pot theory based wholey on guess work poor evedence and junk science its still a throry based on nothing
DougJ
I would too, Joey. I was trying to do a conservative estimate.
scs
Agreed. I said so above. However, I think critics should stick to fair comparisons, not calling Christians Taliban for example, and if they don’t, others have a right to call them on that. So I am also allowed to tell you to shut the fuck up, you don’t know what you are talking about, no? So quit your whining, go suck on your pacifier or something.
Well what is GreenPeace doing, or MoveOn.org doing? Are they not using their political power, and a lot of money from Sorros, “to force their beliefs on others”, otherwise known as politically acting? I agree it’s not always the best course of action, but it’s a free country, and if people feel strongly about an issue, and as long as they stay within the bounds of reason, they are allowed to organize politically to support it, otherwise known as trying to “force their beliefs on others.”
Jorge
Well, Democracy needs checks and balances as well. Such as the judicial branch in this country that often led the way in assuring the rights of blacks and women when the democratic system was failing them left and right. The reason Democracy is often called the tyranny of the majority is that if you don’t have a moral system of codes to guide it, Democracy can be just as savage as any other form of government.
I see Democracy the same way I see capitalism. Excellent systems with out any inherent morality to them. The morality comes in the rules and regulations that govern them. However, I suspect that we are probably pretty close in agreement about these issues even if we differ in how we express them.
jaime
Forcing what beliefs? If gay marriage is made legal…are you forced to marry a member of the same sex?
Since abortion is legal, are you being forced to have an abortion?
What is being forced upon conservative Christians other than the notion that gays exist or women sometimes have to take an unnecessary and unfortunate step to terminate a pregnancy.
Steve
Except the whole point of religion, to the extent it even goes beyond your personal beliefs, is to encourage others to accept God’s word of their own free will. Not to use the power of the state to force others to live as you think they should.
Nothing makes one quite so passionate about the beauty of democracy as being a member of the majority. If a different religion were in the majority, and they tried to tell you that you couldn’t get married because their religions beliefs frown on it, you wouldn’t sit there saying “oh well, I guess I have to organize a political movement to fight for my right to get married.” You’d be offended that the issue of who you marry should be any of their business.
If someone doesn’t want to be a Christian, I assume you would not be in favor of forcibly converting them. Nor should you be in favor of passing laws to punish them if they don’t live as you feel a Christian is supposed to live.
jack
There are various factions who seek to pervert science to get their sociological/political agendas approved.
Radical Christians who want the teaching of evolution banned are among the least worrisome of them. Their actions, primarily focused through judicial and legislative courses are non-violent, rarly passed, and generally overturned when challenged–which prompts the ‘violent’ action of a remarshaling of forces to try again.
They are persistent, but ineffective.
Would that I could say the same for their counterparts.
Lines
I never knew that Greenpeace and other “George Soros funded” organizations were trying to actively change the Constitution to uphold a bigotted belief.
Would you like to provide links that prove otherwise?
jg
Scs sounds like the type of person who wouldn’t ever have left for the New World. She would have preferred to stay and live in a place where religion ruled. Ironic?
Ancient Purple
Right, because there has never been any violence directed at abortion clinics nor doctors providing abortion services by radical Christians.
Nope. Never.
Ancient Purple
Crud. My broswer ate my first line.
Insert at the beginning of my last comment:
I am certain no radical Christian has ever been involved in violence, right?
Lines
I had a friend get stabbed 13 times by Christian Fundamentalists because she opened an “alternative bookstore”.
So do I think it would be a better America when Christian Fundies get to write whatever law they want?
Ancient Purple
Well, there is some foundation already set.
Of course, executing people who commit sin isn’t really violence.
Pb
Lines,
I don’t know, but I bet this guy does… I trust that you aren’t him.
LITBMueller
This who thread is a great example of why Jefferson was so adamant that Church and State must remain separate.
The Other Steve
Shorter scs:
Someone saying “The Sky is Purple” should have just as much right to be taken seriously as someone saying “The Sky is Blue”.
The Other Steve
It’s interesting, but the reason why America was founded as a country in the way it was, with the seperation of Church and State, was because of the Great Failure derived from the intermingling of Church and State as occured in Europe.
Following the Reformation, Europe became embroiled in war after war, all relating to religion. The states also began enforcing arbitrary laws again due to religion. Many of the authors of the enlightenment were jailed and/or executed because of what they wrote.
This failure is what resulted in a new age of Secularism, with the foundation of America being a primary example of that. Now I’ll be the first to admit that I think the securlism has in some cases gone too far. But those who are trying to promote their Christian Reconstructionist arguments upon us are way out of line and the only thing they’re going to end up with is proof positive that Religion is a bad thing. Which, as a Christian, I find tremendously sad because it’s not true in general, only because of these specific reborn Pharisees.
Bob In Pacifica
I posted this on another thread, but it applies here too.
Wilhelm Reich said:
“Fascism [replace fascism with religion] is only the organized political [religious] expression of the structure of the average man’s character. It is the basic emotional attitude of the suppressed man of our authoritarian machine civilization and its mechanistic-mystical conception of life.”
While I appreciate Jorge’s sincerity, the people who are rioting and murdering over cartoons are working with a religious direction from God that’s six hundred years closer to the present. We have people in Sri Lanka fighting over Hinduism versus Buddhism. And everywhere where people are fighting over religion there are people on the sidelines making big bucks over the bloodshed. Always has been, always will be. Who’s to say that the Queen of England isn’t serving with the blessings of God or that George Bush has God on his side or that Osama will remain free to wage war against the Great Satan, Allah willing? Do you doubt that Joseph Smith found golden tablets in his backyard and that Native Americans are the lost tribe of Israel? Okay, the last one is having problems standing up to DNA scrutiny, but that’s only science anyway, right?
You don’t have to believe in any God to be moral, to treat others decently. Unfortunately, being a good Christian or a good Muslim or a good Jew or Animist often affords you an excuse to behave awfully. You don’t have to have heaven to enjoy your life here on earth. In fact, thinking too much about the afterlife tends to cause people to lose focus on what’s going on, current events-wise. And, of course, that’s the point.
As long as most people believe in the religious chains they imagine they are wearing we will be cursed with these great fantasies driving masses against each other to kill and subjugate. While we can find universalities with all religions, the devil’s in the details.
tzs
Joel, sorry, I don’t believe in “gifts from the Creator” except in the most abstract and allegorical sense. I have never seen any evidence of the existence of a self-aware Deity who has created everything. And I certainly am not going to bow down to a petty insecure godling who throws temper tantrums because his creations don’t pander to him enough. The “God” of the Old Testament comes across as a psychopathic child. It’s easier for me to believe we had alien brats from other planets playing “god” here on Earth.
Or maybe all deities arose in our ancestors’ heads as hallucinations–suggest people read “Conciousness as Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind” and then come back and ask about God–if anyone still thinks the question makes any sense.
skip
Bruce Chapman of DI is my cousin–the kind who had to sit at the card table at Thanksgiving, with the defectives.
LITBMueller
That’s an interesting point, Other Steve. Consider, too, that such intertwining of religion and the State was present in the Colonies, too, and Jefferson railed against it before the Revolution even started. For instance, Virginia had a law on the books back then that was handed down by the Church of England that imprisoned anyone who denied the existence of God.
Jefferson, a Deist, was very concerned anout the imposition of one form of Christianity by one sect upon another.
But, as far as today is concerned, I suspect we’ll be having arguments over things like Intelligent Design forever. This is, after all, a country that was first settled by some pretty extremely religious people (like the Pilgrims), but its Constitution was designed by Deists and others who were part of the Enlightment!
The Other Steve
Yeah, and some of our rules on the books which prohibit the interminging further were done not out of enlightened reasoning, but rather because the Protestants hated the Catholics and were afraid they were taking over.
Now that some of the Protestants have become united with the Catholics with a message of Hatred, they want to rid themselves of those pesky rules.
Which is really quite funny, when you think about it.
tzs
When my Japanese friends ask for an explanation of why the US is the way it is, I point out that we were founded as a nation of religious nuts and it’s never quite worn off…
ppGaz
“IT’S ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
ppGaz
Do you see an “argument” over Intelligent Design going on here?
Can you briefly describe the positions represented by those “arguments?”
Here, I’ll help you out with a template:
Pro: Intelligent Design is a likely solution to the origin of species because ___________________________.
Con: Intelligent Design is not a likely solution to the origin of species because ___________________________.
ppGaz
….. the debate rages ……
ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz………….
Krista
Oh my god, hon…did she live? Were the bastards ever prosecuted?
VidaLoca
Krista,
I’m guessing they were Raptured out.
ppGaz
You are the Dwight Schrute of Balloon-Juice.
ppGaz
Threadjack: Is there a bigger, more hateable prick on earth than Chad Hedrick?
Mr. Grouchypants
Intelligent Design arguments will persist as long as theists persist. The majority of theists will not likely reject the notion that a creator interacted with his creation at least on some level.
DougJ
There’s a lot of scientific theories we all agree on: gravity, electro-magnetism, basic optics. Why not focus on those instead of always talking about controversial theories like evolution, global warming, and the big bang? I bet you’ll never see a headline that says “Christian groups support teaching the theory of gravity”. People like Tim just want to focus on the issues that divide us.
ppGaz
Yes, for example, it’s a round bat and a round ball, but you got to hit it square.
Beej
I really love that old argument that in a democracy, we all have the right to go out and try to get our beliefs/agenda enacted into law. The fact is, we don’t have that right. At least not in some areas. Many years ago, one of my law school professors made what I still think is the most enlightening comment I have ever heard about the Constitution: The U.S. Constitution is one of the most astonishing documents ever written because its whole purpose is to protect the things that the majority does not like and probably wouldn’t vote for. If an idea is popular, it doesn’t need Constitutional protection. It is the unpopular ideas that do.
GOP4Me
So does God. We’ve all been divided into repentant sinners and the unrepentant, and in the fullness of time it will be revealed that those who lied to children about how we were once monkeys will fall firmly into the latter camp.
On another note, I see this thread has devolved into an scs-bashing contest. Very classy, moonbats.
Lines
Krista: Yes, most of the wounds were defensive, arms, legs (she curled up in a ball) and it doesn’t appear they wanted to kill her. It was more like a mob “warning”.
So by day, I’m a heated blog troll, by night, I hunt fundies with night vision goggles and bible scent dogs.
Shygetz
Unless it isn’t revealed. The problem with revealed knowledge is that it’s useless to everyone but the person it was revealed to. There’s no way I can verify your “knowledge.” I can’t submit it to scrutiny of any kind. So it doesn’t do me any good.
And by scs’ logic, we are bashing all Christians…and continuing that logic, we are bashing all humans. Why do we hate ourselves?!? scs claims the right to tell us to shut the fuck up, but we better respect him or we are classless? scs claims that Christians are oppressed in America, simply because we are not all forced to follow his specific version of his religion?
You express stupid views like that, I’ll pile on with the rest of ’em.
ppGaz
scs is a rank troll, number one, and number two, is not likely to be a “him” unless it’s a spoof, which is entirely possible. If I were a betting man, I’d wager that John Cole and Tim F are writing scs to stir up churn on the blog. Because really, there is no other rationale for the crap that scs posts. Other than mental illness.
There’s no intellectual thread of continuity in scs’ material. The only poster I’ve seen here with that kind cognitive discontinuity is John Cole and his “I hate Republicans but don’t call me a Democrat” routine.
GOP4Me
Well, maybe it wasn’t revealed to you for a reason. Maybe you’re the kind of person who’d laugh at it and reject it. Cast not pearls before swine, that sort of thing.
I don’t EXPECT you to respect anyone. You kooks consistently demonstrate exactly the amount of respect I’d expect you to show.
scs is perfectly capable of defending scs’s opinions. What I was objecting to was the ad hominem invective so common amongst you left-wing wackos. But again, I’ve come to expect and welcome it, and even be amused by it. scs seems to have thinner skin, and that’s why it bothers me to see you do this to her.
Of course you will. That’s what being in a moonbat wolfpack is all about.
And I’d wager John Cole is writing YOU, peepee, just to churn up the other lefty posters. He’s probably laughing his butt off at the thought of getting all the other kooks to agree with you, when you’re really just a figment of his overproductive imagination.
At this point, I could say something about pots and kettles, but arguing with a mirage is like kissing yourself in the mirror.
SeesThroughIt
Now that’s some good religious crazy. Not great religious crazy, and I know you can get crazier, but the day is young, and this is a good warm-up.
ppGaz
You oughta know, Darrell.
GOP4Me
What’s true is true, and lies are lies, and we walk through a vale of shadows and tears until our final days. As for you, I have no idea what you’re implying or saying.
Check our IP addresses, John Cole. You of all people should know that I have no relation to Darrell.
worn
Re: GOP4Me’s comment:
(emphasis is mine)
What an absolutely perfect encapsulation of the lack of principle and intellectual rigor so often in evidence in the comment sections of blogs.
Second runners up (from the same post):
What an achingly beautiful construction – thanks GOP4Me!
worn
Jorge:
I tend to agree with this sentiment, Jorge, but I wonder how what you think about those who are is essence ‘strict constructionalists’, i.e., those who insist that the Bible is the direct (or lierally inspired) word of God, and that no alterations, additions, editing, etc. are allowed? I can’t remember the verse and chapter but there’s at least one that deals with this matter in a direct & unambiguous fashion.
This problem of the ‘modern disconnect’ is one of the factors that ultimately led me to stray from my Southern church-fueled upbringing. In other words, the “Why would” portion of your question might be answered in that God hasn’t apparently seen fit to issue needed clarifications – i.e., are we dealing with a literal description of events or something more like an allegory created for the benefit of a people with a more primitive understanding of the world?
I say the above from the point of view of someone who sees no real conflict between the idea of evolution & ‘intelligent design’ – the pithy question being “What if evolution is intelligent design”?
Krista
That’s horrible. I’m glad she’s okay. Did they ever catch the bastards?
Krista
Dang – I hit submit by accident. What I meant to say was this:
Evidently, ad hominem invective transcends idealogical boundaries! Imagine that…
worn
Krista – yeah, I don’t either side really has a monopoly on that crap.
I’m always tempted to respond to ad hominem attacks with “Ad Hominem? Why not instead add hominy for a nutritious, filling breakfast!!!”.
I fear the humor would be lost on some, however…
worn
Whoa, that’s weird. Apparently three exclamation points equals an image anchor in John’s blog software…
Krista
I know…I always feel somewhat stifled by not being able to use multiple exclamation points.
scs
Shygetz – nooo!, don’t tell me. And you had given me such long science info which I thought was helpful- darn. I always was a little suspicious of you, due to the real estate you showed up in, but that last one put you over the edge. Is there anyone left here now, besides Sybil, to actually debate?
scs
Let me think who is left on here – ppgaz, Krista, the Other Steve, Disenfranhised Voter, and DougJ, in his multiple inventions. All of whom probably flunked highschool debating. The only person I think of, left on here, who can contribute to a debate, is Steve. One debater does not a blog make. And there are a few people who drift in and out of here now and then, like Demimondian, who have brains, but don’t appear often enough to make a difference. There has got to be a better blog than this- large fonts be damned, with some people who actually have an ability to think for themselves and express themselves logically, not act like this is a junior highshcool lunchroom. They have to be out there somewhere! Time to start looking for them.
Sav
“Or stoning women who don’t respect their husband.”
Good God.
Excuse me. Good Gaia.
A few years ago I’d have never thought you’d make Kos sound reasonable.