The ONE qst. that should be asked of every GOP candidate

[Nosmo King]

How on earth did you manage to type that with your knuckles dragging on the ground?

How do you have the never to even post on a forum, arent you afraid you might read something that will make you act in a violent way? evidently you have no control over your thoughts.
or the other poster is somewhat right, I dont agree that you exhibit a gay personality, but I would say that the words butthurt pansy come into play.
Oh no, the mean man is shooting someone, I better protect everyone and turn off the tv.. LOL, wuss.

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

Two questions.
1) your undeniable proof that relgion is only myth and can not be based on any truth.
2) explain how science requries less faith than creation (you know, the myths Christians believe)

Im sure this will be easy.
If you have time, can you also explain the many times science new it was right, it was factual, to be believed only to have the theory disproved in favor of a new theory that is now right, factual and to be believed.
example, global warming, then cooling now warming.

I'm not criticizing religion. I'm criticizing the Ge3nesis myth. The Bible is a book of beautiful poetry, amazing spirituality, sex, violence, allegory, parable and invaluable life lessons. What it is not is a science textbook.

Teaching the Creation myth in a philosophy class is perfectly acceptable. Teaching it as a geology lesson, a biology lesson, an astronomy lesson is false teaching.

Where was science right and the Creation myth wrong? Take the solar system as your example. Sou es mouve.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

How on earth did you manage to type that with your knuckles dragging on the ground?

How do you have the never to even post on a forum, arent you afraid you might read something that will make you act in a violent way? evidently you have no control over your thoughts.
or the other poster is somewhat right, I dont agree that you exhibit a gay personality, but I would say that the words butthurt pansy come into play.
Oh no, the mean man is shooting someone, I better protect everyone and turn off the tv.. LOL, wuss.

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

I don't follow any religious faith myself, but it's an interesting topic. There's a lot more to it than delusion and ignorance. The number of very intelligent people who maintain religious faith is evidence enough that it's not based on stupidity. At the very least, these people are able to compartmentalize and understand that spiritual truth and scientific truth don't have to be in conflict.

Science has to totally be wrong, or its leading to God.
since there are theories that can be proven in science, I would suggest the second option to be true. Science is discovering how God created, not that God does not exist.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

How do you have the never to even post on a forum, arent you afraid you might read something that will make you act in a violent way? evidently you have no control over your thoughts.
or the other poster is somewhat right, I dont agree that you exhibit a gay personality, but I would say that the words butthurt pansy come into play.
Oh no, the mean man is shooting someone, I better protect everyone and turn off the tv.. LOL, wuss.

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

Two questions.
1) your undeniable proof that relgion is only myth and can not be based on any truth.
2) explain how science requries less faith than creation (you know, the myths Christians believe)

Im sure this will be easy.
If you have time, can you also explain the many times science new it was right, it was factual, to be believed only to have the theory disproved in favor of a new theory that is now right, factual and to be believed.
example, global warming, then cooling now warming.

I'm not criticizing religion. I'm criticizing the Ge3nesis myth. The Bible is a book of beautiful poetry, amazing spirituality, sex, violence, allegory, parable and invaluable life lessons. What it is not is a science textbook.

Teaching the Creation myth in a philosophy class is perfectly acceptable. Teaching it as a geology lesson, a biology lesson, an astronomy lesson is false teaching.

But it does tell us about the hydrological cycle, long before scientist realized it. It talks about hypothermal vents 3000 years before their discovery by science. It also contains statements that are consistent with sciences such as paleontology, astrology, meteorology, biology, anthropology, geology and even physics.

So although it isn't a science book, it is scientifically accurate.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

How do you have the never to even post on a forum, arent you afraid you might read something that will make you act in a violent way? evidently you have no control over your thoughts.
or the other poster is somewhat right, I dont agree that you exhibit a gay personality, but I would say that the words butthurt pansy come into play.
Oh no, the mean man is shooting someone, I better protect everyone and turn off the tv.. LOL, wuss.

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

Two questions.
1) your undeniable proof that relgion is only myth and can not be based on any truth.
2) explain how science requries less faith than creation (you know, the myths Christians believe)

Im sure this will be easy.
If you have time, can you also explain the many times science new it was right, it was factual, to be believed only to have the theory disproved in favor of a new theory that is now right, factual and to be believed.
example, global warming, then cooling now warming.

I'm not criticizing religion. I'm criticizing the Ge3nesis myth. The Bible is a book of beautiful poetry, amazing spirituality, sex, violence, allegory, parable and invaluable life lessons. What it is not is a science textbook.

Teaching the Creation myth in a philosophy class is perfectly acceptable. Teaching it as a geology lesson, a biology lesson, an astronomy lesson is false teaching.

Where was science right and the Creation myth wrong? Take the solar system as your example. Sou es mouve.

I build engines for racing as a hobby.
so if you are standing there looking at an engine and tell me it looks nice, and my response is only, I built it.
do you believe I built it based on the fact that it is there and my claim that I build it, or would you require all of the specs, the materal breakdowns, full prints to prove I built it.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

How do you have the never to even post on a forum, arent you afraid you might read something that will make you act in a violent way? evidently you have no control over your thoughts.
or the other poster is somewhat right, I dont agree that you exhibit a gay personality, but I would say that the words butthurt pansy come into play.
Oh no, the mean man is shooting someone, I better protect everyone and turn off the tv.. LOL, wuss.

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

Two questions.
1) your undeniable proof that relgion is only myth and can not be based on any truth.
2) explain how science requries less faith than creation (you know, the myths Christians believe)

Im sure this will be easy.
If you have time, can you also explain the many times science new it was right, it was factual, to be believed only to have the theory disproved in favor of a new theory that is now right, factual and to be believed.
example, global warming, then cooling now warming.

I'm not criticizing religion. I'm criticizing the Ge3nesis myth. The Bible is a book of beautiful poetry, amazing spirituality, sex, violence, allegory, parable and invaluable life lessons. What it is not is a science textbook.

Teaching the Creation myth in a philosophy class is perfectly acceptable. Teaching it as a geology lesson, a biology lesson, an astronomy lesson is false teaching.

Where was science right and the Creation myth wrong? Take the solar system as your example. Sou es mouve.

If we cant use religion then we have to base the solar system totally on scientific theory and fact.
If we believe that science is right when it comes to the universe, then we have to accept that science is wrong as far as the laws of matter are concerned.
As humans we are not able to comprehend infinity, we always have a starting point, and and ending point.
the ending certainly falls within the parameters of scientific theory when it comes to matter and energy, however the starting point presents many problems that contradict science completely as we currently know it.
Do you at least agree with that?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

Two questions.
1) your undeniable proof that relgion is only myth and can not be based on any truth.
2) explain how science requries less faith than creation (you know, the myths Christians believe)

Im sure this will be easy.
If you have time, can you also explain the many times science new it was right, it was factual, to be believed only to have the theory disproved in favor of a new theory that is now right, factual and to be believed.
example, global warming, then cooling now warming.

I'm not criticizing religion. I'm criticizing the Ge3nesis myth. The Bible is a book of beautiful poetry, amazing spirituality, sex, violence, allegory, parable and invaluable life lessons. What it is not is a science textbook.

Teaching the Creation myth in a philosophy class is perfectly acceptable. Teaching it as a geology lesson, a biology lesson, an astronomy lesson is false teaching.

But it does tell us about the hydrological cycle, long before scientist realized it. It talks about hypothermal vents 3000 years before their discovery by science. It also contains statements that are consistent with sciences such as paleontology, astrology, meteorology, biology, anthropology, geology and even physics.

So although it isn't a science book, it is scientifically accurate.

I do beleive in creation over a random accidentle act where trillions of things fell exactly in to place to create all we are.
However, as far as the Bible talking about hypothermal vents, or any other thing, They can be explained or reasoned as simple observation by a laymen. its possible that man knew about these things for thousands of years before science stepped up and studied it, named it and explained it.
that takes little faith on the part of science or the Bible.
the biggest leap of faith comes in the creation itself, even some of the works of Jesus with the sick or dying, or even dead at the time could today be explained with science and medical research. (although that medical science did not exist back then) Raising someone from the dead is not as uncommon as one might think today. Back then, we all would have been Gods.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It serves me little or no benefit to contribute to someone elses health care in such a large way.

Well, yes it does.

If the person who doesn't bother carrying Health Insurance becomes catastrophically ill or injured, the Doctors and Hospitals are going to cost shift his bills onto you.

Then he goes on Welfare and Medicaid.

All of which costs you. A lot.

I am quite possibly the most conservative person in here but we need to have a mandatory participation in Health Insurance.

that has already been happening for years, and its been cheaper to cover them then now under obamacare, and lets be honest here, the idea behind obamacare is to insure those on welfare, so chances are this worthless person is already on welfare.
It would actually serve society more if that person were to just die. Hate to be cold but if they serve no purpose in society, then they are not a benefit to keep around.

"Worthless Person"? Judging someone you don't know so harshly gives us an insight into the mind and heart of a Callous Conservative.

It may be cheaper (loss expensive is the proper term) for the Federal Government to treat the uninsured, but it is the most costly of all other services provided by county and state governments.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

Two questions.
1) your undeniable proof that relgion is only myth and can not be based on any truth.
2) explain how science requries less faith than creation (you know, the myths Christians believe)

Im sure this will be easy.
If you have time, can you also explain the many times science new it was right, it was factual, to be believed only to have the theory disproved in favor of a new theory that is now right, factual and to be believed.
example, global warming, then cooling now warming.

I'm not criticizing religion. I'm criticizing the Ge3nesis myth. The Bible is a book of beautiful poetry, amazing spirituality, sex, violence, allegory, parable and invaluable life lessons. What it is not is a science textbook.

Teaching the Creation myth in a philosophy class is perfectly acceptable. Teaching it as a geology lesson, a biology lesson, an astronomy lesson is false teaching.

But it does tell us about the hydrological cycle, long before scientist realized it. It talks about hypothermal vents 3000 years before their discovery by science. It also contains statements that are consistent with sciences such as paleontology, astrology, meteorology, biology, anthropology, geology and even physics.

So although it isn't a science book, it is scientifically accurate.

I do beleive in creation over a random accidentle act where trillions of things fell exactly in to place to create all we are.
However, as far as the Bible talking about hypothermal vents, or any other thing, They can be explained or reasoned as simple observation by a laymen. its possible that man knew about these things for thousands of years before science stepped up and studied it, named it and explained it.
that takes little faith on the part of science or the Bible.
the biggest leap of faith comes in the creation itself, even some of the works of Jesus with the sick or dying, or even dead at the time could today be explained with science and medical research. (although that medical science did not exist back then) Raising someone from the dead is not as uncommon as one might think today. Back then, we all would have been Gods.

So tell me how could hypothermal vents which are thousands of feet underwater be observed 3000 years ago?

Underwater volcanoes at spreading ridges and convergent plate boundaries produce hot springs known as hydrothermal vents.

Scientists first discovered hydrothermal vents in 1977 while exploring an oceanic spreading ridge near the Galapagos Islands. To their amazement, the scientists also found that the hydrothermal vents were surrounded by large numbers of organisms that had never been seen before. These biological communities depend upon chemical processes that result from the interaction of seawater and hot magma associated with underwater volcanoes.

Hydrothermal vents are the result of seawater percolating down through fissures in the ocean crust in the vicinity of spreading centers or subduction zones (places on Earth where two tectonic plates move away or towards one another). The cold seawater is heated by hot magma and reemerges to form the vents. Seawater in hydrothermal vents may reach temperatures of over 340°C (700°F).

Hot seawater in hydrothermal vents does not boil because of the extreme pressure at the depths where the vents are formed.

The bible talks about these underwater fountains.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If you want to argue him on his level, now is when you start repeating the request to give a link to this video, and if he cant (which he cant because we all know it does not exist) then you just keep calling him a liar no matter what he says, and you point to his video comment as proof.
its how a liberal will do it in order to waste time and try to run out the clock.

Sound, VERY sound advice.........LOL

Thank you.
Ive been around a while, I know how these things work.

Your posts suggest you do not.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

It serves me little or no benefit to contribute to someone elses health care in such a large way.

Well, yes it does.

If the person who doesn't bother carrying Health Insurance becomes catastrophically ill or injured, the Doctors and Hospitals are going to cost shift his bills onto you.

Then he goes on Welfare and Medicaid.

All of which costs you. A lot.

I am quite possibly the most conservative person in here but we need to have a mandatory participation in Health Insurance.

that has already been happening for years, and its been cheaper to cover them then now under obamacare, and lets be honest here, the idea behind obamacare is to insure those on welfare, so chances are this worthless person is already on welfare.
It would actually serve society more if that person were to just die. Hate to be cold but if they serve no purpose in society, then they are not a benefit to keep around.

"Worthless Person"? Judging someone you don't know so harshly gives us an insight into the mind and heart of a Callous Conservative.

It may be cheaper (loss expensive is the proper term) for the Federal Government to treat the uninsured, but it is the most costly of all other services provided by county and state governments.

First, if somebody does nothing, provides nothing, only exists by using others resources, what value do they have for a society. How many of these people can society carry before the weight is to great and society fails.
you say that the federal government can do things cheaper?
History tells us that you are wrong, please give an example of the government doing more for less than any private concern.

 

[The Rabbi]

Are you afraid that if you watch a staged gun battle on TV that you will be forced to run out and have your own gun battle?
seems like the makings of a pretty weak mind if you ask me.
but let me guess, you would have no problem if it was a love story being shown and the actors were filmed having sex. ( straight or gay, makes little difference really)

How on earth did you manage to type that with your knuckles dragging on the ground?

How do you have the never to even post on a forum, arent you afraid you might read something that will make you act in a violent way? evidently you have no control over your thoughts.
or the other poster is somewhat right, I dont agree that you exhibit a gay personality, but I would say that the words butthurt pansy come into play.
Oh no, the mean man is shooting someone, I better protect everyone and turn off the tv.. LOL, wuss.

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

You probably dont get the irony in your post. So let me spell it for you:
You doubtless believe that the Genesis story has zero basis in fact. You doubtless believe the "scientific" view of creation and evolution, as you were taught in school.
But here's the thing: Scientists do not agree on creation or evolution. There are wide disparities so there are no "accepted" theories. There is little evidence for many assumptions made.
Yet despite this you demonize people as closed minded, even though you wll not begin to consider the arguments against your own beliefs. You call people stunted and ridged (probably mean rigid) even though your own beliefes were formed some time in junior high school and havent changed since. Nor are they consonant with actual scientific evidence. You conform to a generally received belief even while you condemn others for exactly that kind of thinking.
There is probably more evidence for Creationism than there is against it. But your narrow minded bigoted brain could not begin to process it.

 

[The Rabbi]

How do you have the never to even post on a forum, arent you afraid you might read something that will make you act in a violent way? evidently you have no control over your thoughts.
or the other poster is somewhat right, I dont agree that you exhibit a gay personality, but I would say that the words butthurt pansy come into play.
Oh no, the mean man is shooting someone, I better protect everyone and turn off the tv.. LOL, wuss.

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

Two questions.
1) your undeniable proof that relgion is only myth and can not be based on any truth.
2) explain how science requries less faith than creation (you know, the myths Christians believe)

Im sure this will be easy.
If you have time, can you also explain the many times science new it was right, it was factual, to be believed only to have the theory disproved in favor of a new theory that is now right, factual and to be believed.
example, global warming, then cooling now warming.

I'm not criticizing religion. I'm criticizing the Ge3nesis myth. The Bible is a book of beautiful poetry, amazing spirituality, sex, violence, allegory, parable and invaluable life lessons. What it is not is a science textbook.

Teaching the Creation myth in a philosophy class is perfectly acceptable. Teaching it as a geology lesson, a biology lesson, an astronomy lesson is false teaching.

Where was science right and the Creation myth wrong? Take the solar system as your example. Sou es mouve.

What? "Science" at one time taught the Earth as the center of the universe.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

Two questions.
1) your undeniable proof that relgion is only myth and can not be based on any truth.
2) explain how science requries less faith than creation (you know, the myths Christians believe)

Im sure this will be easy.
If you have time, can you also explain the many times science new it was right, it was factual, to be believed only to have the theory disproved in favor of a new theory that is now right, factual and to be believed.
example, global warming, then cooling now warming.

I'm not criticizing religion. I'm criticizing the Ge3nesis myth. The Bible is a book of beautiful poetry, amazing spirituality, sex, violence, allegory, parable and invaluable life lessons. What it is not is a science textbook.

Teaching the Creation myth in a philosophy class is perfectly acceptable. Teaching it as a geology lesson, a biology lesson, an astronomy lesson is false teaching.

But it does tell us about the hydrological cycle, long before scientist realized it. It talks about hypothermal vents 3000 years before their discovery by science. It also contains statements that are consistent with sciences such as paleontology, astrology, meteorology, biology, anthropology, geology and even physics.

So although it isn't a science book, it is scientifically accurate.

I do beleive in creation over a random accidentle act where trillions of things fell exactly in to place to create all we are.
However, as far as the Bible talking about hypothermal vents, or any other thing, They can be explained or reasoned as simple observation by a laymen. its possible that man knew about these things for thousands of years before science stepped up and studied it, named it and explained it.
that takes little faith on the part of science or the Bible.
the biggest leap of faith comes in the creation itself, even some of the works of Jesus with the sick or dying, or even dead at the time could today be explained with science and medical research. (although that medical science did not exist back then) Raising someone from the dead is not as uncommon as one might think today. Back then, we all would have been Gods.

So tell me how could hypothermal vents which are thousands of feet underwater be observed 3000 years ago?

Underwater volcanoes at spreading ridges and convergent plate boundaries produce hot springs known as hydrothermal vents.

Scientists first discovered hydrothermal vents in 1977 while exploring an oceanic spreading ridge near the Galapagos Islands. To their amazement, the scientists also found that the hydrothermal vents were surrounded by large numbers of organisms that had never been seen before. These biological communities depend upon chemical processes that result from the interaction of seawater and hot magma associated with underwater volcanoes.

Hydrothermal vents are the result of seawater percolating down through fissures in the ocean crust in the vicinity of spreading centers or subduction zones (places on Earth where two tectonic plates move away or towards one another). The cold seawater is heated by hot magma and reemerges to form the vents. Seawater in hydrothermal vents may reach temperatures of over 340°C (700°F).

Hot seawater in hydrothermal vents does not boil because of the extreme pressure at the depths where the vents are formed.

The bible talks about these underwater fountains.

Is it possible that these underwater fountains at that time were in less shallow waters? maybe not even the exact same thing that was discovered recently. The earth is constantly changing.
I dont have all the answers, Im just like everyone else, I make a guess based on the facts at hand.
I only questioned if it was possible that the vents were in an easier place to observe a couple thousand years ago.
I have a deep belief in religion, however I also think science has proven that many of its theories are fact, even though they still call them theories.
Science in my opinion is discovering how God, or someone else created everything here. Somebody had a hand in it, I dont think it just magically happened.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

Two questions.
1) your undeniable proof that relgion is only myth and can not be based on any truth.
2) explain how science requries less faith than creation (you know, the myths Christians believe)

Im sure this will be easy.
If you have time, can you also explain the many times science new it was right, it was factual, to be believed only to have the theory disproved in favor of a new theory that is now right, factual and to be believed.
example, global warming, then cooling now warming.

I'm not criticizing religion. I'm criticizing the Ge3nesis myth. The Bible is a book of beautiful poetry, amazing spirituality, sex, violence, allegory, parable and invaluable life lessons. What it is not is a science textbook.

Teaching the Creation myth in a philosophy class is perfectly acceptable. Teaching it as a geology lesson, a biology lesson, an astronomy lesson is false teaching.

Where was science right and the Creation myth wrong? Take the solar system as your example. Sou es mouve.

What? "Science" at one time taught the Earth as the center of the universe.

Actually its still possible that earth is the center of the universe. Just not the center of our galaxy.
wont know until such a time that the finite ends of the universe are actually found.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It serves me little or no benefit to contribute to someone elses health care in such a large way.

Well, yes it does.

If the person who doesn't bother carrying Health Insurance becomes catastrophically ill or injured, the Doctors and Hospitals are going to cost shift his bills onto you.

Then he goes on Welfare and Medicaid.

All of which costs you. A lot.

I am quite possibly the most conservative person in here but we need to have a mandatory participation in Health Insurance.

that has already been happening for years, and its been cheaper to cover them then now under obamacare, and lets be honest here, the idea behind obamacare is to insure those on welfare, so chances are this worthless person is already on welfare.
It would actually serve society more if that person were to just die. Hate to be cold but if they serve no purpose in society, then they are not a benefit to keep around.

"Worthless Person"? Judging someone you don't know so harshly gives us an insight into the mind and heart of a Callous Conservative.

It may be cheaper (loss expensive is the proper term) for the Federal Government to treat the uninsured, but it is the most costly of all other services provided by county and state governments.

First, if somebody does nothing, provides nothing, only exists by using others resources, what value do they have for a society. How many of these people can society carry before the weight is to great and society fails.
you say that the federal government can do things cheaper?
History tells us that you are wrong, please give an example of the government doing more for less than any private concern.

Government put men on the moon.

"First" Let's presume an 18 year old female is pregnant, has learned from her doctor that the fetus has serious congenital medical conditions which will render the child dependent on the support of others for his or her life.

Then she is convinced to keep this child by a right to life advocate who will have no fiscal or emotional ties to the child should he or she survive for decades.

By your definition this child is worthless.

How about this scenario:

A 16 year old girl is impregnated by her mother's brother. He mom was abandoned by her husband and has two other children under the age of 12. Mom kicked her out when she learned of he pregnancy, claiming her brother would never do such a thing.

By your definition, "First, if somebody does nothing, provides nothing, only exists by using others resources, what value do they have for a society", the 16 year old is worthless too.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

It serves me little or no benefit to contribute to someone elses health care in such a large way.

Well, yes it does.

If the person who doesn't bother carrying Health Insurance becomes catastrophically ill or injured, the Doctors and Hospitals are going to cost shift his bills onto you.

Then he goes on Welfare and Medicaid.

All of which costs you. A lot.

I am quite possibly the most conservative person in here but we need to have a mandatory participation in Health Insurance.

that has already been happening for years, and its been cheaper to cover them then now under obamacare, and lets be honest here, the idea behind obamacare is to insure those on welfare, so chances are this worthless person is already on welfare.
It would actually serve society more if that person were to just die. Hate to be cold but if they serve no purpose in society, then they are not a benefit to keep around.

"Worthless Person"? Judging someone you don't know so harshly gives us an insight into the mind and heart of a Callous Conservative.

It may be cheaper (loss expensive is the proper term) for the Federal Government to treat the uninsured, but it is the most costly of all other services provided by county and state governments.

First, if somebody does nothing, provides nothing, only exists by using others resources, what value do they have for a society. How many of these people can society carry before the weight is to great and society fails.
you say that the federal government can do things cheaper?
History tells us that you are wrong, please give an example of the government doing more for less than any private concern.

Government put men on the moon.

"First" Let's presume an 18 year old female is pregnant, has learned from her doctor that the fetus has serious congenital medical conditions which will render the child dependent on the support of others for his or her life.

Then she is convinced to keep this child by a right to life advocate who will have no fiscal or emotional ties to the child should he or she survive for decades.

By your definition this child is worthless.

How about this scenario:

A 16 year old girl is impregnated by her mother's brother. He mom was abandoned by her husband and has two other children under the age of 12. Mom kicked her out when she learned of he pregnancy, claiming her brother would never do such a thing.

By your definition, "First, if somebody does nothing, provides nothing, only exists by using others resources, what value do they have for a society", the 16 year old is worthless too.

Scenerio one. I wouldnt convince her to have the child. But, yes in a society what purpose does that child serve.
next, why isnt mom responsible, or the uncle, or even the father that abandoned her, why am I as a taxpayer responsible for the care of this girl and her child for life. but as far as what purpose does that child serve? none yet, maybe one day, however what purpose does the rest of that family serve? none if they are expecting society to care for then.

Now how about the millions of "families" that have lived on welfare as a generational type of income. They do nothing, the produce nothing the provide no value to society. Should we keep catering to those millions in order to make sure one that might deserve help gets it?

 

[Nosmo King]

How on earth did you manage to type that with your knuckles dragging on the ground?

How do you have the never to even post on a forum, arent you afraid you might read something that will make you act in a violent way? evidently you have no control over your thoughts.
or the other poster is somewhat right, I dont agree that you exhibit a gay personality, but I would say that the words butthurt pansy come into play.
Oh no, the mean man is shooting someone, I better protect everyone and turn off the tv.. LOL, wuss.

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

You probably dont get the irony in your post. So let me spell it for you:
You doubtless believe that the Genesis story has zero basis in fact. You doubtless believe the "scientific" view of creation and evolution, as you were taught in school.
But here's the thing: Scientists do not agree on creation or evolution. There are wide disparities so there are no "accepted" theories. There is little evidence for many assumptions made.
Yet despite this you demonize people as closed minded, even though you wll not begin to consider the arguments against your own beliefs. You call people stunted and ridged (probably mean rigid) even though your own beliefes were formed some time in junior high school and havent changed since. Nor are they consonant with actual scientific evidence. You conform to a generally received belief even while you condemn others for exactly that kind of thinking.
There is probably more evidence for Creationism than there is against it. But your narrow minded bigoted brain could not begin to process it.

Genesis is myth. It is the musings of a Bronze Age philosopher to explain the natural world to people who did not have the methodology to make rational observations, hypothesizes, experiments upon those hypothesizes and observe the results of those experiments. Genesis is folly without scientific merit. Teaching mythology in science class is folly.

 

[The Rabbi]

How do you have the never to even post on a forum, arent you afraid you might read something that will make you act in a violent way? evidently you have no control over your thoughts.
or the other poster is somewhat right, I dont agree that you exhibit a gay personality, but I would say that the words butthurt pansy come into play.
Oh no, the mean man is shooting someone, I better protect everyone and turn off the tv.. LOL, wuss.

I am not enthralled with gun play. I was when I was seven, but I out grew that.

And why do you assume I'm Gay or a "wuss"? I'm a man, not a savage. I think, I'm not a Conservative. I read, I'm not a fan of the childhood fantasies.

If you are the paradigm of manhood in 2015 America, I weep for the future for it will be bleak.

You must read romance novels. For sure you dont think. You emote. You repeat slogans and talking points you picked up on popular media somewhere. You've never formulated a coherent argument and successfully defended it on this site. Not once.
Now, remind us how believing in Creationism should be a bar to becoming president. Recall that not a few of our presidents have been devout Christians.

Believing in Creationism betrays a shadowed, stunted and ridged mind open to myth rather than fact, allegory rather than evidence, conformity rather than independent thought. It reflects a mind that would happily march civilization backward, a mind that eschews logic for fairy tale and a mind that does not welcome progress.

Creationism is a myth perpetuated by the ignorant, those without knowledge. It is not a position someone wanting to lead this nation into the future should embrace, especially given the secular nation. Imposing the values of ignorance upon us is insulting at best, approaching cultural treason at worst.

You probably dont get the irony in your post. So let me spell it for you:
You doubtless believe that the Genesis story has zero basis in fact. You doubtless believe the "scientific" view of creation and evolution, as you were taught in school.
But here's the thing: Scientists do not agree on creation or evolution. There are wide disparities so there are no "accepted" theories. There is little evidence for many assumptions made.
Yet despite this you demonize people as closed minded, even though you wll not begin to consider the arguments against your own beliefs. You call people stunted and ridged (probably mean rigid) even though your own beliefes were formed some time in junior high school and havent changed since. Nor are they consonant with actual scientific evidence. You conform to a generally received belief even while you condemn others for exactly that kind of thinking.
There is probably more evidence for Creationism than there is against it. But your narrow minded bigoted brain could not begin to process it.

Genesis is myth. It is the musings of a Bronze Age philosopher to explain the natural world to people who did not have the methodology to make rational observations, hypothesizes, experiments upon those hypothesizes and observe the results of those experiments. Genesis is folly without scientific merit. Teaching mythology in science class is folly.

LOL!
Have you ever read Genesis? Do you actually know what's in it?
There is more scientific merit in Genesis than in Darwin's theory.

 

[M14 Shooter]

At every scheduled debate for the GOP primaries, each of the candidates should be asked one very simple question....just to separate the sane from the insane:
"Do you believe in creationism or evolution....."
The answer to the above can help dwindle down the number of whomever should even be given a microphone and a podium.

"Ii is perfectly possible that creation happened in such a way that evolution can be proven sound."

 

[nat4900]

I'm agnostic, but it appears the all Liberals believe in ...NOTHING, as far as what the beginning was!....Is that settled science?

Well, what IS "settled science" is the fact that most likely, Jesus did NOT ride through the streets of old Judea on a dinosaur.