River Valley Blogs

Perry to Harsch wrote on Feb 21, 2008 9:08 AM:

" I placed a call to Kissinger and Associates this morning, and Henry said he'd be glad to come...to complete the "K" trinity, so to speak. Look forward to seeing you and Stasi Saturday night. Should be one heck of a good time. "

To:2:39pm wrote on Feb 20, 2008 5:07 PM:

" Huh?
"

harsch to perry wrote on Feb 20, 2008 4:39 PM:

" I will be there, but as that's hardly enough wine i'll bring some of my own. And if you could get Krusty, Krause and any other K, so we could have the traditional three, it would be quite the bonus. "

rick harsch wrote on Feb 20, 2008 2:39 PM:

" scrolling a little i came across the amusing kenneth krause post that calls god a copulator, albeit the original one. now there's a novel convergence of the biblical and evolutional. but it still leaves out the female, which means, to leap christianly ahead, that god beat himself blind, which brings us back to what we all know. "

Perry Mason wrote on Feb 20, 2008 1:09 PM:

" A big welcome back to Mr. Rick Harsch. Your brilliant commentary has been missed. Say, if you're not doing anything this weekend, I'd like to invite you and the missus over to the mansion for some some vittles. We'll be dining on Cornish Hen, twice-baked potatos, creamed corn with bacon bits, and good old fashioned vanilla ice cream topped with hot fudge for dessert. I'll open up 3 or 4 bottles of my best wines to add to the merriment. "

To:Rick Harsch wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:40 AM:

" If you will see the 2/18 5:22pm post, you will see that BGS first used the phrase "...men far superior to you and I"....I believe the poster was just going with that line of thought to in turn make his point. But, your point is well taken. "

rick harsch wrote on Feb 20, 2008 8:19 AM:

" More fun religious stuff. My favorite of the recent posts is feb.19 to BGS, who uses the cliche 'better men than us' in referring to those who have debated these matters before us. It's funny how easily people will acquiesce to the dead. I don't compare myself with them very often, but I'm not sure in considering any debater I would ever think 'He was a better man than me'. If you find you're about to sell yourself short walk away from the deal. "

To:BGS wrote on Feb 19, 2008 9:54 AM:

" How are things in the basement? Is Star trek coming on soon?
"

Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 19, 2008 8:57 AM:

" BGS, instead of defending you posts when anyone reading can see they are devoid of all congruity and logic,and full of hypocrisy, lunacy, and absurdity, why can't you just admit these posts are a personal failure? It would be more honorable than what you are doing now. "

To:BGS wrote on Feb 19, 2008 8:40 AM:

" The fact you reread the posts and see nothing wrong with your logic or reasoning proves Mikes point. The historical accuracy of the Bible has been debated and defended throughout history by men greater than you or I or Mike. Gary Habermas successfully debated Anthony Flew several times regarding the historical accuracy and integrity of the Bible. So, it is laughable that you would want anyone to seriously consider your opinion. "

BGS wrote on Feb 18, 2008 5:27 PM:

" Dear Mike Sanders...I reread the posts you refer to and see nothing wrong but your hissy-fitting. Rereading the thread brought me to realize how seriously I schooled you on your own biblical 'turf'... Certainly you're inclined to namecalling, but the frustration will pass.....it's called growing up. "

Dear Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 18, 2008 5:22 PM:

" No luck needed, thanks nonetheless. Living in the here and now with eyes open suits me fine. Luck is closely related to hope and prayers.....more your line of reward. You've failed to prove one biblical point and fail to see how much the bible has been derided by men far superior to the likes of me and you. You keep refering in the abstract but can't bring it upon yourself to address anything specific. The bible is bunk. "

RE:ToBGS wrote on Feb 18, 2008 5:17 PM:

" Yeah...he's a winner. Wished he'd stay in Africa where they love him. "

To:James wrote on Feb 18, 2008 4:05 PM:

" Good point, especially considering that more "faith" is required to believe in the religion of evolution than to believe in any other religion. "

James wrote on Feb 18, 2008 2:32 PM:

" It doesn't matter what religious leaders do, they will be harrassed by those who mock their religious beliefs. How about a little irony? Some people deride Christians for believing the Bible, and then deride them again for not believing the theory of evolution. Go figure. Despite what the religious leaders may or may not be doing one thing remains true. There is no larger voting block in the United States than Christians. "

ToBGS wrote on Feb 18, 2008 12:17 PM:

" Re 2/16 320 am post. I consider the fact he is indeed President as evidence of his winning. Even his opponent congratulated him on his victory. Victory=winning=President. Losing=Not President. Savvy?
"

Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 18, 2008 9:32 AM:

" Thank you for your permission to me to believe what I want. Neither one of us have proof. If we did, these discussions would not be taking place. I happen to believe the evidence supports my position. I also have evidence of the lunacy and absurdity of your posts below. So, although I can discuss these issues seriously with others, I just can't do so with you. Good luck to you. "

Dear Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 18, 2008 5:08 AM:

" Hey....in the end...beleive what you want. It is a free country. But once you bring those beleifs into the public arena don't expect silence or approval. You've got no proof anything in the Bible is real.....and you haven't the guts to see the lonney contradictions and absurd story line. You are brainwashed. Amen. "

Mike Sanders to BGS wrote on Feb 17, 2008 8:19 PM:

" I respectfully disagree that you are rock steady. In support of my position, I offer up the 2/13 8:34am post, and then your responses at 9:41am and 9:50am. I also offer up your 2/13 10:46am post, as well as a response to that at 12:41pm which you failed to address. If anything, YOU saying the Bible contains contradictions is almost an endorsement of the Bibe. Kind of like "the crazy man says its crazy" would mean its actually NOT crazy. "

Richard Cranium wrote on Feb 17, 2008 10:21 AM:

" To 3:26 am poster: Just some more reasons why the Religious Right is Wrong... "

Hey Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 16, 2008 3:26 AM:

" I'm rock steady. Irrational is you and others with your indoctrinated brainwashed belief that a collection of man written fables are the "word of god". Tell me....did god change over the past 3500 years or did man? How come god doesn't require all the "burnt offerings" like he did in days past....god LOVED the "sweet smell of the burning flesh"....and now? The Bible is the word of MEN....and thusly it is deeply flawed. But beleieve what you want.....live a life under the shackles of the words of twisted and crazy wanderers from the past......I'll live in the here and now. In reality. Now go sacrifice an unblemished goat before god gets PO'd at you and covers your body in pus and blisters. "

Dear "ToBGS" wrote on Feb 16, 2008 3:20 AM:

" Bush had 500,000 less US citizen votes than Gore. He was appointed by the Supremes, not the State. If you call that a win lets put it in line with the Gold Medal the Soviets took from us during the 1972 Olympics in Basketball. (Google it and learn). Pleae pull out charts of the value of the US dollar from the moment Bush was appointed to now.....you'lll see a sharp decline that Norwegians could use as a ski jump it is so steep. Ha...ha...ha....Bush won, that's a good one. "

Mike Sander wrote on Feb 15, 2008 4:06 PM:

" Brian, by rational Americans, do you mean those that agree with you? Wouldn't the IRrationality of your posts(as noted below) contradict that? "

To:BGS wrote on Feb 15, 2008 4:03 PM:

" You are mistaken. Bush won that year. "

Starfish to 11:06 wrote on Feb 15, 2008 2:58 PM:

" No. "

BGS wrote on Feb 15, 2008 1:03 PM:

" Religious right never had any clout.....its another myth propogated by the corporate press. Bush lost in 2000 by 500,000 votes....evangelicls did squat for him then.....They have little weight because rational Americans view them as the Christian Taliban.....minus the exploding. "

To Starfish wrote on Feb 15, 2008 11:06 AM:

" Interesting post. Do you see a connection between the widespread acceptance of abortion or even the idea it is not important and the indoctrination of our society with the concept of evolution? "

Starfish wrote on Feb 15, 2008 10:41 AM:

" Back to the topic of religous leaders losing clout. . . We have here the incarnate illustration of how this creation/evolution, "right-to-life," supply-side economics coalition that is Movement Conservatism operates--and why it, as Jimmy states in his post, set to crash and burn. With the winks and nods that come with a fragile coalition's dog-whistle politics, diversion is the key ploy. While you folks are arguing origins with circular arguments, your "leaders" are quitting congress in droves--like rats fleeing a sinking ship. Yet with that silly signal--abortion! evolution! stained blue dress!--you will STILL obediently vote to destroy what's left of the American fabric. "

Bugs to 8:47 am wrote on Feb 15, 2008 9:49 AM:

" I responded to that post later that day. "

To:Bugs wrote on Feb 15, 2008 8:47 AM:

" Well, they are entitled to their opinion. I am just trying to keep things on track. Do you not agree with what I posted at 9:32am yesterday?
"

Mike Sanders to Brian G Smith wrote on Feb 15, 2008 8:45 AM:

" I saw nothing wrong with citing your posts. I assume you are referring to the posters 9:38am and 9:42am posts yesterday. Anyone on this blog should go back and read them, and then the posts he refers to. Actually seeing firsthand how you think is more powerful than trying to explain it. It is right there in black and white. I mean, you LOVE to use other peoples quotes to try to prove your point. Weak? I don't think so. Whats good for the goose and all that... "

To:BGS wrote on Feb 15, 2008 8:40 AM:

" I find that citing your specific posts, as well as the posts you are attempting to respond to is the most clear way to show how messed up and illogical your thinking is. Sorry you disagree. "

Kenneth Krause to 2:36am wrote on Feb 15, 2008 8:37 AM:

" See my posts yesterday at 9am and 9:07am. If what you are saying is true, why weren't any of the professors and students able to refute Dr Menton? Isn't that odd? A room full of scientists who can't defent their belief in a dead theory? And why did that poor young man suffer a breakdown as his faith in the religion of evolution was slowly but surely being taken from him? "

Bugs to 4:42 pm wrote on Feb 15, 2008 7:57 AM:

" As you know, sometimes the 'conversations' spin off a bit from the main topic. I was just following up on Brian's post of 2/13, 2:27 pm. Still, it is a fact that evangelicals condemn homosexuality as a sin and they usually cite Old Testament law as their authority-the rub being that Jesus never said anything bad about homosexuality. If he thought it sinful, surely he would have said something. "

Dearest Bugs... wrote on Feb 15, 2008 2:49 AM:

" Yeah....Thomas Paine rules. These flat-earhter Talibanners should worship his words rather than silly ancient stories from a messed up land. They blaspheme logic and science. Was "god" a real estate broker? "

Dear "One more BGS gem" wrote on Feb 15, 2008 2:42 AM:

" No one has refuted anything I've typed. You can't. You have no proof.....I live in a world I can touch and feel not a world based on indoctrinated brainwashing faith. Please try and site one solid example of you or any other flat-earhter refuting my position. "

The "flood" wrote on Feb 15, 2008 2:39 AM:

" The story of the great flood existed long before the traveling Jews put it into their tribal "diary"....Sumerians, Egyptians, Syrians and oriental cultures all speak of it. This flood was no doubt the climax of a global warming cycle in the past...when the last Ice age ended....And if "god" did this flood to kill all of humanity I spit in his face...what an idiot....unable to "create" an obedient species with all his infinite powers. "

Dear Kenneth Krause wrote on Feb 15, 2008 2:36 AM:

" There is exponentially mo' proof of the mechansim of evolution than there is proof stories and fables of the bible are true. You bible folks got nothing concrete, all talk and speculation......evolutionists have an ever expanding fossil record. Again, I hope 'god' doesn't make a wager with the 'devil' about the corruption of your 'faith' like god did to poor ol' Job. An utterly absurd story in an utterly absurd bible. "

BGS wrote on Feb 15, 2008 2:32 AM:

" If anyone wants to challenge my postulations please do so clearly. Alluding to a posting of mine (or anyone for that matter) is simply weak. Tell us what you specifically find wrong. Truth is NO ONE can prove anything in the Bible. Someone here said "Jesus didn't detest the Bible"...is that a joke? There was no bible when Jesus walked the Earth. The Bible is bunk...or worse. I think it could be argued that it is the work of the devil, if one is inclined to beleive in him. I mean..."god" forbode "Adam" from eating from the "Tree of Knowledge"...ie...."stay stupid sheeple, don't look behind that curtain." "

whospeaksforearth wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:10 PM:

" the flood is completely irrelevent because the bible sets it at somewhere between 4 and 10 thousand years ago...most fossils are in the hundreds of millions of years old...and if you dispute how long ago the great flood 'happened' then look no further than any creationist website...their argument is that somehow the dating techniques are flawed...laughable

and as for the being with reproductive powers, it isn't known for sure EXACTLY how life originally started on earth...but we do that it didn't happen how the bible describes...everything alive today is descended from lower species, even plants...we all share a common ancestor from which everything branched out of...yes, it sounds difficult to believe, but if you are willing to look at the facts objectively, it's much more plausible than the bible's account "

Kenneth Krause to 3:37pm wrote on Feb 14, 2008 4:56 PM:

" I will make the same argument as you, but use it to support my position:If there really was a global flood,like that described in the Bible, you would expect to find billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth. Which is exactly what you do find. You are correct about one thing. We do know more 150 years after Darwin. We know all of the scientific problems with his theory. By the way, 150 years later, has anyone accounted for this being with reproductive powers that Darwin was unable to, and which he said a thoroughly comprehensive theory of evolution MUST give some accounting of? "

To:2:16 wrote on Feb 14, 2008 4:50 PM:

" I went back and read the 2:46 post. It looks like the poster was more concerned with the facts presented rather than how many letters one had behind their name. It looks like he threw you a nugget just to make you happy. My guess is anyone of us could find many more. But, that would prove nothing. The facts speak for themselves. The facts just don't support evolution. "

To:Bugs wrote on Feb 14, 2008 4:42 PM:

" I dont recall anyone in this discussion condemning homosexuality. I think you may have posted on the wrong board?.... "

To Kenneth Krause wrote on Feb 14, 2008 3:37 PM:

" you cannot possibly base your opinion on evolution solely on darwin's book...that was just the catalyst, so much more has been learned since then...as i've said before, there have been numerous instances where his theory could've been proven wrong, all it would take would be to find ONE fossil in the wrong time period of rock...that has never happened...in over 150 years, there has never been one fossil that hasn't fit in where it should "

To 2:46 wrote on Feb 14, 2008 2:16 PM:

" COOL! We've been at this for weeks and someone has FINALLY produced a name, Dr. David Menton, who got a Ph.D. in anatomy at a REAL university and stands by the anti-evolution crowd. One out of hundreds of thousands--does anyone feel a groundswell? "

Bugs to 9:32 am wrote on Feb 14, 2008 1:11 PM:

" I don't see where the distinction between secular law and God's law enters this argument vis a vis homosexuality. Evangelical Christians, I think you'll agree, mostly turn to Old Testament scripture as their authority for condemning homosexuality as a sin. An earlier poster stated that Christ's sacrifice made Old Testament law moot. If that's the case, then why do evangelicals continue to regard homosexuality as sinful? Certainly Jesus had nothing to say on the subject. If being gay was a sin to Jesus, why he didn't he come out and say so? "

One more BGS gem wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:42 AM:

" Also, BGS tends to ignore points that refute what he says. See his 2/13 10:46am post. Then, see the post addressing that at 12:41pm. Presumably, BGS must have seen how foolish his point was, but couldn't bring himself to concede that. Hopefully, BGS will go away and let the adults converse. "

Re BGS and reading comprehenssion wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:38 AM:

" For evidence of BGS lack of reading comprehension skills, see the post "to eddie" on 2/13 at 8:34am. Then, see BGS responses to this post at 9:41am and 9:50am, also on 2/13.
"

To:Bugs wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:32 AM:

" There is a difference, which you and BGS have trouble comprehending, between our secular laws and Gods law. Some laws, such as those against killing and stealing, overlap. Other laws, such as laws against homosexuality, do not. It doesn't surprise me that BGS has difficulty with this. It does surprise me that you do, however, as I know we were always in agreement that abortion should be illegal due to moral reasons as opposed to religious reasons. "

To:Dear Kenneth Krause wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:24 AM:

" You don't live your life according to Christs teachings. Christ taught that He was the only way to heaven, which you reject. Christ did not detest the Bible, nor did he denigrate God. As you are fond of saying, it can't be piece meal. It is all or nothing. "

Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:20 AM:

" Re BGS 3:08am post-I alluded to some actual debates that did take place concerning these topics. Either you missed the post by me yesterday at 12:36pm, or chose to ignore it since it didn't support your claims about faith and reason. "

Bugs to Kenneth Krause wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:20 AM:

" You said it was a 'funny' story, but I found no humor in it whatsoever. "

Kenneth Krause(cont) wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:07 AM:

" Anyway, people in the room actually began to see the real SCIENTIFIC problems with evolution, and that there is nothing in observable science that contradicts the Bibles account of history. As he repeatedly made his point and answered objections using facts and evidence, one of the students became very upset and started screaming at him calling him a sellout. He actually had a breakdown and started crying. Not to laugh at his misfortune, but it emphasized the point that to most evolutionists, evolution is a religion as opposed to science. This was a young man indoctrinated with the concept of evolution, who literally was losing his faith. Anyway, I would need to dig them up, but I have my program and notes if anyone is interested in the exact date and time this took place. "

Kenneth Krause wrote on Feb 14, 2008 9:00 AM:

" I would like to share a funny story concerning something concerning this topic that happened right here at UWL a couple years ago. It was when Ken Ham was in town doing his Creation conference. One of the events was Dr David Menton speaking at UWL. He was speaking in front of a group of biology and science professors and students. I am sure some of the professors atteneded thinking they would trip him up and that science and facts would not support his position.(cont next) "

Kenneth Krause to 9:32pm wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:55 AM:

" In Chapter 14 of Origin of the Species,Darwin himself acknowledged his whole theory depended on a being with reproductive powers to kick everything off, so to speak. He was fully aware he had given no such accounting. Without this, evolution is a dead theory. It is meaningless. "

To:Re Thomas Paine wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:51 AM:

" I respectfully disagree. Many people such as Josh McDowell used logic and reason to investigate the Bible and came to the conclusion that it is trustworthy. I recommend his book "Evidence That Demands A Verdict". "

Kenneth Krause wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:49 AM:

" Re 4:43 am:I agree-most educated people in this country are Christians.
"

To:BGS 3:08am wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:47 AM:

" I respectfully disagree. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:11 AM:

" It's interesting. Someone has posited that the sacrifice of Jesus invalidated Old Testament law, which, of course, is notorious for its condemnation of homosexuality. Yet most evangelical Christians will cite Leviticus to back up their contention that homosexuality is a sin. Jesus, of course, had nothing to say about it. I think Paul condemned it in Romans, but then Paul said some pretty flaky stuff..like 'slaves be obedient to your masters.' He also spoke of being taken up to a '3rd heaven.' What's with that? Perhaps Josh McDowell has the answer. "

Bugs to Brian wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:03 AM:

" Thanks for the quotes from Thomas Paine. A genius, if there ever was one. "

Dear "whospeaksforearth" wrote on Feb 14, 2008 4:46 AM:

" Go check out some of the recommended "creationist" voices folks on here have suggested explain the bible...it is enlightening the depth of their inabilty to explain reality. It will strengthen your arguments knowing their lightweight logic. - BGS "

Dear Kenneth Krause wrote on Feb 14, 2008 4:43 AM:

" When "whospeaksforearth" says "most educated people are Christians" he is speaking about the USA. Many identify themselves as "Christian" like Bush, for example, but hardly follow Christ's teachings. These type of christians might as well call themselves humperdy-snoots...it's just a name. Being a "Christian" means adhering to Christs teachings. I, the Bible detester, am exponentially more Christian than Bush, Dobson and most other christian figureheads because I try to live my life according to Jesus' teachings. Globally the statemnt you quoted does not hold water...China and India and the EU are full of educated non-Christians. "

Dear "Re: Thomas Paine" wrote on Feb 14, 2008 3:11 AM:

" I read the pamphlet as a US citizen researching our Nations Founding. They were men far beyond the grasp of voo-doo bible stories, living in the here and now. Science and reason were their guides. To accept the Bible one must put aside logic. Not for me. But enjoy anyway. Hope God doesn't make a bet with the devil about the corruption of your soul like He did to Job.(sic) "

Dear "To BGS" wrote on Feb 14, 2008 3:08 AM:

" Hey...good for you if you "understand" the Bible. Would love to debate you on innumerous contradictions and absurdities of the Bible and get your "understanding". The New Testament was written 300 years after Jesus' life...edited, stories deleted and added...all to fit a scheme of keeping sheeple like yourself in line and paying your homages to the church. Again, what kind of all powerful god writes a book that many folks don't understand. Original Sin.....what a joke. Not even in the Bible...it is a man made..er church made concept. I'm free from the baggage of that obscene "guilt"....life is much sweeter without the detestable Bible. We should burn them all for energy production. "

whospeaksforearth wrote on Feb 13, 2008 9:32 PM:

" to the 5:10 pm post...please explain to me why evolution is a dead theory...now i don't think you can possibly back that statement up with coherent thought, but good luck to you "

Kenneth Krause wrote on Feb 13, 2008 5:13 PM:

" Re 3:04pm-I could give you the name of Doctors with PHD's in Biology who interpret the Bible literally. Thank you for admitting most educated people are Christians. That about says it all. "

To:whospeaksforarth wrote on Feb 13, 2008 5:10 PM:

" Quantum theory doesn't attempt to explain our origins. The theory of evolution does attempt this, and fails. Darwin even acknowledges this himself in Chapter 14 of Origin of the Species. I am looking at nothing through a religious prism. As a scientific theory, evolution simply doesn't hold up. It is dead-a "nothing" theory, if you will. "

To:BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 5:06 PM:

" The Bible isn't clear and understood by you, apparently. It is to me. Speak for yourself. "

Re:Thomas Paime wrote on Feb 13, 2008 5:03 PM:

" I have read that pamphlet. As a second-year Sunday school student, I was able to see through it. He uses some clever verbige, but there is no substance. He thinks faith and reason are mutually exclusive, which I don't agree with. I think one can examine the evidence for and against Christianity, and come to a reasonable conclusion to put their Faith in Christ. I have found that those who disagree with this have an anti-supernatural bias. Any bias will be a hindrance in a search for the truth. I recommend Josh McDowell "Evidence That Demands A Verdict". "

Dear "10:49am to Bugs" wrote on Feb 13, 2008 4:29 PM:

" So you and Bugs and I read the same texts but draw two differing conclusions....ain't that stupid? How can those words be from God if we can't clearly deliniate what point He is trying to make. You've done more to prove my point than I have. Thanks. - BGS "

Last quote for today.... wrote on Feb 13, 2008 4:11 PM:

" "The story of the redemption will not stand examination. That man should redeem himself from the sin of eating an apple by committing a murder on Jesus Christ, is the strangest system of religion ever set up."
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine "

Dear Mark Sanders wrote on Feb 13, 2008 4:08 PM:

" "The study of theology, as it stands in Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on nothing; it proceeds by no authorities; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing and admits of no conclusion."
-- Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason (1793-5), "

BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 4:06 PM:

" "All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."
-- Thomas Paine, (1737-1809), The Age of Reason, pt. 1, "The Author's Profession of Faith" (1794) -

"Any system of religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
-- Thomas Paine, as quoted by Joseph Lewis in Inspiration and Wisdom from the Writings of Thomas Paine
"

Ken Ham explains nothing wrote on Feb 13, 2008 3:59 PM:

" The basis of Ken Hams belief in the Bible is....his belief in the Bible. He has no proof of anything he says. How silly of God to have men write a Bible that requires dufuses like Ham to interpret it for those that choose to believe. In order to beleive Ham one has to believe in the Bible and its unclear messages. What kind of almighty creator inspires a book that isn't clear and understood by all his creatures? No...the God I believe in speaks to all of us in an universal language....N-A-T-U-R-E. - BGS "

whospeaksforearth wrote on Feb 13, 2008 3:07 PM:

" to say evolution is 'not supported by evidence' is one of the more irrational statements one can make...there is an incredible amount of evidence supporting evolution, and if you would take the time to look at facts objectively instead of through a religious prism you would see that "

whospeaksforearth---to 8:29 AM post wrote on Feb 13, 2008 3:04 PM:

" i will concede that most educated people are christians, but it is also a fact that the higher the education level the less literal people interpret the bible...it's the least educated that are fundamentalists...and to call evolution 'a weak theory' is simply ridiculous. it is no weaker than quantum theory...i highly doubt u have such a strong opinion on quantum theory...the only reason you discount evolution is because it calls into question your religious beliefs...and i highly doubt you fully understand natural selection enough to make a judgment about it "

To:11:49am wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:46 PM:

" Of course Genesis does not constantly change. That is what makes it more credible than a "theory" that scientists are constantly "revising". I am not as interested in the credentials of the parties on EITHER SIDE as much as I am interested in the facts and evidence presented. Again, I find the evidence against evolution much more compelling than the evidence for evolution. And, as brought up by another poster, the fact that Ken has successfully debated leading evolutionists is pretty compelling also. By the way, since YOU are interested in credentials, check out the credentials of Dr David Menton, who comes to the same conclusions as Ken Ham. He has more letters behind his name, so maybe that makes what he says more compelling to you. "

10:49am to Bugs wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:39 PM:

" Sorry, I don't think it is clear at all He is referring to his second coming. Since he returned after He was crucified, it is clear to me and others that is what He was referring to. Sorry you disagree. "

Hey Mike Sanders... wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:30 PM:

" I will read that stuff....I appreciate the sources. And then the next time a Bible debate pops up I will allude to your sources for your benefit and mine. In the meantime read Paine's "Age of REASON".....it's a pamphlet...takes 30 minutes and expresses the sentiment of the majority of our Founders who were FED UP with religion.- BGS "

Dear "To BGS 10:41,10:46" wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:27 PM:

" So according to you all the "law" in the Old Testament is obsolete due to Christ.....Hmmmm that includes the 10 (or was it 17) commandments and all the anti-homosexual ranting in Leviticus. Good news. So why do Evangelicals press the anti-homosexual krappe non-stop? We have some agreement. Jesus said love God and love your neighbor as yourself. Case closed. He also said love your enemy....oooooops.....no wars with love. What gives? - BGS "

BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:21 PM:

" Bugs....forgive them for they see and do not believe. "

BrianGSmith wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:20 PM:

" 1) What Old Testament Bible prophecies were fulfilled? Please enumerate. 2) Read Thomas Paines "The Age of Reason" where Mr. Paine eviscerates the Bible and religion in general...Paine motivated the young Nation to resist imperial British rule.....I'd take Paine over any dushenheimer Liberty Univ. graduate or Lee Strobel. Paine helped forge America during the Age of Enlightment when man began to peel off the facade of the Bible. If you don't value the conclusions of our Founders move to some theocratic nightmare and let us in the US live free of the silly Bible. "

To:Brian wrote on Feb 13, 2008 12:41 PM:

" All or nothing? So, if we have laws against killing and stealing we must also have laws against wearing clothes with 2 fibers?! No laws against wearing certain clothes would mean no laws against killing? No thanks. THAT is looney. "

Mike Sanders to BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 12:36 PM:

" Re 10:41am post. Sorry, if what you said is true then people like Gary Habermas would not have trounced people like Anthony Flew in various debates concerning Christianity and the Bible. Also, Ken Ham would not have handily defeated leading evolutionists in various debates. Some of these are on tape and CD. Seriously, you should check them out. Great stuff. Many universities routinely schedule these types of debates. Maybe you should try your hand at some. What do you think? Are you a master debater? "

Bugs to 10;49 am wrote on Feb 13, 2008 12:21 PM:

" Well, go back and look at the quotes that BGS provided. Jesus is not talking about just returning, but coming back with the kingdom and the power-clearly a reference to his second coming, which he said would occur in the lifetimes of his follower, which of copurse it did not. How's that for a long sentence? "

To BGS 10:41,10:46 wrote on Feb 13, 2008 12:14 PM:

" Of course the Bible can withstand scrutiny. It has in the past, it does today, and it will continue to do so. As far as our laws, following the Bible should be a personal choice. That is why many of our laws don't mirror the laws of the Bible. And that is how it should be. As a side note, any critical reader of the Bible would understand that Gods people were released from the "law" of the Old Testamant when Christ died. This "law" included thigs like the clothes with two fibers, etc. For one having claimed to read it multiple times, your ignorance of the Bible is mind-boggling. "

To 8:42 wrote on Feb 13, 2008 11:49 AM:

" Ken Ham has a degree in Applied Science and a few honorary degrees in theology and such from the likes of Liberty College. He may SOUND scientific but I assure you that he is not taken seriously in ANY circles of biological study. A so-called "scholar" using similar polemics, Erich Anton Paul von D�niken, gained notoriety a few years back, claiming that the "holes" in evolutionary and/or human history could only be explained by the contribution of extraterrestrial aliens. Look, 8:42, you can believe anything you want--so can the 40 or 60% of other Americans--but Ken Ham's narrative is NOT science. Science has one important ingredient: it can be improved and disproved. Pieces of evolutionary theory get revised every day. Genesis does not. "

To:9:44am wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:53 AM:

" Go ahead. I feel more comfortable in the company of the great minds I listed. As do the majority of educated people in this country. "

To:Dear Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:51 AM:

" Again, you show your ignorance. The fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy is what caused many people to become Bible believing Christians. "

To:Bugs wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:49 AM:

" No, clearly He was NOT referring to His second coming. You are reading things into what He said simply to manufacture contradictions. All He said is that He would return. And He did. "

BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:47 AM:

" Back shortly...have to "draft" my Fantasy Baseball squad on mlb.com "

BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:46 AM:

" You can't have it both ways. Either the Bible is Gods word and should be adhered to or its not. God told folks not to wear clothes made of two fibres. I see no laws against that. I hear no one quoting that text. Yet we have men/women quoting the anti homosexual text repeatedly. If you follow the Bible its not piecemeal....its all or nothing or its nothing. "

BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:41 AM:

" Peace to you to....whoever you are. The Bible can not withstand any serious scrutiny...sorry. It takes......faith......to buy into the "program".....blind faith. If "god" wanted to communicate to us He would do so in an Universal language, not some gibberish book requiring legions of priests and theologians to interpret. That's plain looney. "

Re BGS 9:41am wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:36 AM:

" No wonder you don't understand the Bible. If this is what you got out of the post you are responding to, maybe you need to brush up on YOUR critical reading. wow. "

Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:16 AM:

" No, Brian, you are reading things into the Bible that simply are not there. Jesus fulfilled His promise in the verses you quoted. He said He was going to return and He did. "

"To Eddie" to BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:13 AM:

" Come on, Brian. Don't be so lazy. Re-read my post. I never said all of our laws were based on the Bible. They are based on societies collective idea of morality. If anything, your post shows that we are NOT a Christian theocracy. "

Bugs to Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:09 AM:

" Clearly, Jesus is referring to his second coming, and he is telling his followers it'll occur in their lifetimes. Of course, it didn't. "

Dear "To Eddie" wrote on Feb 13, 2008 9:50 AM:

" How many laws do we have against wearing clothes made of two fibres? How many laws do we have prohibiting the growing of two crops in one field? What did Jesus say were the only commandments to follow? Boo-yah - BGS "

Dear "To Dear To BGS" wrote on Feb 13, 2008 9:44 AM:

" I'm more apt to accept the beliefs and arguments of Einstein, Thomas Paine, Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, Madison, and Mark Twain among many. "

Dear "To Eddie" wrote on Feb 13, 2008 9:41 AM:

" God's laws in the Bible are also against thinking....How many laws do we have against coveting? - BGS "

Dear Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 13, 2008 9:40 AM:

" Did you read the quotes I offered and their context? Jesus was talking about his "Second Coming". Yes, He did return after his crucifixion so I suppose that was the apocalypse? I could send you hundreds of Biblical propheccies that failed to materialize if you'd like. What's your opinion on the Book of Joshua? Or Job? I read that book thrice looking for inspiration and instead found it awfully whacky. Sticking with the theme of this thread I think other Americans have read the Bible as well and thus we see the influence of the evangelical melting away like Bush's popularity. "

Mike Sanders to BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:48 AM:

" Perhaps most people DO read it critically while you do not. One supposed contradiction you brought up below was explained in a post to Bugs. If you were a critical reader, you would have been able to figure this out. "

To:6:11pm wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:45 AM:

" I share your disgust with our educational system. 45% of American believe in evolution? Unbelievable. You are right, our education system has failed. No way should the figure be that high. I am going to have to look some things up-I actually didn't think it was that high. "

Mike Sanders to Starfish wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:42 AM:

" I would never presume to be more educated in this area than the community of biological scientists. But, there are people who agree with me who have opposed these evolutionists in well publicized debates. Ken Ham has debated many leading evolutionists, and the SCIENTIFIC evidence presented to support his position was very interesting. You should pick up a couple of the tapes. Fascinating stuff. "

To:1:49am wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:35 AM:

" Whether intentional or not, you just made a fantastic arguement for intelligen design, which of course is not science. "

To:Eddie wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:34 AM:

" Could you give some examples? My experience has been that each and every one of us(politicians and us common folk alike) push for laws we find moral and just, and oppose those we do not find moral and just. Gods law opposed killing and stealing. Are you suggesting laws against these things should not have been enacted due to fear of being on the road to a theocracy? I am unclear as to the point you are making. All of our laws are based on societies collective idea of morality. "

To:Whospaeksforarth wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:29 AM:

" The poster wasn't talking about belief in God going up and down or sideways. Here is the bottom line: Most educated people in this country(college degree or higher) classify themselved as Bible-believing Christians. That, my friend, is a fact. Also, you need to wake up. Even hard-core evolutionists acknowledge that evolution is not a fact, only a theory. And, as shown on other blogs and many books on the subject, it is an extremely weak theory at that. It is simply not supported by the evidence. Sorry you disagree. "

To Dear to:BGS wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:22 AM:

" Then why don't you go to some of those websites and enjoy the debate? Sorry, but I am more likely to respect the opinions of people like Gary Habermas, Isaac Newton, C.S. Lewis, Josh McDowell, Lee Strobel, etc. than people like you. These are all people who have stood behind the Bible and handled themselves very well in debates. For examples, see a few of the debates that took place between Habermas and Sir Anthony Flew. Sorry, as much as you would like to believe differently, the Bible can withstand any scrutiny either you, or men much more learned than you, can throw at it. Peace. "

Democratic Evangelicals...... wrote on Feb 13, 2008 1:52 AM:

" Finally there has been some polling on how many Evangelicals vote Democrat and the average per State is 30-35%. This is never mentioned in the Corporate Media and could explain the diffusion of evangelical control in the process (something i never bought into).- BrianGSmith "

Dear "whospeaksforearth" wrote on Feb 13, 2008 1:49 AM:

" Have you ever read into the Aquatic Ape Theory? The idea we were water dwelling. Supported by the shapes of our noses, "web like" structure between our fingers and feet, our ability to hold our breath (most mammals can't) and the similarities our skin and body fat distribution has in commn with current water dwelling mammals like dolphins, whales and pigs? Check it out....very interesting....very possible. Babies born under water, a growing birthing practice, instinctively know how to deal with the conditions. This is lost when the kid ages and then, often, is retaught or relearned. Facinating. - BrianGSmith "

Eddie wrote on Feb 12, 2008 6:33 PM:

" 8:34am, you completely misunderstood my post. It addressed the evilness of politicians trying to install THEIR definitions of "God's Law" as the law of the land. When politicians do this, they take the first step towards creating a Theocracy, which is no different than an oppressive dictatorship. Citizens will then be "punished" for not worshipping God in the "correct way". Do we really want that to happen? "

whospeaksforearth wrote on Feb 12, 2008 6:20 PM:

" examples...one big talking point for creationists used to be that if life started in water, there should be a fossil of a creature that is a transition from water to land-living...in 2004 that creature was found, a fish with a flat head and limbs...it was found in the exact part of rock that it should've been according to the current theory

98% of our DNA is identical to chimpanzees

99% of the species to ever have existed are now extinct (if you believe in intelligent design, how intelligent is that?)

and by the way, why is it demeaning to think we all came from lower species? i find it quite beautiful to know that all species and all living things are connected "

whospeaksforearth wrote on Feb 12, 2008 6:11 PM:

" it is completely ridiculous to see the posts on here from people who don't 'believe' in evolution...you guys seriously need to wake up...this country needs to wake up, only like 45% of americans 'believe' in evolution, compared to 70-80% in europe...our science system has failed...evolution is an undeniable fact and every time there has been a gap in the fossil record a fossil has been found...will you people never give this thing up? "

whospeaksforearth wrote on Feb 12, 2008 6:07 PM:

" to 8:48 am post...I don't know what you're talking about...as education level goes up, religious belief goes down, the most religious people are almost always the ones with the least education, sorry..it's true "

Dear Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 12, 2008 4:44 PM:

" Your statement is an hypocrisy of sorts. One would think "educated readers" would read something so important as the Bible critically and word for word. Facts and my experiences debating Bible thumpers has proven quite the opposite. Most educated Americans couldn't find Iraq on a map before we invaded them for the second time in 2003. Education is relative. - BrianGSmith "

To: 2:42 (Starfish) wrote on Feb 12, 2008 4:41 PM:

" Clearly you are far, FAR more educated than me--and all of the community of biological scientists--so I see there is little need to argue. There was a guy that drew a distinction between micro- and macro-evolution--is he still around? He never answered my question as to how there could be one without the other. Not that li'l ol' Starfish would have the intelligence to understand, but I shore wood like to try. "

Dear "To BGS" wrote on Feb 12, 2008 4:41 PM:

" Indeed I use the Bible...I was raised Christian, I studied and beleived. And then I read the book....the most damning biography of a "god" I've ever seen. I use Bible quotes to subdue ignorant "Christians" who blindly reference it. I found the actual teachings of Jesus to be enlightening and inspirational and wish "Christians" based their lives on that rather than on the hatred and squazz eminating from the Dobsons, Falwells and Bush's. The Bible is hardly the 'word of God" and one would have to have a low opinion of god to think so. Too many folks are afraid to take on anyone who stands behind the Bible....I relish the debate. Bring it on. "

Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 12, 2008 3:13 PM:

" Re BGS post: Well, I guess most educated people in this country are not critical readers. "

To:BGS wrote on Feb 12, 2008 3:07 PM:

" I can read fine, but thanks for your concern. You may want to check out some websites on Bible difficulties. You seem to be almost schizo when it comes to the Bible. I have seen you vigorously use the Bible to defend your views on certain social issues, and other times, like today, call it unreliable. So, any comments you make regarding the Bible I tend to take with a grain of salt. "

To:Bugs wrote on Feb 12, 2008 2:49 PM:

" I am not sure, but I am thinking Jesus told them this before He was crucified. After He was crucified, He did indeed return. So, I see no lie. If I am mistaken on the timeframe, I will have to check some websites. "

Dear "To BGS" wrote on Feb 12, 2008 2:46 PM:

" You obviously can't read. Jesus was telling the people he was speaking to that HE would return before some of them died. So "Evangelicals" and "Left Behinders" are simply idiots who haven't bothered to go to Jesus' words to learn of his return. But this is silly. The Bible is so wrought with failed predictions and prophesies that it's a freaking joke. But you have to be a critical reader to know this. Keyword being "reader". "

To:Monkey Boy wrote on Feb 12, 2008 2:42 PM:

" I would suggest believing that you descended from a monkey OR a starfish is pretty demeaning. But, to each his own. Have at it, and good luck. But, I must correct you on one thing. According to REAL science, evolution doesn't even qualify as a theory. It simply is not supported by the evidence. Sorry to disappoint. "

To: 11:23, 12:25 (Monkey Boy) wrote on Feb 12, 2008 1:51 PM:

" Sorry, kids, but evolution IS scientific "fact" as far as REAL science is concerned. As with all real-world data, it is unknowable in its totality but it is the framework within which all modern biological science is conducted. I am not, indicently, descended from a monkey but, rather, a monkey-like creature that took two evolutionary paths. I go further back, and find that I'm a distant relative of a starfish. Can I go by "Starfish?"--Monkey Boy seems so, I don't know, demeaning. . . "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Feb 12, 2008 1:28 PM:

" It appears, then, that Jesus was lying when he told his followers he'd return during their lifetimes. "

To:BGS wrote on Feb 12, 2008 12:33 PM:

" Your post proves my point. No one knows the day or hour, or even the year. Only that He will return in the future, which is what the verses you cite state. Hope that helps. If you have other difficulties with the Bible, or my explanation on this doesn't help you, there are many websites that give detailed answers on difficulties in the Bible. "

To:Michael wrote on Feb 12, 2008 12:25 PM:

" Your original post said nothing about whether he believes in teaching Creationism as science. You simply asked what his views are on Creationism. There is a difference. Many people believe in Creationism, but recognize it is not science due to the fact that it involves the supernatural. Science is only concerned with the natural. That aside, I do not want evolution taught as science either. Not because it contradicts the Bible, but simply because it is not a correct account of our origins. Why would you want to teach children something that is false, no matter what your spiritual beliefs are? "

To:4:42pm wrote on Feb 12, 2008 11:23 AM:

" The issues and problems with evolution were discussed in some detail in the evolution/Vatican blog. "

Michael Welch: Late "Saints"... wrote on Feb 12, 2008 10:33 AM:

" I obviously don't believe in a 'religious test' or I wouldn't have written a defense of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons) or said that I personally preferred Mike Huckabee the former Baptist preacher to John McCain. At the same time I am as most here know for abortion rights and against the teaching of creationism as 'science.' My remark about McCain is to note that he has ALWAYS been against abortion rights but I have no idea his stance on creationism; neither does anyone else apparently. McCain vs Hillary would be a narrow thing is my guess but vs Obama I think Obama would win -- if he survives... "

To 6:34 wrote on Feb 12, 2008 10:14 AM:

" You don't have to call them nuts, Jimmy. We'll do that or, better yet, just let them exercise their freedom of speech and they can demonstrate it themselves. "

Dear "To BGS" wrote on Feb 12, 2008 9:50 AM:

" You are wrong....it is stated in the Bible when Jesus will return.....Even better Jesus Christ himself says, dozens of times, when he will return. Here are a few samples. - MATTHEW 16:28 "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." MATTHEW 23:36 "Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation" - LUKE 9:27 "But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God." -- MARK 9:1 "Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power." -- BGS "

Planet Stasiak to: And,Oh wrote on Feb 12, 2008 8:55 AM:

" I don't believe in evolution as an explanation for our origins. I recommend Evolution:The Lie, by Ken Ham. Not sure if he has an agenda or not, nor do I care. But, the fact he uses real, actual science to refute evolution is compelling. Again, don't know if peers reviewed the book, nor do I care. I find it intellectually dishonest that evolutionists say your work is not credible unless it is peer reviewed. Then, they refuse to review the work in question. So, we must sometimes review it ourselves to find the truth, which is what I did. I simply find the evidence against evolution much more compelling then the evidence for evolution. Sorry you disagree. "

To:whospeaksforearth wrote on Feb 12, 2008 8:48 AM:

" Then I guess most educated people in this country are delusional. BTW, isn't one definition of crazy thinking everyone ELSE is crazy? "

To:HEY! wrote on Feb 12, 2008 8:46 AM:

" Thank you so much. That is very magnanimous of you. I in turn will promise you I will not deliberately harm another. Unfortunately I can't, however, make the same promise as you made to me, either to you or anyone else. But, I CAN say the ONLY reason I would interfere or try to change laws, or what have you, would be if your "private medical decision" would harm another. So, I think we understand each other. Peace. "

Mike Sanders to 5:24pm wrote on Feb 12, 2008 8:38 AM:

" I don't have a priest, and am unclear what in my post made you believe I did. All I did is state a simple fact. I guess, according to you, most educated people in this country are certifiable. But, I guess most educated people in this country may consider you certifiable. So, it's a wash I guess. "

To:What a Joke(on you) wrote on Feb 12, 2008 8:36 AM:

" Huh?
"

To:BGS wrote on Feb 12, 2008 8:35 AM:

" The Bible states no one would know the day or hour of Christs return. "

To:Eddie wrote on Feb 12, 2008 8:34 AM:

" So the Devil would WANT Gods law observed? I don't care who you are or what you believe, your post is messed up, dude. "

Dear "Yo" wrote on Feb 12, 2008 7:19 AM:

" Reagan was a hypocrite too. - BGS "

The Moderate wrote on Feb 12, 2008 6:03 AM:

" Not being a member of the "Right Wing" or the "Left Wing", I tire easily from these types of conversations. My observation is that �extremists� are never tolerant regardless of whether they come from the right wing or the left wing. And my observation is again fortressed by the content of the posts on this Blog. "

Eddie wrote on Feb 12, 2008 4:38 AM:

" I'm all for the continuing decrease in the Religious Right's influence in national politics. When certain people try to install their idea of "God's Law" as the law of the land, they are doing the Devil's work for sure. "

Dear Yo.... wrote on Feb 12, 2008 2:11 AM:

" You are sadly misguided when you combine the theme of this thread...the disappearing of the perceived influence of the "evangelicals" with "support our troops". Who do evangelicals allegedly follow and adore? Jesus CHRIST or aul and John...the drugged out dude that wrote "Revelations"? I stand by my Christians are whiners statement fully. We hear them screeching and gnashing teeth every Christmas season...a "war on Christams"..the absurdity. Tell me Yo....when did Jesus say he would return? When did Jesus say he would return....not what "john" and not your delusional priest(ess) say...but what were HIS words about HIS return? (alleged return). - BrianG "

What a joke (on you) wrote on Feb 11, 2008 10:04 PM:

" Medical doctors used to be the whipping boy of the religious right (how they recently treat chiropractors and holistic medicine)....They were evil and taking "gods'will" into their own hands blasphemy!!!
Now these clowns have taken over the Hospitals in the name of god and made "Medicine" (and the money) their own.....Hypocrites. Heads in the sand.
We need these people involved with politics like we need them killing people for saying the world is round! "

whospeaksforearth wrote on Feb 11, 2008 9:39 PM:

" yo: could you explain to me where in the constitution it talks about abortion rights? I can't seem to find it anywhere... "

To Yo from Jimmy wrote on Feb 11, 2008 6:34 PM:

" I did call Mr. Dobson a loudmouth, which I'll stand by, but nowhere in the post do I refer to or call the religious Right "nuts." "

Yo wrote on Feb 11, 2008 6:28 PM:

" To Brian Smith - thin skin christians? I don't recall any beheadings or death threats for placing the Virgin Mary in Cow Dung and calling it "art". I don't recall any beheadings, or threats thereof over any bears or dolls named Jesus either. No Christians have put up with everything from being killed to being mocked and have turned the other cheek more than enough. Unlike some other religions whom we are at war with now. Wake up before it's too late, support the troops! "

Yo wrote on Feb 11, 2008 6:20 PM:

" Hypocracy, by voting for McCain? Right to life - forgetting that Life begins at conception, good ole hillary wants healthcare for all, claims it's part of the constitution. So is the right to Life! Calling someone like Dobson a loudmouth, or the religious right - nuts - really jimmy, will that bring us together? Will that promote unity in ANY way? By the way, Reagan voted for abortion rights when he was Gov. of California and then changed his mind. Romney changed his mind likewise for the same reasons Reagan did. - yet you call him a hypocrite? Right to Life is part of the constitution, let's let the unborn have their rights. "

whospeaksforearth wrote on Feb 11, 2008 6:18 PM:

" it's 2008...if you still believe the bible word for word, seek help; you're delusional "

Dear "Mike sanders" wrote on Feb 11, 2008 5:24 PM:

" Have you read the Bible or do you only know the few verses your priest expands upon once a week? If you've read it and "believe" in it then you are certified.... "

BrianGSmith wrote on Feb 11, 2008 5:22 PM:

" Why is it Christians are some of the thinnist skinned members of our society? They got churches all over the place, a calendar full of their holidays...shrines, statures, TV programs and tax breaks. And how many "Bible believers" have actually read the entire Bible? Methinks none to less than none. "

Mike Sanders wrote on Feb 11, 2008 4:44 PM:

" Re 2/11 2:00pm post. well, I guess the majority of the country would be eschewing all these advances since most educated people in this country consider themselves Bible-believing Christians. "

And, oh. . . wrote on Feb 11, 2008 4:42 PM:

" And, oh, 2:46: we now have two types of evolution? And you believe in one of them? I see. . . So you DO believe in evolution--just not a lot of it. Okay. So: very observable "micro-evolution" occurs but when it gets too big, it no longer exists. Maybe YOU should do a little reading that's NOT on the Discovery Institute's reading list--like maybe a little real science. You know, the stuff done by scientists that is vetted by OTHER scientists (peer review) and not circular argument ideologues. I've noticed that because Darwin's writings are not iron-clad TRVTH that you dismiss the theory. Well, science is not divine, irrevocable TRVTH; it is a framework, a foundation, and as nearly as such can be, it is responsible for ALL of modern biological advancement. "

HEY! wrote on Feb 11, 2008 4:37 PM:

" That's Ranunculus to you, bub. Just trying to lighten up. Thank you, though, it IS one of my favorite genuses. I'd be more than glad to enlighten you, and 2:46, as to what is your business: YOUR body and YOUR decisions and YOUR pregnancy. I promise that I will never, EVER force you to have an abortion (like Tom Delay's Marianas Island friends in the Pacific island sweat shops). In fact, I will never inquire of you what decisions you have or haven't made in the privacy of your doctor's office. "

To:2:00pm wrote on Feb 11, 2008 3:20 PM:

" AWWWWW, poor baby! Someone dared to question evolution. Your well reasoned solution is if we don't believe we came from monkeys, we have no right to the benefits of modern medicine. I have an idea-as a matter of principle, I think you should post under the name "monkey boy". What say you? "

To:Re 126 wrote on Feb 11, 2008 3:00 PM:

" Your post reeks of intolerance. Maybe you could enlighten as to what is our "business", so no one steps on your toes again. Lighten up, buttercup. "

To:Religious Right wrote on Feb 11, 2008 2:57 PM:

" I disagree. I think we need them. "

Re:2:00pm wrote on Feb 11, 2008 2:46 PM:

" I didn't see the word "figuratively" in your post. Maybe it was one of those things censored-excuse me-"filtered". It is none of YOUR business whether I choose to oppose abortion. It is my right, with or without your approval, to work to change laws I find unjust. Antibiotics have nothing to do with Darwinian evolution, nor do any scientific advances. You should do a little more reading on the subject before you spout off, like maybe macro-evolution vs micro-evolution. So, there is no need for me to "eschew" anything. But thanks for your concern. "

Re: 1:26 wrote on Feb 11, 2008 2:00 PM:

" Yikes! There's another one! "Human rights concerns"--hoo, boy, THAT'S rich. It is a clear gambit to wrest a woman's reproductive system from her control. Period. End of discussion. You have no CLUE what is going on in her doctor's office (do you understand figuratively? Too big a word?) without barging in. IT IS NONE OF YOUR (or my) business. And I'll tell you, if you REALLY don't believe in evolution, why don't you, as a matter of principle, eschew all advances developed with evolutionary theory as the very backbone of biological sciences? Nothing in your creation myths about antibiotics, you say? Oh well. "

Religious Right wrote on Feb 11, 2008 1:54 PM:

" I for one am happy that the religious right is leaving the GOP. I am so sick of people that wear their religion on their sleeves like Huckabee. Thanks for your past help religious right but we don't need you anymore. Form your own political party like the Green's. "

To:Froto wrote on Feb 11, 2008 1:39 PM:

" What are you talking about? ACLU, Barry Lynn, A Gaylor, etc, are all for tolerance. Just look at their posts. "

To:Michael Welch wrote on Feb 11, 2008 1:30 PM:

" I am also unaware of McCains views regarding creationism, i.e., I am not sure if he is a Bible believing Christian or not. I am more concerned that he made a big push to ban UFC simply due to his political ties to boxing. Taking away peoples rights to make a living and run a business is no small potatoes to me. Can I ask you, why would his views on creationism make a difference? Do you believe in a religious test in order to hold public office? "

To: Oh My! wrote on Feb 11, 2008 1:26 PM:

" Could you be more specific? What comments are you referring to? Maybe, per your wish, they have been censored. Nothing like free and open discussion. BTW, do these people REALLY barge into doctors offices? Or, do they merely oppose abortion due to human rights concerns? Also, creation as science is no more ridiculous than evolution as science(see evolution/vatican blog). Has anyone REALLY said "love thy neighbor unless they have olive skin"? Looks like your posts are the ones that should be filtered. "

Michael Welch: Cautionary Tale... wrote on Feb 11, 2008 12:46 PM:

" I note 'Bugs's remark below; it's pertinent and poignant especially re: the support for Obama from the two Kennedy family 'heavy hitters' Caroline and her uncle Ted. Obama is an unknown quantity re: the establishment and his advertised openness to 'change' may not be perceived by it as mere campaign bloviating. If he enters the white house particularly determined to rein up the empire then the empire will eventually strike back. Yet re: Wellstone it seems that the 'preemptive strike' philosophy of the Bush um 'defense' dept may have its political parallel domestically?... "

Oh my! wrote on Feb 11, 2008 12:35 PM:

" Looks like you've stirred up a flock of wing-nuts, Jimmy! Astonishingly, they don't even seem to hear it when their panderers say goofy stuff. As they swarm to pawn off their ridiculous creation myths as science and barge into doctors' offices, they spout platitudes like "love they neighbor"--unless, of course, he has olive skin and parks his heresy on top of OUR oil! Can't you filter out these nut-jobs so that we can have a civil discussion? OF COURSE these goofballs are losing clout! They can't even differentiate between true conservatism and totalitarian theocracy! "

Froto wrote on Feb 11, 2008 12:09 PM:

" Everybody is right and everybody is wrong.
Everything is either BLack or White.
No wonder we are in the state were in. Clothing manufactures should start making only White hats and Black hats all other colors should be outlawed. Next laws should be passed that only allow people to wear all white or all black, that way we all know where everyone stands. When the Higher Power offerred STUPIDIY along with WISDOM and TOLLERANCE, this latest generation must have opted for stupidity. "

Michael Welch: Lots Of "Christian" Voting Going On I'd Say... wrote on Feb 11, 2008 12:07 PM:

" Christians of whatever denomination (there are hundreds that can't agree after all) are certainly permitted to vote -- ALL four of the current major candidates are after all PRACTICING Christians. (And try running for president as an atheist hmm?) I don't think Christians need worry about being disenfranchised! As for what they 'stand' for the most literal believers seem to stand for the endless wars; Christ's pacifism has been relegated to the asterick. Well the wars continue and John McCain would keep them going. Also McC is anti-abortion rights; his views on creationism however I am unaware of. Anyone know?... "

A.Gaylor wrote on Feb 11, 2008 11:59 AM:

" We must be mindful that whenever religious symbols or speech is allowed in the public square, it is basically Congress making a law respecting an establishment of religion. Therefore, this must be suppressed. This includes students voluntarily speaking about their faith at graduation ceremonies. If the Religious Right wishes to enjoy this type of free speech, I want no part of it. "

Barry Lynn wrote on Feb 11, 2008 11:31 AM:

" Re ACLU. Absolutely! We must be United for the Separation of Church and State. Everytime we jail someone for violating a Biblical principle such as that against stealing or killing, we are violating the concept of separation of church and state. Everytime we give Christians a vote, we are violating this concept. Our laws are based on socities collective idea of morality. To give Christians a voice or foothold in this process is just plain wrong. "

Bugs Raplin wrote on Feb 11, 2008 11:28 AM:

" Please triple the secret service protection for Obama. "

To:Welchy wrote on Feb 11, 2008 11:21 AM:

" By anti-abortion rights rr, you must mean they are opposed to allowing women to kill their babies? Oh, the horror! By Creationist rr, you must mean Bible-believing Christians? Oh, the humanity! "

Yeah... wrote on Feb 11, 2008 11:15 AM:

" ...where is the elusive Johnny Hobo? We couldn't have scared him off, could we? "

Michael Welch: No Huck -- But Maybe No Hills Either?... wrote on Feb 11, 2008 10:40 AM:

" Personally I'd much prefer Huckabee to McCain re: the potential for enlarging the wars with possible air attacks on Iran. I don't know what Huck had in mind per that unfortunate 'constitutional' remark but I suspect neither did he actually -- even Baptist preachers are capable of pander eh? Don't believe though that Huckabee can (mathematically) be nominated but then I thought Hillary would 'emerge' by now as the Demo inevitability yet after the arresting results of this last weekend I think that Obama might really win it and as Brian Smith has observed the convention could be 'interesting' at that! As an Obama voter I'm pleasantly surprised indeed... "

Michael Welch: Religious "Diversity"... wrote on Feb 11, 2008 10:18 AM:

" The religious right as we've known it IS losing its control; Pat Robertson had endorsed who? Rudy Giuliani! As in the Reagan years the rr thoroughly enjoyed access, shmoozing with the president, big names at Liberty University etc. Huckabee of course behaved as a moderately liberal governor of Arkansas re: Bill Clinton!), not phobic to raising taxes for education, not panic-stricken over illegals; he even criticized the Bush admin foreign policy. Some religious have become rather interested in Barack Obama vis-a-vis Big Jawn. There is that anti-Islamic rr, the one which strongly supports an endless war contra Islam, that is a creationist rr and an anti-abortion rights rr but it actually ought to be quite comfortable with, well, John McCain... "

ACLU wrote on Feb 11, 2008 9:14 AM:

" I totally agree with the sentiments expressed in this article. We must strive to be more tolerant in this society. The religious people in this society with their goofy ideas about doing unto others, loving thy neighbor, not killing, not stealing, etc. is very intolerant. Who are we to judge, for example, those 2 men that killed another man in a bar fight? They were merely practicing an alternative lifestyle that we must be more tolerant of. We should not impose our morality on others or attempt to legislate personal morality. We are truly in danger of becoming a Christian theocracy, as evidenced by all the non-Christians being arrested and jailed daily. This is a truly horrifying time. "

I guess we know. . . wrote on Feb 11, 2008 9:01 AM:

" I guess we know that the GOP establishment has chosen its leader when the party apparatus starts honing up its voter suppression mechanisms as in the Washington state primary this past weekend. Sorry, Huck, you lovable ol' squirrel-eater, you--no need to count all the votes any more than we did in Florida or Ohio. You'll just have to take our word on it. For those of us that have cringed with the mis-governance of the GOP machine since 1994, accelerating with great earnest in 2000, it is greatly rewarding to see that about 30 GOP congressmen are calling it quits this year (compared to only 5 for Dems). . . .Guess there aren't enough young-earthers to go around. "

Sorry, this is backwards wrote on Feb 11, 2008 9:00 AM:

" It's not the Religious Right who wish to scale back liberty, it is the bleeding heart liberals. Look at Clinton. When her daughter Chelsea was speaking to someone who is actually in the trenches fighting to protect our freedom and liberty, the following exchange took place: Chelsea: "What do you fear most?" Serviceman: "Osama, Obama, and Yo Mama." That says a lot about who respects freedom and liberty, does it not? "

Losing clout? wrote on Feb 11, 2008 8:47 AM:

" Not too sure about that...how many Presidents in our history have claimed to be Bible-believing Christians? Like, maybe, all of them? Heck, even the ones who might not be still claim they are. Losing clout? I don't think so. "

Jimmy-How about some examples? wrote on Feb 11, 2008 8:36 AM:

" Maybe I have been living in a cave, so at the risk of sounding out of the loop and ill informed, could you please cite some examples(quotes, etc)of candidates wishing to Christianize America, revamp the Constitution, and rollback individual rights and freedoms? The truth is, I am guesing there is no proof or evidence of this, and it is something you attribute to these candidates merely because they disagree with you. I will grant you the one quote by Huckabee regarding the Constitution, but that is an isolated, well-publicized quote. I recall no candidate, for example, wishing to scale back individual rights and freedoms. But, if you oppose a candidate, it sure is something you could say about them to make them look bad. "

Bugs to Jimmy wrote on Feb 11, 2008 8:24 AM:

" Methinks there's still a race for the GOP nod. It's not over til it's over sayeth Yogi. "

Comments »

Post a comment (150 word limit) »