why not just sit on your butt and pray?

It was the courts. You know, the courts which are a part of government charged with upholding the law.

and yet, earlier you were pretending it was the religious fundies who used the courts to enforce their beliefs on schools......and here we are, seeing that its you after all.....

I was not pretending that it was the religious fundies who used the courts to enforce their beliefs on schools. You can search the web and discover that it has been religious fundies who have attempted to used the courts force their religious dogma into the public schools.

I have had no hand in any court rulings regarding the teaching of creationism in the public schools.

I agree with the rulings of the courts, so, you're free to hate me for requiring Christian fundamentalists to obey the law.
 
It was the courts. You know, the courts which are a part of government charged with upholding the law.

and yet, earlier you were pretending it was the religious fundies who used the courts to enforce their beliefs on schools......and here we are, seeing that its you after all.....

I was not pretending that it was the religious fundies who used the courts to enforce their beliefs on schools. You can search the web and discover that it has been religious fundies who have attempted to used the courts force their religious dogma into the public schools.

I have had no hand in any court rulings regarding the teaching of creationism in the public schools.

I agree with the rulings of the courts, so, you're free to hate me for requiring Christian fundamentalists to obey the law.

Well ... as I've proven in another thread Christians founded this nation and Christian books, as well as the Bible, were used in America's public schools. As a result, America climbed to greatness. Now, as all Christian material is removed from schools, America is faltering on the brink of failure. 2 + 2 = 4
 
More of what you struggle with as you don't even understand the terms you're describing.

Just to prevent you from derailing your own argument, creationism is not a scientific theory.

note: I didn't say it was....I said abiogenesis wasn't.....

Abiogenesis is a theory that can be held to the strictures of the scientific method.

really?.....can it be tested?.....can it be falsified?.....
 
and yet, earlier you were pretending it was the religious fundies who used the courts to enforce their beliefs on schools......and here we are, seeing that its you after all.....

I was not pretending that it was the religious fundies who used the courts to enforce their beliefs on schools. You can search the web and discover that it has been religious fundies who have attempted to used the courts force their religious dogma into the public schools.

I have had no hand in any court rulings regarding the teaching of creationism in the public schools.

I agree with the rulings of the courts, so, you're free to hate me for requiring Christian fundamentalists to obey the law.

Well ... as I've proven in another thread Christians founded this nation and Christian books, as well as the Bible, were used in America's public schools. As a result, America climbed to greatness. Now, as all Christian material is removed from schools, America is faltering on the brink of failure. 2 + 2 = 4

Thank the gods (I'd list them alphabetically but that would take too long), that the founding fathers understood the dangers of theocratic totalitarianism.
 
Yes. It can be tested.

would you please give an example of it being tested?....

Miller-Urey for an example.


What tests have been done to demonstrate your particular gods? Remember, Miller-Urey was subject to peer review so make sure your tests for the gods can meet that same standard.

since Miller Urey didn't produce life, doesn't that mean your theory has, at least once, failed in the experiment?
 
would you please give an example of it being tested?....

Miller-Urey for an example.


What tests have been done to demonstrate your particular gods? Remember, Miller-Urey was subject to peer review so make sure your tests for the gods can meet that same standard.

since Miller Urey didn't produce life, doesn't that mean your theory has, at least once, failed in the experiment?
The experiment produced almost two dozen amino acids.

So then, in controlled experiments, what are the results of testing for evidence of your gods?
 
Last edited:
Every time the scientist tries to prove that the unexplained can be explained with an answer other than "God did it" the scientist succeeds. And yet God exists. Does that not tell us something of God?
 
I was not pretending that it was the religious fundies who used the courts to enforce their beliefs on schools. You can search the web and discover that it has been religious fundies who have attempted to used the courts force their religious dogma into the public schools.

I have had no hand in any court rulings regarding the teaching of creationism in the public schools.

I agree with the rulings of the courts, so, you're free to hate me for requiring Christian fundamentalists to obey the law.

Well ... as I've proven in another thread Christians founded this nation and Christian books, as well as the Bible, were used in America's public schools. As a result, America climbed to greatness. Now, as all Christian material is removed from schools, America is faltering on the brink of failure. 2 + 2 = 4

Thank the gods (I'd list them alphabetically but that would take too long), that the founding fathers understood the dangers of theocratic totalitarianism.

And yet atheists/humanists are routinely trying to legislate their version of "morality" upon the rest of society. You don't want to take it but you don't mind dishing it out.
 
Miller-Urey for an example.


What tests have been done to demonstrate your particular gods? Remember, Miller-Urey was subject to peer review so make sure your tests for the gods can meet that same standard.

since Miller Urey didn't produce life, doesn't that mean your theory has, at least once, failed in the experiment?
The experiment produced almost two dozen amino acids.

So then, in controlled experiments, what are the results of testing for evidence of your gods?

I run into problems telling people about the Bible or telling cults the truth and God answers me.
 
More of what you struggle with as you don't even understand the terms you're describing.

Just to prevent you from derailing your own argument, creationism is not a scientific theory.

note: I didn't say it was....I said abiogenesis wasn't.....

Abiogenesis is a theory that can be held to the strictures of the scientific method.

How is the scientific method applied against supernaturalism?

Cause and effect. For every effect there was a cause. The first cause was un-caused otherwise it would not be the first cause. Therefore, the first cause is eternal. Now, since the universe operates on a system of laws we must trace those laws to the first cause. That would make the first cause a "Law-Giver." Natural laws are generally measured by mathematics and moral laws are measured by a sense of right and wrong or ethics. When we trace these measurable truths back to the first cause we are left with a Moral Mathematician or, an Intelligent Designer. God
 
note: I didn't say it was....I said abiogenesis wasn't.....

Abiogenesis is a theory that can be held to the strictures of the scientific method.

How is the scientific method applied against supernaturalism?

Cause and effect. For every effect there was a cause. The first cause was un-caused otherwise it would not be the first cause. Therefore, the first cause is eternal. Now, since the universe operates on a system of laws we must trace those laws to the first cause. That would make the first cause a "Law-Giver." Natural laws are generally measured by mathematics and moral laws are measured by a sense of right and wrong or ethics. When we trace these measurable truths back to the first cause we are left with a Moral Mathematician or, an Intelligent Designer. God

Using the logic I posted earlier the causes are infinitive and therefor there is no God. On can never logically explain God. Then again God does not have to be believed by faith alone. Apparently God made Himself unprovable. Or more like I should say God did not provide us with the tools to prove Him.
 
While the answer to not having anything constructive to contribute to a discussion board is, apparently, start yet another thread intended on ridiculing Christians

I saw no reference to Christianity.

Why not climb the battlements while waving a tee shirt and screaming "hey, look at me. I'm suffering for my religion"

/shrugs......does that change the fact that I have again proved you wrong?.....it isn't the "fundies" who use the courts to impose their beliefs on others......

You actually proved the goals of Christian fundies - to impose their dogma on the public school system.

The Dover case (and it is just one of many), amply proved that ID is nothing but a theological attempt to put christianity into the public schools. The goals of the Disco'tute and others like them are to reform society and government into a more theocratic arrangement, intolerant of non-Christians or Christians who do not agree with them, and imposing their concept of "morality" upon the population.



NOVA | Intelligent Design on Trial

U.S. District Court Judge John E. Jones III ultimately decided for the plaintiffs, writing in his decision that intelligent design "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents." As part of his decision, Judge Jones ordered the Dover school board to pay legal fees and damages, which were eventually set at $1 million.

How does mentioning other theories exist impose dogma?

Why be so dishonest? Demanding EQUAL time = "mentioning" ? Public schools only serve to better inform our students when we present material that has a basis in scientific study. Faith or a popular belief is not science and has no place in a science classroom.

Science has it's own rules of study. Not every possibility theorized is a "scientific" theory. Religious types attempt to rationalize the replacement of speculation over theory assuming the two are interchangable.
 

Forum List

Back
Top