Creation vs. Evolution

[AXL72]

It's about wanting to be right with God and have a relationship with Him now.

What kind of relationship?

-short term
-long term
-"activity" partners
-hook up partners

What?

 

[MikeFerrara]

Granted on a literal reading of the first amendment but that's not how the courts interpret it. As far as the 10 commandments go whose commandments? Christians have made some minor changes and reordered them. And even among Christian denominations there are minor differences.

I guess they're all close enough for a couthouse wall. Use whichever one you like.

So by putting your version over another's version on a public venue isn't that supporting one religion over another?

Not as far as I can tell. There are several tranlations out there and I don't know that any specific religion is aligned with any specific translation. Most (many?) folks that spend much time reading the Bible have several and often reference more than one translation.

The Ten Commandments would, I guess, be mostly a Jew/Christian thing but I don't see how any display is a violation of the first ammendment.

Quote:
But, while there may be some complaints about the way gay adoption is treated, I'm not aware of any laws regarding "gay parenting". ie, A gay person or couple, that somehow manages to get children can legally parent them.

I find this quite insulting. The implication is that gay parents get their children in some less than proper way.

somehow >adverb 1 by one means or another. 2 for an unknown or unspecified reason.

How in the world do you get an implication of propriety from that?

I think you're looking for excuses to find things insulting.

 

[Soggy]

That's not quite what I've seen but maybe we should let this one go for now.

My hunch is that it's because you live in a area of the country that isn't known for it's tolerance of gay people, but that's just a guess.

Sure they have the choice but what creates the situation in the first place. Lets face it, most of our problems of our own making.

Well, that's true for those who willingly got themselves into it by obvious means, but not true for those who are raped or victims of incest.

There is more to it. There are lots of books in the world. You don't think I believe all of them, do you? What do you think is different about this one?

The only thing different is that it's really old. I couldn't tell you why you think this one is any better than all the rest, since none of it makes any sense to me.

 

[shoredivr]

US currency has printed on it "In God we trust".

It wasn't always there, though, which I didn't know.

» “In God We Trust” — The National Lie Virtual Illusions: From Allusions to Illusions

"In 1782 Jefferson, who coined the phrase ‘wall of separation between church and state,’ authored the first national motto. From an Deist and separationist like Jefferson this motto was clearly secular. “E Pluribus Unum,” (One from Many) was this first motto and still part of the great seal of the United States. This motto appeared on the first coin in 1798 and in 1837 was required by law to appear on all U.S. coins. It still appears on coins today.

This motto stood without challenge for nearly a century. In a letter dated November, 13 1861 from Rev. M. R. Watkinson, a Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, PA, Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase was urged to recognize God on our coins [...] This letter set off a series of events that cause a 1864 law to be passed allowing the “In God We Trust” motto to be placed on one, two and three cent coins.

In 1955 state-church separation became a victim of the cold war. The cold war was represented as a fight against the godless communists. The McCarthy era respect for individual rights led to President Eisenhower to sign Public Law 140 making it mandatory that all coins and paper money reflect an unconstitutional Christian state. In 1956 E Pluribus Unum was pushed aside as the national motto in favor of the religious motto. As part of a broad anti-communist/anti-atheist program that same year the words “under God” were added to the pledge of allegiance making it illegal for non-Christians to swear allegiance to their country under oath. This program also added the phrase “so help me god” to the oath administered to all judges."

In God We Trust - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"In God We Trust was first used on paper money in 1957 when it appeared on the one-dollar Silver Certificate."

 

[MikeFerrara]

My hunch is that it's because you live in a area of the country that isn't known for it's tolerance of gay people, but that's just a guess.

Gosh, I don't know...I sort of have plenty to say on the subject but I can't think of a way to say much of it that has any place on the board. Like I said before, I think I'm just going to have to leave it.

Well, that's true for those who willingly got themselves into it by obvious means, but not true for those who are raped or victims of incest.

rape and incest victims are just that...victims.

The point I was trying to make was that without behavior that's inconcistent with Biblical principles none of this would exist.

The only thing different is that it's really old. I couldn't tell you why you think this one is any better than all the rest, since none of it makes any sense to me.

The Bible isn't what does it. You look at it and you see a book. Some people might even like the book but they still just see a book. I don't know how to explain it so it makes sense to you but God does it. Jesus speaking in John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent me draws him: and I will raise him up on the last day."

 

[MikeFerrara]

In 1955 state-church separation became a victim of the cold war.

As far as I know, the first ammendment was still in effect.

The cold war was represented as a fight against the godless communists. The McCarthy era respect for individual rights led to President Eisenhower to sign Public Law 140 making it mandatory that all coins and paper money reflect an unconstitutional Christian state.

It had already been on some coins for a long time?

In 1956 E Pluribus Unum was pushed aside as the national motto in favor of the religious motto. As part of a broad anti-communist/anti-atheist program that same year the words “under God” were added to the pledge of allegiance making it illegal for non-Christians to swear allegiance to their country under oath. This program also added the phrase “so help me god” to the oath administered to all judges."

In God We Trust - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"In God We Trust was first used on paper money in 1957 when it appeared on the one-dollar Silver Certificate."

What I find really interesting here is that "right wing" (conservative) is sometimes associated with "religious" and left wing (liberal) is associated with "non-religious"? Though I pointed out to Kim earlier that religion wasn't what defined the difference, maybe I was wrong. As I follow current politics in the US we're being pulled more and more toward socialism by the left (non-religious?). Is there a correlation between religious/nonreligious and right/left?

Crazy thought, maybe, but I'm going to ask anyway...does the left need/want more government to take care of the things that we of the "religious" right depend on ourselves and God for? Are huge social programs that take care of almost everything a person could ever need, the left's replacement for God?

A few quick google searches didn't turn up anything but maybe you social science types have an answer?

 

[MikeFerrara]

Nevermind. I answered my own question. Socialists don't word it quite the same way but that's what it boils down to.

 

[MikeFerrara]

Mike, what do you think of Scientology?

Sorry missed this post somehow. Just as well though. LOL like I'm going to tell you what I think of scientology on a public forum and end up with people looking in my windows and black cars following me around?

 

[AXL72]

Mike,

1. Why do we need to fear the Lord (as is stated in your signature line)?

2. Why does a convicted murderer who prays to God and Jesus everyday for 30 out of 40 years he is in prison (on a life sentence) get into heaven, but if I die tomorrow, I don't get to heaven, simply because I don't beleive? and if I were to believe, by seeing with my own eyes, I denounce the worthiness of God for my praise because of what I think of his actions....to His face!?

I don't get it?


Further information for the question: The conviction was valid. The killer murdered 3 women and one woman's 2 year old son, but he was only caught and convicted for one of the murders.

 

[sheck33]

So you have irrefutable facts to back your theories? Good, then please present them and prove us guys wrong...

First, this thread is about evolution theory versus creation. Secondly I'm a physicist not a biologist, the theories are not mine. But I am versed in the scientific method. Thirdly, you creationists always talk about the theory of evolution being wrong therefore evolution doesnt take place. Creationists conveniently ignore that this theory, like any other theory, attempts to find a logical explanation for observed phenomena, that evolution takes place is fact.

You guys have already been proven wrong by the scientific community, every time creationists come up with some pseudo scientific claptrap to disprove evolution theory it can be easily dismissed for lack of any real logical arguments, the 'explanation' being in total contradiction with observed facts, selective observations, applying statistics where statistics cant be applied etc etc etc. You guys have already been presented with the evidence and you choose to ignore it while offering no alternative explanation, because for some obscure reason creationists can't handle reality.