The creationists are BACK

[thereisnospoon]

The founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.
Texas valedictorian vows to pray in her graduation speech, despite judge's order | khou.com Houston

I thought you respected the laws?

If this young woman chooses to thumb her nose at a Federal Judge's ruling that was specifically against her, I have no sympathy for the consequences she faces.

If this were any other issue, no one would support a person intentionally ignoring a legal ruling that was not in her favor.

Somehow, it's supposed to all be different because religion is involved?

Biery’s order, released Tuesday, was in response to a lawsuit filed by Christa and Danny Schultz on behalf of their son, Corwin, to block use of prayer. The judge says speakers cannot call on audience members to bow their heads, join in prayer or say "amen."

Texas judge: No prayer at high school graduation | khou.com Houston

Once again, the issue isn't that this student wants to exercise her religion privately, but rather she wants to lead the whole assembly in prayer.

Genius.....the school is barred from promoting one religion over another. Essentially that is why ALL religion was kicked out of public schools.
Since the school is not sanctioning one religion over another, the student can indeed say the words the judge barred.
As a matter of fact, the judge's ruling is incorrect and I suspect will be overturned.
When a law or ruling is viewed to be unjust it is the right of the people to express their disagreement with civil disobedience.
IMO this is an outrage. One agnostic parent has an axe to grind and a desire for 15 minutes of fame has in effect taken away this girl's right to freedom of religion.
Not for long. This liberal judge will be overturned and the agnostic troublemaker will just have to suck it up and deal with it.
As agnostics the parent nor his son have a Constitutional right to freedom FROM religion. The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
You tell me where that says we have a right to freedom from religion...

 

[Contumacious]

Then perhaps you should take it up with the judge who made the ruling. As it stands, the same basic rules for living in a nation of laws apply. You don't get to ignore legal rulings you disagree with. That defeats the purpose of having a judiciary.

Man, where the fuck have you been?

There is no federal judiciary.

Article III Courts were abolished circa 1935.

It began when an SCOTUS majority decided to censor , suppress, Justice James Clark McReynolds dissenting opinion in the "Gold Clause cases".

.

Webpage under the title "Federal Judiciary"

United States Courts

Sorry to burst your bubble, we actually do have a federal court system.

There is branch of government still denominated as the Federal Judiciary in order to perpetrate the fraud that Article III courts still exist.

The ONLY ones impressed are the members of the populace who are narcotized.

.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.
Texas valedictorian vows to pray in her graduation speech, despite judge's order | khou.com Houston

I thought you respected the laws?

If this young woman chooses to thumb her nose at a Federal Judge's ruling that was specifically against her, I have no sympathy for the consequences she faces.

If this were any other issue, no one would support a person intentionally ignoring a legal ruling that was not in her favor.

Somehow, it's supposed to all be different because religion is involved?

Biery’s order, released Tuesday, was in response to a lawsuit filed by Christa and Danny Schultz on behalf of their son, Corwin, to block use of prayer. The judge says speakers cannot call on audience members to bow their heads, join in prayer or say "amen."

Texas judge: No prayer at high school graduation | khou.com Houston

Once again, the issue isn't that this student wants to exercise her religion privately, but rather she wants to lead the whole assembly in prayer.

BTW, it is my guess the County DA could not find 12 people in the entire county to convict this girl of a crime.
Furthermore. DA's are elected officials. Should the DA make the gave mistake of prosecuting this girl there is no doubt he/she would be looking for another job.

 

[geauxtohell]

The founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.
Texas valedictorian vows to pray in her graduation speech, despite judge's order | khou.com Houston

I thought you respected the laws?

If this young woman chooses to thumb her nose at a Federal Judge's ruling that was specifically against her, I have no sympathy for the consequences she faces.

If this were any other issue, no one would support a person intentionally ignoring a legal ruling that was not in her favor.

Somehow, it's supposed to all be different because religion is involved?

Biery’s order, released Tuesday, was in response to a lawsuit filed by Christa and Danny Schultz on behalf of their son, Corwin, to block use of prayer. The judge says speakers cannot call on audience members to bow their heads, join in prayer or say "amen."

Texas judge: No prayer at high school graduation | khou.com Houston

Once again, the issue isn't that this student wants to exercise her religion privately, but rather she wants to lead the whole assembly in prayer.

BTW, it is my guess the County DA could not find 12 people in the entire county to convict this girl of a crime.
Furthermore. DA's are elected officials. Should the DA make the gave mistake of prosecuting this girl there is no doubt he/she would be looking for another job.

As the ruling was from a federal judge, I am not sure if the DA would be involved in the matter. I could be wrong. I am not a lawyer.

Even so, it doesn't change the fact that this young woman chooses to break the law.

Should a Muslim student be able to call their classmates to prayer at a graduation ceremony?

 

[geauxtohell]

Man, where the fuck have you been?

There is no federal judiciary.

Article III Courts were abolished circa 1935.

It began when an SCOTUS majority decided to censor , suppress, Justice James Clark McReynolds dissenting opinion in the "Gold Clause cases".

.

Webpage under the title "Federal Judiciary"

United States Courts

Sorry to burst your bubble, we actually do have a federal court system.

There is branch of government still denominated as the Federal Judiciary in order to perpetrate the fraud that Article III courts still exist.

The ONLY ones impressed are the members of the populace who are narcotized.

.

LMAO.

You tried to act like I don't know what I am talking about when you are basically evoking a conspiracy theory?

Once again, you don't get to simply ignore facets of our country that are inconvenient to your beliefs and position.

 

[thereisnospoon]

This child doesnt and should get the ability to coerce others into listening to her prayer.

There is no coercion. Those who are offended may excuse themselves or be silent out of respect for the rights of others.
This is all about who can push around who.
Remember this is one agnostic parent who wants 15 minutes of fame and one liberal judge with an anti Christian agenda.
The girl will get to say her prayer because the people of the community support her.
This hopefully will be the one time when people will take a stand against the lowest common denominator bullshit from the Left.
If the agnostic is offended by use of the name of God or Jesus, let him wear ear plugs.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

 

[geauxtohell]

Genius.....the school is barred from promoting one religion over another. Essentially that is why ALL religion was kicked out of public schools.
Since the school is not sanctioning one religion over another, the student can indeed say the words the judge barred.
As a matter of fact, the judge's ruling is incorrect and I suspect will be overturned.
When a law or ruling is viewed to be unjust it is the right of the people to express their disagreement with civil disobedience.

It was overturned by a federal appeals court.

IMO this is an outrage. One agnostic parent has an axe to grind and a desire for 15 minutes of fame has in effect taken away this girl's right to freedom of religion.
Not for long. This liberal judge will be overturned and the agnostic troublemaker will just have to suck it up and deal with it.
As agnostics the parent nor his son have a Constitutional right to freedom FROM religion. The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
You tell me where that says we have a right to freedom from religion...

So, by this standard, a Muslim Student can call their classmates to prayer at a graduation ceremony?

If legal precedent is going to be set, then it has to apply equally to all students and all faiths.

 

[Woyzeck]

Genius.....the school is barred from promoting one religion over another. Essentially that is why ALL religion was kicked out of public schools.
Since the school is not sanctioning one religion over another, the student can indeed say the words the judge barred.
As a matter of fact, the judge's ruling is incorrect and I suspect will be overturned.
When a law or ruling is viewed to be unjust it is the right of the people to express their disagreement with civil disobedience.

It was overturned by a federal appeals court.

IMO this is an outrage. One agnostic parent has an axe to grind and a desire for 15 minutes of fame has in effect taken away this girl's right to freedom of religion.
Not for long. This liberal judge will be overturned and the agnostic troublemaker will just have to suck it up and deal with it.
As agnostics the parent nor his son have a Constitutional right to freedom FROM religion. The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
You tell me where that says we have a right to freedom from religion...

So, by this standard, a Muslim Student can call their classmates to prayer at a graduation ceremony?

If legal precedent is going to be set, then it has to apply equally to all students and all faiths.

Or can a humanist call their classmates to reject theism as supernatural and advocate humanist principles?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Is there a special clause in the constitution regarding sex toys?

Apples and footballs.

Your municipality has latitude to enforce decency laws to cover such matters.

As they should when it comes to speaking at graduation. Fair is fair.

Uh, no. Religion is a distinctly constitutional issue. The same laws that ensure that your own right to practice your religion are not infringed upon (which I am assuming is true as you haven't been able to give an example of being deprived of your religious freedoms) also protect others from being compelled to participate in another person's religion.

The founding fathers, who you love to reference, put that in there.

It's a double edged sword.

Who at this graduation is being compelled to participate in the prayer?
Is it your assertion that just being in an area where the prayer is audible constitutes "coercion"?
I look at this in reverse. The girl's religious rights are being infringed upon by one agnostic. How do we account for that?
As a matter of fact, the problem I see is the agnostic found a judge that chose to interpret the First Amendment in his own way and not the way of the Amendment's intent.
The judge has essentially thumbed his nose at the community. If his judgeship is political, I doubt it if he'll be re-elected.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Genius.....the school is barred from promoting one religion over another. Essentially that is why ALL religion was kicked out of public schools.
Since the school is not sanctioning one religion over another, the student can indeed say the words the judge barred.
As a matter of fact, the judge's ruling is incorrect and I suspect will be overturned.
When a law or ruling is viewed to be unjust it is the right of the people to express their disagreement with civil disobedience.

It was overturned by a federal appeals court.

IMO this is an outrage. One agnostic parent has an axe to grind and a desire for 15 minutes of fame has in effect taken away this girl's right to freedom of religion.
Not for long. This liberal judge will be overturned and the agnostic troublemaker will just have to suck it up and deal with it.
As agnostics the parent nor his son have a Constitutional right to freedom FROM religion. The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
You tell me where that says we have a right to freedom from religion...

So, by this standard, a Muslim Student can call their classmates to prayer at a graduation ceremony?

If legal precedent is going to be set, then it has to apply equally to all students and all faiths.

She may call all she likes. There is no coercion to participate.
BTW, I see where you're going here. Attempting to take advantage of post 9/11 mistrust of Islam...Tolling is rejected. You are not innocent of this. So don't insult our intelligence and say you are.

 

[Contumacious]

Webpage under the title "Federal Judiciary"

United States Courts

Sorry to burst your bubble, we actually do have a federal court system.

There is branch of government still denominated as the Federal Judiciary in order to perpetrate the fraud that Article III courts still exist.

The ONLY ones impressed are the members of the populace who are narcotized.

.

LMAO.

You tried to act like I don't know what I am talking about when you are basically evoking a conspiracy theory?

Once again, you don't get to simply ignore facets of our country that are inconvenient to your beliefs and position.

You are right I don't get to ignore the powers-that-be since I don't have a powerful standing army.

They on the other hand , get to ignore the Constitution whenever it is inconvenient.

.

 

[geauxtohell]

As they should when it comes to speaking at graduation. Fair is fair.

Uh, no. Religion is a distinctly constitutional issue. The same laws that ensure that your own right to practice your religion are not infringed upon (which I am assuming is true as you haven't been able to give an example of being deprived of your religious freedoms) also protect others from being compelled to participate in another person's religion.

The founding fathers, who you love to reference, put that in there.

It's a double edged sword.

Who at this graduation is being compelled to participate in the prayer?
Is it your assertion that just being in an area where the prayer is audible constitutes "coercion"?
I look at this in reverse. The girl's religious rights are being infringed upon by one agnostic. How do we account for that?
As a matter of fact, the problem I see is the agnostic found a judge that chose to interpret the First Amendment in his own way and not the way of the Amendment's intent.
The judge has essentially thumbed his nose at the community. If his judgeship is political, I doubt it if he'll be re-elected.

In this instance, she is going to open with "let us pray". As stated, her intent is to lead her classmates in prayer. Whether that is coercion or not is debatable. The issue is whether it's the establishment of religion.

The Federal Appeals court didn't think so.

However, by that precedence, a Muslim student should be covered to call their classmates to prayer.

Would you be equally accepting of that?

 

[geauxtohell]

Genius.....the school is barred from promoting one religion over another. Essentially that is why ALL religion was kicked out of public schools.
Since the school is not sanctioning one religion over another, the student can indeed say the words the judge barred.
As a matter of fact, the judge's ruling is incorrect and I suspect will be overturned.
When a law or ruling is viewed to be unjust it is the right of the people to express their disagreement with civil disobedience.

It was overturned by a federal appeals court.

IMO this is an outrage. One agnostic parent has an axe to grind and a desire for 15 minutes of fame has in effect taken away this girl's right to freedom of religion.
Not for long. This liberal judge will be overturned and the agnostic troublemaker will just have to suck it up and deal with it.
As agnostics the parent nor his son have a Constitutional right to freedom FROM religion. The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
You tell me where that says we have a right to freedom from religion...

So, by this standard, a Muslim Student can call their classmates to prayer at a graduation ceremony?

If legal precedent is going to be set, then it has to apply equally to all students and all faiths.

She may call all she likes. There is no coercion to participate.
BTW, I see where you're going here. Attempting to take advantage of post 9/11 mistrust of Islam...Tolling is rejected. You are not innocent of this. So don't insult our intelligence and say you are.

Did you mean "trolling"? If it's "trolling" you are operating under a loose definition of the word.

It's an honest question that was made without insulting you (more than I can say for you).

It's telling that you can't give an honest answer to it.

 

[geauxtohell]

There is branch of government still denominated as the Federal Judiciary in order to perpetrate the fraud that Article III courts still exist.

The ONLY ones impressed are the members of the populace who are narcotized.

.

LMAO.

You tried to act like I don't know what I am talking about when you are basically evoking a conspiracy theory?

Once again, you don't get to simply ignore facets of our country that are inconvenient to your beliefs and position.

You are right I don't get to ignore the powers-that-be since I don't have a powerful standing army.

They on the other hand , get to ignore the Constitution whenever it is inconvenient.

.

By all means, illustrate where I have ignored the Constitution for convenience.

At any rate, before you insult another person for being wrong, you should ensure you are in full command of the facts.

 

[AllieBaba]

Of fucking course...so long as it wasn't done to establish a state religion. If it was a Muslim student who, by merit of his or her own hard work, was called upon to speak at graduation, I would absolutely not be insulted if that child chose to open with a Muslim prayer. Because it is their RIGHT to speak openly of their religion and to practice their religion, so long as it doesn't violate the rights of others. And it doesn't violate anybody's rights to hear somebody pray, provided they have the option of leaving, of not praying themselves, or of praying after their own fashion.

 

[Gadawg73]

The law can be changed. Leading a prayer is not "proselytizing". Why are you afraid of the little baby Jesus? He never hurt anyone.

You give away your bias by this statement..."glorified bible school". The idea of separation of church and state is to keep the government out of our lives so Americans can be free to experess their religious beliefs. There is nothing in the US Constitution about keeping any references to God out of our schools.

How come we have a chaplain in the congress who leads in prayer, but to lead in a prayer at school is against the law? Are you all afraid some little kid might find out Jesus loves him and not fall in line like everyone else?

The same thing can be said in reverse. Why must you have organized prayer in schools. What EDUCATINAL purpose does it serve? YOU belive that prayer is a good thing. Many do not. Why must our children be paraded through organized prayer to the benefit of your children?

The fact is, church does not belong in school in any form. It has no purpose there. I cannot understand this irrational NEED to take your personal belief in prayer into a public forum where there are children from all stripes. Is your time at home not enough? There is nothing to stop a student from praying. There is only laws that prevent them from being put in that situation without their consent or choice.

Nor can we understand the left's irrational need to teach condoms, homosexuality and other entirely personal things to school children.

How does one teach homosexuality?
And I am not left wing having voted Republican for 40 years and believe only a fool would not want the subject of condoms as a fact in high school health class.
If you have a bitch about condoms go to the thousands of dope stores in your town and complain about them being front and center on the racks.
The "leftist statist" broken record continues. When without facts, always call names.
It works. Just ask the current President.

 

[Gadawg73]

Of fucking course...so long as it wasn't done to establish a state religion. If it was a Muslim student who, by merit of his or her own hard work, was called upon to speak at graduation, I would absolutely not be insulted if that child chose to open with a Muslim prayer. Because it is their RIGHT to speak openly of their religion and to practice their religion, so long as it doesn't violate the rights of others. And it doesn't violate anybody's rights to hear somebody pray, provided they have the option of leaving, of not praying themselves, or of praying after their own fashion.

There you go Allie. I knew you had some sense.
Good post.

 

[AllieBaba]

The same thing can be said in reverse. Why must you have organized prayer in schools. What EDUCATINAL purpose does it serve? YOU belive that prayer is a good thing. Many do not. Why must our children be paraded through organized prayer to the benefit of your children?

The fact is, church does not belong in school in any form. It has no purpose there. I cannot understand this irrational NEED to take your personal belief in prayer into a public forum where there are children from all stripes. Is your time at home not enough? There is nothing to stop a student from praying. There is only laws that prevent them from being put in that situation without their consent or choice.

Nor can we understand the left's irrational need to teach condoms, homosexuality and other entirely personal things to school children.

How does one teach homosexuality?
And I am not left wing having voted Republican for 40 years and believe only a fool would not want the subject of condoms as a fact in high school health class.
If you have a bitch about condoms go to the thousands of dope stores in your town and complain about them being front and center on the racks.
The "leftist statist" broken record continues. When without facts, always call names.
It works. Just ask the current President.

Ummm....let's see, providing kids with condoms at school, teaching them to use them, at school, and explaining to them the ins and outs of homosexuality, at school, is akin to head shops selling condoms?

Are you on crack?

 

[AllieBaba]

Are kids even supposed to be in dope stores? i thought they had to be a certain age, like a bar or cigarette store.

Wait..what the fuck is a dope store? I was thinking it was a head shop, but I think maybe not. Is this where they sell medical marijuana? In which case...come again? How is selling condoms in a dope store (I guess it could be called a marijuana pharmacy) like giving them to kids in school????

 

[logical4u]

I don't see how any of these questions matter at all. That these are mentioned in the bible, if at all (specific passages?), isn't saying much. Of course there was darkness before light. Go into a dark room, and turn on a light. Voila! LIght and substnaves before atmosphere? What does that even mean? I don't even understand the third questions. It is common sense, even to ancestors, that built such things as the Great Pyramids, that looking at nature, it is clear that plantlife is the foundation of the entire animal kingdom. I assure you, they were attuned to this. Native Americans were very attuned to this nature. Attuned to the Earth. This is not a big deal. I don't even know where you are getting the sixth question. Obviously men have dominion over animals if we are the ones writing the books, otherwise we would be hiding in caves and wouldn't have time to write books. How does that help the case of creation? How has science proved there was an Adam and Eve. ANY links to any of these claims would be much appreciated. I'm just curious as to where you are getting your info. If you are going to say such things and be taken serious, be prepared to back it up.

there is no genetic Adam and Eve as you say either. Prove it. Provide a link.

If "science" had proved any of those, then "science" would have an original thought. Science has not proved any of those. Science has uncovered evidence that the order of creation was as it is stated in Genesis (first chapter for the Biblically illiterate). That is my point; science is saying the same thing the Bible does (right up to evolution), only it puts in more details about specific times which it has no way of proving. If "science" reaffirms what the Bible says, why not pay attention to what the Bible says? If you want to say that other religions have their own creation theories, I am okay with that, if science backs it.

I understand what you are saying, and it doesn't mean that the Bible owns the truth, and science can only follow or affirm that truth. It doesn't give the Bible credibility because you think it correctly sequenced events of the past, which it didn't.

A little knowledge: The OT bible is a collection of stories from around that time (1000 BC for old testament) in and around Mesopotamia. Those stories, including Genesis, the flood, and others, had been floating around long before they put it in a book, labeled it monotheistic, and sent it off to the press. Jesus was heavily plagiarized as well, as I have already posted, and is not an original mythological character. These truths- such as dark came before light, that plants came before animals, are pretty common sense, since it is the rising sun each day that chased away all of the darkness (like "Jesus"). All of the material in Genesis was plagiarized from already existing pagan religions at the time, so I don't know what you are bragging about. I asked you for specific references in the bible to the questions you asked, and you did not. I asked you for a link to this genetic Adam and Eve. You have not.

Where does it say in the bible, specifically, that mammals came before sea creatures and birds, not that it proves anything even if it does... I have never heard or read that before. Or the Earth being separated from the sea. What does that even mean? that the earth and the sea were at one point "one?" What would that even look like? Mud? The reason we have separation of layers in the earth is because of the differing densities of substances. Basaltic crust forms the ocean floor, which is sub ducted below the less dense continental crust, all riding on convection currents circulating between the Earth's Hot Core and the 'crust.' The H20 on this earth, naturally will fall to the lowest point, which is on the basaltic crust which contains the majority of our water, except for natural lakes and rivers on continental crust, which all leads to the oceans eventually. The earth was not made of mud at any point in history. No substance before light? That's not even true. After that big bang, there was no light for about 300,000 years until the first stars started forming, but there was plenty of 'matter' and substance in the universe. Until then, pitch black, bitches. Like I said, it is obvious men have dominion over animals since it was the domestication of animals that took us out of the hunter-gather stage and led to the possible of towns, cities, then 'countries' after the last ice age in Mesopotamia. By the way, it was after the last ice age when the ice receded and the water melted that caused GREAT FLOODING in Mesopotamia around that time, and exposed the 'fertile crescent' where farming and animals domestication really began... no doubt this flooding is where the flood stories, which were heavily circulated around then in many pagan religions, came from.

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.
11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.


From the original post: " Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,492
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 3,862
Thanked 465 Times in 368 Posts
Rep Power: 44



Quote: Originally Posted by PatekPhilippe
I respect people's belief in their religion....however...this creationary theory has been proven to be hogwash numerous times by sound scientific data. Anyone advocating that their children be taught this in a public school should be found guilty as UNFIT parents.
Science proved there was no substances before there was light?
Science proved the atmosphere came before light and substances?
Science proved the earth was not seperated from the sea?
Science proved that plant life came after animal life?
Science proved the moon was here before the earth was here?
Science proved that mammals came before sea creatures and birds?
Science proved that animals have dominion over men?
Science has proved that there was never an Adam and Eve?"

In other words, science has not disproved the order stated in the Bible. I can see how you might be confused, I abreviated the questions by leaving the word "Has" off the beginning. I find it amusing that people that want to mock and humiliate those that believe in the Lord have nothing original for life, for guidance, for wisdom. They are just as lost as those wondering in the wilderness worshipping false gods (can you say mother earth, environment, socialism, communism, etc, etc, etc). I am pointing out that one of your gods, science, simply affirms the order of Genesis. How hard is it to mock someone and steal their story? Of course you put your own little twists in it to elevate "your" gods, but you do not disprove the original.

As for your claim the Bible was stolen from other religions, what other faith had their Lord traveling with them day and night? What other religion gave a weapon (the arc of the covenant) that is still sought (that doesn't sound mythological to me)?