Of course it is insightful. It bashes the Neo-Con president. Of course, the fact that he is completely ignorant of American politics, as demonstrated by his horrid spelling of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, California, 8th District, soon to be Speaker of the House... yeah, that Pelowski.
I'm sorry, but I couldn't let this one go. Now, I won't call the guy an idiot because I don't know him. He may be brilliant for all I know. However, I feel it is fair to point out that this guy is clearly has no idea what he is talking about. I also find that it is an excellent example of Left-Slant of Slashdot Mods. Another excellent case will be how this post will end up negative just for pointing the truth out.
Group-think like the parent post is a fine example of what the mods look for, regardless of how ignorant the post is.
If the "truth" is drenched in smarmy condescending oversimplifying sarcasm that fails to even address the main point then I'd just as soon call it a Troll.
The GGP stated that Russia and other nations with no regard to human rights were copying the US. I think the GP did a find job of showing how ridiculous that really is. Russia is copying the US by abusing human rights? As if the Soviet Unions was a shining example of freedom and free expression. There has never been a time in Russian or Soviet history that he could have typed that crap and gotten away with it in Russia, The Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Afghanistan, or any other host of countries around the world, and he has the gawd to even assume that these countries are simply emulating the US? That is either the most obscene example of rewriting history I think I've ever seen, or the guy is flat out dishonest! He deserves the Troll or at least Flamebait mod, not me who called him on it!
You won't be modded down for being offtopic, as much as being illogical. Offtopic is just the closest pre-defined moniker the mods can hit you with.
The parent's point wasn't that the US was the only state engaged in subversive activities and censorship, but rather that they are pioneers in the field, or at least an outstanding modern example. Showing a recent copycat move by another state just reinforces the GP's point. You would have been amazingly on-topic, if you said "Look how well the US censors. Other totalitarian governments worldwide are starting to emulate them."
Cute! You are correct that is only recently that Russia (formerly known as the USSR) has had any sort of human rights violations. It is amazing the way Stalin slaughtered millions of farmers, in almost exactly the same way that Hoover did a few years earlier in what was later called "Black Friday". The way we put up that wall splitting Berlin and the way we shot anyone seeking freedom in the booming East Germany economy was such a great idea that the Democratic Republic of China put up a similar wall. That was a Great Wall they put up there! Speaking of China, anyone notice how similar that Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 crackdown they had was an exact copy of the way Bush had the secret police fire on the crowds protesting the GOP national convention in 2004?
Of course, this has nothing to do with the way the North Koreans imitated us after we eliminated all Bosnian Muslims in the 90's. The UN called it Genocide. We call it "population adjustment". I don't know if any country can follow the way we carpet bombed Baghdad, nuked Fallujah as to not lose any of our own troops there, the way we made Afghanistan a state after we conquered it and enslaved their populations. All fine examples of the fictional American Imperialism and human rights abuses you speak of.
Of course, seeing as how you were arrested and your counter-revolutionary remarks were deleted by the government censors you speak so highly of, I guess you won't be reading this after all.
I'm so glad you opened my eyes to the US abuses of power and the government's crackdown on the population. We are by far the worst nation in the world and Bush is the biggest terrorist by far!
The US is showing you amateurs how to do censorship correctly.
First you subvert the population, then you censor. None of this "revolution by force", "censorship by edict", oh no. The correct way to do it is get the population on board with a completely bogus set of threats and rationalizations they think are their own -- "terrorism", "homeland" security, "for the children" -- then the population's own representatives willingly subvert the country's founding documents and the people like it.
At least in Russia, they are given the freedom to protest. I mean, only in the US does the police arrest and detain people who have not committed a crime right? Hundreds Detained Ahead of Moscow Rally
Yeah, we are so good at taking rights away that the public is actually happier and seemingly better off without them! What's your complaint again?
(Before you mod me OT, keep in mind that I'm responding to a post that is modded well(Score:5, Insightful). How could that post be ON Topic and mine not?)
Sad to see that all of the west's criticism towards the Soviet Union, Iraq, North Korea, etc. is hypocritical considering this form of censorship. At least in the SSSR you had some kind of social justice...
I guess you mean the USSR? How's that working out for them?
I thought the US was the police state and GWB was the only one infringing on human rights. (OT I'm sure, but I was responding to a previous post that evidently is NOT OT (Score:2, Interesting). We are either both OT or neither of us are.)
Clearly that's a straw man. I would claim that it is only people who claim that they are never wrong who are wrong. And guess what people of faith claim about their articles of absolute faith: that they are never wrong. Absolute faith is a vacuum of intelligence.
I never claimed absolute faith. I've considered differing points of view and continue to do so. I know what I know based on my own experience and research. So my knowledge are not based on blind faith. You have had different experiences and researched different things, so you know something different. When you look at the fable of the blind men examining the elephant, each came to a different conclusion based on their own observations. That doesn't make them any less intelligent. I'm not going to be so arrogant and insult your intelligence just because we disagree.
it doesn't matter who am I it matters the facts I am basing my opinion on.
I think this says it all. You have your opinion, others have theirs. No one has the right to tell another that their opinions are wrong, because by definition, they are not right either. You are free to disagree, but to insult someone's intelligence is a bit bigoted and extremely disrespectful. It is arrogant to assume that your opinions are more important than someone else's.
do you think Galileo was being a prick for saying the Earth goes around the Sun when he was clearly insulting the belief system of people around him?
No, Galileo pointed out that his observations led him to believe that the earth is not the center of the universe. He never insulted the intelligence of the "powers that be". The pricks were the ones who locked him up for it. They stood defiant and told him he was wrong because his beliefs were different than their own. Given the era, there were actually more "scientists" of the day claiming that Galileo was wrong. It was common knowledge that the earth was the center of everything, and Galileo went against the most current scientific "facts" and the pricks ridiculed him for it.
All of this should sound familiar by the way. Granted, all current scientific data points to evolution, just like all current scientific data pointed to the earth being central when Galileo presented his "beliefs".
->It's quite simple really. God created the heavens and the earth and all the oceans, seas, lands, and plants and creatures.
Which God(s)?
That depends on what you choose to believe. It's not my place to tell you what to believe. I only brought it up because the GP asked. (Curiously, how does one "believe in ID?" Seriously, explain your view.)
Face it, you belong to the worlds' oldest and greatest money making machine - church. How much of your annual earnings go towards your pastor's new Jaguar? Er, I mean, towards the spreading of the faith to more sources of income... or, sorry, how much of your hard earned money goes towards your church?
Well, I haven't given enough, frankly. If my preacher drove a Jag, I'd see your point. However, my church feeds the poor, gives toys to kids for Christmas, and opens its doors to the homeless. Granted, the church is moving to a fancy, brand new building. But the preacher used to work construction and built most of it himself in his free time, with the help of a few unemployed helpers who were overpaid in an attempt to help them get back on their feet. Of course, everyone involved is invited to attend church, and some did, but that had no affect on the help they were offered, and they were not preached to in exchange the help. ("Reading the Bible = food" --South Park) Still, I see where you get your opinion. When I walk into a church and see plasma LCD's all over the place, I wonder how many of the hungry could be fed for each of those HD monitors. Unfortunately, you have let a few bad examples represent an entire religion. That's no different than assuming that all Muslims or terrorists, all Catholics are child molesters or that all (your minority here) steal.
Well this is my point exactly. Since you can't prove it, I'm forced to believe that you don't KNOW it. Knowing implies a some degree of certainty. I believe that you BELIEVE that God created man, but I'm also sure that you are not certain of that 'fact.' For you to state that you are 100% certain only makes me shake my head. As you've said, 'faith and intelligence are in no way mutually exclusive,' and one mark of intelligence is being open to alternatives.
When you believe something strongly enough, you know it to be true. I have never seen Cygnus X1, yet I know it is there. I hear there is evidence to support it, but just took their words for it without actually doing the observations myself. Now if I know that Cygnus X1 exists with such little evidence, imaging how much I know that the universe is the result if ID when I have done the research for that myself. I've taken the time to consider alternatives and based my conclusions on my personal research of the writings of those much brighter than I am such as Plato, Aristotle, and Aquinas, Leibniz, and Aquinas who argued "First Cause" and scientists such as Einstein, who believe there is simply too much order in the universe to be random. Now I, similar to you, take an agnostic approach to the matter by admitting that my feeble mind is not capable of understanding an infinite being. If God created man via evolution, who am I to tell Him that He is wrong. On the flipside, I get offended by those telling me I am wrong because I believe in God, and try to use evolution to prove it to me, especially after I state that the two are not mutually exclusive.
->As I stated, I am a Christian, which means I know that God created man.
No, as a Christian, you believe that God created man. There is a difference.
Belief does not imply knowledge (read up on discourses on epistemology etc).
If you believe something strongly enough, it is really no longer a belief, is it? Though I do have to admit that I had to go back and edit the sentence, changing "believe" to "know".
What are you getting so worked up about? You mentioned you don't like people forcing their beliefs onto others, but no forcing has happened here whatsoever. If you are saying the truth when you say that you "agree with the evolution point", why is it wrong to say that the disbelief in evolution is stupid?
The same way it is wrong to say not eating pork is stupid. It's the same as saying not working on Saturday is stupid. It's the same as saying that choosing wearing a veil (ha jib) is stupid. Many people more brilliant than myself have had beliefs different than my own. I am not one to call them stupid. Just because we disagree, no matter how sure we are in our knowledge, we have no right to call someone stupid based on their faith.
Hardly. If the specifics of their religion contradict reality, then reality wins. Failure to realise that is stupid. Don't blame me for that fact.
This is my point! You are equating faith to stupidity. Let me quote Einstein. "God does not play dice with the universe." "A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man." "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings." Are you really smart enough to call Einstein stupid? Why are you wasting your time with me and not working the Grand Unified Theory?
Any religion more specific than "God created the universe and hasn't been back since" is silly because it has as its fundamental belief that God is great enough to create the entire univers but he's too pathetic to deliver a simple message effectively.
You should read beyond the first chapter before you claim to speak from a position of authority. You really should not argue against things you know nothing about.
I'm not trying to force my beliefs, or lack thereof, on anybody. That's generally the realm of the religious. In fact the extremist Christians are currently taking over America with the *stated* goal of the destruction of the constitution and its replacement with a Christian theocracy.
and how's that? By putting a Christmas tree on the town square? By singing Christmas carols in a school choir? For some reason, when I saw that tree or those carolers, neither my freedom of speech, nor my right to own a firearm, nor my right to protest, nor any other right was suddenly violated. And if the "extremist Christians" are taking over America and destroying the Constitution, then they are doing a really crappy job because I see the number of Mosques increasing and number of churches declining. I think your fears are unfounded, or at least pointed in the wrong direction.
So, maybe Cuba or Saudi Arabia or somesuch place where criticism is banned would be better for you? You're the only one who has a problem with people speeking freely.
No, in these countries, I would face religious persecution by both the governments and the populations. This country was founded, formed and populated by those trying to escape such persecution. Our forefathers wanted to create a country where its citizens could worship free from prosecution. Unfortunately, this has not always been the case as bigots have burned churches and crosses and flown planes into buildings all in the name of religion and religious intimidation. And the way I see it, ridiculing one because of their faith (which means belief without evidence) is no different than the cross burning bigots of the past.
And again, you demonstrate your ignorance of the difference between "different views" and "treasonous action". I don't condone killing Republicans becasue of what they believe, it's for what they do. And what they do is launch savage assaults on America. Setting up death camps is an action, not a belief.
Your ignorance of history is embarrassing, but I guess ignorance is what keeps you from blushing. Comparing Guantanamo Bay, where one prisoner died due to illness, to true death camps where billions have either been actively murdered or worked or starved to death is telling of your extremist views. The inmates at Guantanamo have better nutrition, health care and religious freedoms than the countries that they came from. If that's a death camp, you need a new term for Auschwitz.
You're missing the point. Yahweh was more right than the other guy, on the subject of evolution. He's no more right than anyone, necessarily, in saying God exists or doesn't: i.e., in non-testable religious beliefs. But evolution is a very different animal from a religious belief, just as heliocentrism or accepting that the Earth is a sphere. It's one thing to say God exists and wants us to be/do/believe whatever, but it's another thing entirely to target a principle of science which is well-document and backed up by enormous amounts of evidence, and declare that you don't believe it because of your religion. "I believe in God" is a perfectly acceptable statement of religious beliefs. "I don't believe in evolution" or "I don't believe in the germ theory of disease" or "I don't believe in a spherical Earth" is a different thing entirely.
I agree with the evolution point. That's not where I have an issue. I have problems with him calling someone stupid because of their beliefs. Religion is more important to some people than their creed, country or the color of their skin. Therefor, it is that much more offensive to insult someone based on their beliefs. Saying "I disagree" is completely permissible, even encouraged. Saying "you are an idiot and you should die" as he has said many times over, is 100% NOT OK.
Religion is supposed to deal with the "why". But most fundamentalists in most modern religions claim divine knowledge of the what, how, and when also.
The book of Genesis is not about the "why"... it is the what, how, and when to many misguided fundamentalist Christians and Jews.
There are wackos on the far reaches of everything from religion to politics to cars to sports. Saying all Muslims are terrorists, all Democrats are Communists or all Republicans are bigots is applying a stereotype on the majority that is based on the minority fringes.
The Bible states that God said "Let there be X", and there was. This is a bit vague in my opinion and does not go into the how. It is up to science to decide what happened between the divine decree and the actual existence. Science determines the how. The "Why" is up to philosophers, and theologians to work out. (as you pointed out that religion was supposed to do)
Evolution is a fact. 100% absolutely proven beyond any possible doubt. Here, I'll prove it to you: Ever seen a dog? There you go.
WOW! It's all so clear now. I am convinced! A dog. Why did I not see it before?
At first I thought you were a fucking moron for spending so much time trying to convince me that evolution is a fact after I stated that I have no qualm with evolution or it being taught in schools. Then, you made that dog statement and it removed all doubt.
My point was that you are a true asshole for insulting someone's religion and their intelligence for believing in that religion. That makes you a grade-A, class 5 asshole. You are no more right than anyone else, and it shows your terribly misplaced conceit to think otherwise. You have no right to force your beliefs on others, just as others can not force their beliefs on you. That's what the freedom or religion is all about. I'll kill or die defending that right, and any true patriot will do the same for the Constitution. If you have a problem with that document, I hear Cuba does not have such backwards ideals as a freedom or religion. I also hear it's quite nice this time of year.
In other words, that makes you a pussy. See, it takes no courage to sit there behind your keyboard and type your drivel. However, if you had real guts and conviction, you'd go a bar that serves the a nearby military base and tell them how you think it's patriotic to murder Republicans, and I assume anyone else that has different views than your own. Hell, since most military personnel are Republican, you could go ahead and prove your patriotism by trying to take a Marine or two out. Or, more on topic, travel to the nearest mosque during their daily prayers, walk in and tell your views on their beliefs and stupid they are for believing them. You are wasting your time arguing with me, as you pointed out, I'm just a liar and a fool. Maybe you should try your luck with a few hundred angry Muslims. If you are so confident that you can prove your point, then you shouldn't have any problems. Hell, you could solve that whole radical Muslim thing once and for all!
You are correct. Gravity is a bad example. Especially since I was always told it was "The Law of Gravity", not "The Theory..." I was using the GP's (or some other nearby post's) example.
Why do you think Russia's such a hot destination for Evangelical Christian missionary programs? With all those years of Stalinism keeping religion under its heel, it's ripe for the picking. And naturally, ID and Creationism follows fundamental evangelical Christian teachings around the globe.
Want to bet on the chances that when the onion is peeled back, Focus On The Family or some other famous US-based evangelical organization is behind the suit? "Send us your dollars so we can do God's work in Russia and force their schools to teach Creationism rather than the Devil's work, Evolution!"
Not to be a troll, but would prefer Muslims take over Russia? You said yourself that it is ripe for the picking. Someone is going to go in there. I'd prefer "turn the other cheek" Christians to "submit by the sword" Muslims.
If your faith is so weak that you need the courts to help you believe, then maybe you need to look in the mirror for the problem? Yup, gotta get rid of those tempting "ideas" out there in the big bad world. Might lead a person to think.
Wait a sec. I thought bucking the system, questioning authority, considering multiple ideas, and not believing everything you were told were good things. Are we now saying that this girl should sit down, shut up and believe what the government tells her? When did that become cool?
(Note: I'm not saying she is right, but it seems when someone bucks the system when it comes to Iraq, wiretapping, Internet censorship or whatever, it's a good thing. But when someone bucks the system for their religion, they can't think. A little consistency is all I'm asking for.)
>As a creationist, I'd be content with a statement saying that evolution isn't proven
so you'd be content with a lie, then?
evolution is a fact. get over it. you are wrong about creationism and no amount of whinging can change a fact.
Who the hell are you to tell this guy his belief system is wrong? Are some sort of deity yourself, or do you just think you are God? Fact is, evolution is theory, much like the theory of gravity or big bang theory. So you are either telling a lie yourself or you don't know the difference between theory and fact. Your post supports both theories.
Note: I'm not claiming that evolution is wrong. I am claiming that you are an asshole for insulting this guy's religion.
Saying that Evolution is not proven shows a very basic lack of understanding of the scientific process. But hey, don't let me, or anyone else, stop you from continually making a fool of yourself everytime you say a theory isn't proven.
Which would explain the the parent post is asking that evolution is not presented as fact, but as a theory, much like the theory of relativity, the big bang theory and so on are all presented as theories. Unfortunately, I've seen too many instances where evolution is presented as fact, not a theory. As you eloquently stated, it is a theory and those presenting it as fact are wrong.
Curiously, how does one "believe in ID?" Seriously, explain your view.
Since you asked: It's quite simple really. God created the heavens and the earth and all the oceans, seas, lands, and plants and creatures. What is not explained is how. That's where science comes in.
Don't take my word for it. The best philosophers in history have argued for and against first cause. I'm a mental midget compared to some of these guys. And unless your name is Descartes (pronounced Day-Cart), I'm guessing you are as well. No offense meant, of course.
Or perhaps, who are you to say whether God created man...?
As I stated, I am a Christian, which means I know that God created man. As a humble Christian, I willfully admit that I don't know how God created man, which means that I am in no position to tell anyone that they are wrong, or what they should teach in schools, and especially what they should believe themselves. All I ask is that you grant me the same respect and stop trying to tell me what I should be believing or that my belief system is somehow not compatible with reality. Such an argument would be futile anyhow as I've already claimed ignorance to the how, just not the who. And quite frankly, no one can prove the WHO one way or another anyhow.
Faith and intelligence are in no way mutually exclusive.
In the United States, several lawsuits challenging the theory that says humans descended from apes have been filed in courts...
Evolution does not claim that man evolved from apes, but that man and apes share a common ancestor, as do all creatures. Just man and the ape's ancestors were a little more recent that, say, the common ancestor between man and jellyfish.
Disclaimer: I'm a Christian and believe in ID myself. However, I feel that "Darwinism" should be taught in schools. Who am I to say how God created man. I feel that evolution is more of a miracle than Him simply saying "Let it Be" anyway! Just my $0.02
Slashdot Mirror
Of course it is insightful. It bashes the Neo-Con president. Of course, the fact that he is completely ignorant of American politics, as demonstrated by his horrid spelling of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, California, 8th District, soon to be Speaker of the House... yeah, that Pelowski.
I'm sorry, but I couldn't let this one go. Now, I won't call the guy an idiot because I don't know him. He may be brilliant for all I know. However, I feel it is fair to point out that this guy is clearly has no idea what he is talking about. I also find that it is an excellent example of Left-Slant of Slashdot Mods. Another excellent case will be how this post will end up negative just for pointing the truth out.
Group-think like the parent post is a fine example of what the mods look for, regardless of how ignorant the post is.
If the "truth" is drenched in smarmy condescending oversimplifying sarcasm that fails to even address the main point then I'd just as soon call it a Troll.
The GGP stated that Russia and other nations with no regard to human rights were copying the US. I think the GP did a find job of showing how ridiculous that really is. Russia is copying the US by abusing human rights? As if the Soviet Unions was a shining example of freedom and free expression. There has never been a time in Russian or Soviet history that he could have typed that crap and gotten away with it in Russia, The Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Afghanistan, or any other host of countries around the world, and he has the gawd to even assume that these countries are simply emulating the US? That is either the most obscene example of rewriting history I think I've ever seen, or the guy is flat out dishonest! He deserves the Troll or at least Flamebait mod, not me who called him on it!
You won't be modded down for being offtopic, as much as being illogical. Offtopic is just the closest pre-defined moniker the mods can hit you with.
The parent's point wasn't that the US was the only state engaged in subversive activities and censorship, but rather that they are pioneers in the field, or at least an outstanding modern example. Showing a recent copycat move by another state just reinforces the GP's point. You would have been amazingly on-topic, if you said "Look how well the US censors. Other totalitarian governments worldwide are starting to emulate them."
Cute! You are correct that is only recently that Russia (formerly known as the USSR) has had any sort of human rights violations. It is amazing the way Stalin slaughtered millions of farmers, in almost exactly the same way that Hoover did a few years earlier in what was later called "Black Friday". The way we put up that wall splitting Berlin and the way we shot anyone seeking freedom in the booming East Germany economy was such a great idea that the Democratic Republic of China put up a similar wall. That was a Great Wall they put up there! Speaking of China, anyone notice how similar that Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 crackdown they had was an exact copy of the way Bush had the secret police fire on the crowds protesting the GOP national convention in 2004?
Of course, this has nothing to do with the way the North Koreans imitated us after we eliminated all Bosnian Muslims in the 90's. The UN called it Genocide. We call it "population adjustment". I don't know if any country can follow the way we carpet bombed Baghdad, nuked Fallujah as to not lose any of our own troops there, the way we made Afghanistan a state after we conquered it and enslaved their populations. All fine examples of the fictional American Imperialism and human rights abuses you speak of.
Of course, seeing as how you were arrested and your counter-revolutionary remarks were deleted by the government censors you speak so highly of, I guess you won't be reading this after all.
I'm so glad you opened my eyes to the US abuses of power and the government's crackdown on the population. We are by far the worst nation in the world and Bush is the biggest terrorist by far!
The US is showing you amateurs how to do censorship correctly.
First you subvert the population, then you censor. None of this "revolution by force", "censorship by edict", oh no. The correct way to do it is get the population on board with a completely bogus set of threats and rationalizations they think are their own -- "terrorism", "homeland" security, "for the children" -- then the population's own representatives willingly subvert the country's founding documents and the people like it.
Everywhere I look, I see sheep.
As opposed to just killing them outright.
Poisoned spy 'had information on Kremlin figure'
At least in Russia, they are given the freedom to protest. I mean, only in the US does the police arrest and detain people who have not committed a crime right?
Hundreds Detained Ahead of Moscow Rally
Yeah, we are so good at taking rights away that the public is actually happier and seemingly better off without them! What's your complaint again?
(Before you mod me OT, keep in mind that I'm responding to a post that is modded well(Score:5, Insightful). How could that post be ON Topic and mine not?)
Sad to see that all of the west's criticism towards the Soviet Union, Iraq, North Korea, etc. is hypocritical considering this form of censorship.
At least in the SSSR you had some kind of social justice...
I guess you mean the USSR? How's that working out for them?
Hundreds Detained Ahead of Moscow Rally
I thought the US was the police state and GWB was the only one infringing on human rights.
(OT I'm sure, but I was responding to a previous post that evidently is NOT OT (Score:2, Interesting). We are either both OT or neither of us are.)
Clearly that's a straw man. I would claim that it is only people who claim that they are never wrong who are wrong. And guess what people of faith claim about their articles of absolute faith: that they are never wrong. Absolute faith is a vacuum of intelligence.
I never claimed absolute faith. I've considered differing points of view and continue to do so. I know what I know based on my own experience and research. So my knowledge are not based on blind faith. You have had different experiences and researched different things, so you know something different. When you look at the fable of the blind men examining the elephant, each came to a different conclusion based on their own observations. That doesn't make them any less intelligent. I'm not going to be so arrogant and insult your intelligence just because we disagree.
it doesn't matter who am I it matters the facts I am basing my opinion on.
I think this says it all. You have your opinion, others have theirs. No one has the right to tell another that their opinions are wrong, because by definition, they are not right either. You are free to disagree, but to insult someone's intelligence is a bit bigoted and extremely disrespectful. It is arrogant to assume that your opinions are more important than someone else's.
do you think Galileo was being a prick for saying the Earth goes around the Sun when he was clearly insulting the belief system of people around him?
No, Galileo pointed out that his observations led him to believe that the earth is not the center of the universe. He never insulted the intelligence of the "powers that be". The pricks were the ones who locked him up for it. They stood defiant and told him he was wrong because his beliefs were different than their own. Given the era, there were actually more "scientists" of the day claiming that Galileo was wrong. It was common knowledge that the earth was the center of everything, and Galileo went against the most current scientific "facts" and the pricks ridiculed him for it.
All of this should sound familiar by the way. Granted, all current scientific data points to evolution, just like all current scientific data pointed to the earth being central when Galileo presented his "beliefs".
I answered your question in another post. Since my risk of being modded redundant higher if I just copy and paste that post, I'll refer you to Here
->It's quite simple really. God created the heavens and the earth and all the oceans, seas, lands, and plants and creatures.
... or, sorry, how much of your hard earned money goes towards your church?
Which God(s)?
That depends on what you choose to believe. It's not my place to tell you what to believe. I only brought it up because the GP asked. (Curiously, how does one "believe in ID?" Seriously, explain your view.)
Face it, you belong to the worlds' oldest and greatest money making machine - church. How much of your annual earnings go towards your pastor's new Jaguar? Er, I mean, towards the spreading of the faith to more sources of income
Well, I haven't given enough, frankly. If my preacher drove a Jag, I'd see your point. However, my church feeds the poor, gives toys to kids for Christmas, and opens its doors to the homeless. Granted, the church is moving to a fancy, brand new building. But the preacher used to work construction and built most of it himself in his free time, with the help of a few unemployed helpers who were overpaid in an attempt to help them get back on their feet. Of course, everyone involved is invited to attend church, and some did, but that had no affect on the help they were offered, and they were not preached to in exchange the help. ("Reading the Bible = food" --South Park) Still, I see where you get your opinion. When I walk into a church and see plasma LCD's all over the place, I wonder how many of the hungry could be fed for each of those HD monitors. Unfortunately, you have let a few bad examples represent an entire religion. That's no different than assuming that all Muslims or terrorists, all Catholics are child molesters or that all (your minority here) steal.
Well this is my point exactly. Since you can't prove it, I'm forced to believe that you don't KNOW it. Knowing implies a some degree of certainty. I believe that you BELIEVE that God created man, but I'm also sure that you are not certain of that 'fact.' For you to state that you are 100% certain only makes me shake my head. As you've said, 'faith and intelligence are in no way mutually exclusive,' and one mark of intelligence is being open to alternatives.
When you believe something strongly enough, you know it to be true. I have never seen Cygnus X1, yet I know it is there. I hear there is evidence to support it, but just took their words for it without actually doing the observations myself. Now if I know that Cygnus X1 exists with such little evidence, imaging how much I know that the universe is the result if ID when I have done the research for that myself. I've taken the time to consider alternatives and based my conclusions on my personal research of the writings of those much brighter than I am such as Plato, Aristotle, and Aquinas, Leibniz, and Aquinas who argued "First Cause" and scientists such as Einstein, who believe there is simply too much order in the universe to be random. Now I, similar to you, take an agnostic approach to the matter by admitting that my feeble mind is not capable of understanding an infinite being. If God created man via evolution, who am I to tell Him that He is wrong. On the flipside, I get offended by those telling me I am wrong because I believe in God, and try to use evolution to prove it to me, especially after I state that the two are not mutually exclusive.
->As I stated, I am a Christian, which means I know that God created man.
No, as a Christian, you believe that God created man. There is a difference.
Belief does not imply knowledge (read up on discourses on epistemology etc).
If you believe something strongly enough, it is really no longer a belief, is it? Though I do have to admit that I had to go back and edit the sentence, changing "believe" to "know".
Still, your point is valid and well taken.
What are you getting so worked up about? You mentioned you don't like people forcing their beliefs onto others, but no forcing has happened here whatsoever. If you are saying the truth when you say that you "agree with the evolution point", why is it wrong to say that the disbelief in evolution is stupid?
The same way it is wrong to say not eating pork is stupid. It's the same as saying not working on Saturday is stupid. It's the same as saying that choosing wearing a veil (ha jib) is stupid. Many people more brilliant than myself have had beliefs different than my own. I am not one to call them stupid. Just because we disagree, no matter how sure we are in our knowledge, we have no right to call someone stupid based on their faith.
Hardly. If the specifics of their religion contradict reality, then reality wins.
Failure to realise that is stupid. Don't blame me for that fact.
This is my point! You are equating faith to stupidity. Let me quote Einstein.
"God does not play dice with the universe."
"A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man."
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings."
Are you really smart enough to call Einstein stupid? Why are you wasting your time with me and not working the Grand Unified Theory?
Any religion more specific than "God created the universe and hasn't been back since" is silly because it has as its fundamental belief that God is great enough to create the entire univers but he's too pathetic to deliver a simple message effectively.
You should read beyond the first chapter before you claim to speak from a position of authority. You really should not argue against things you know nothing about.
I'm not trying to force my beliefs, or lack thereof, on anybody. That's generally the realm of the religious. In fact the extremist Christians are currently taking over America with the *stated* goal of the destruction of the constitution and its replacement with a Christian theocracy.
and how's that? By putting a Christmas tree on the town square? By singing Christmas carols in a school choir? For some reason, when I saw that tree or those carolers, neither my freedom of speech, nor my right to own a firearm, nor my right to protest, nor any other right was suddenly violated. And if the "extremist Christians" are taking over America and destroying the Constitution, then they are doing a really crappy job because I see the number of Mosques increasing and number of churches declining. I think your fears are unfounded, or at least pointed in the wrong direction.
So, maybe Cuba or Saudi Arabia or somesuch place where criticism is banned would be better for you? You're the only one who has a problem with people speeking freely.
No, in these countries, I would face religious persecution by both the governments and the populations. This country was founded, formed and populated by those trying to escape such persecution. Our forefathers wanted to create a country where its citizens could worship free from prosecution. Unfortunately, this has not always been the case as bigots have burned churches and crosses and flown planes into buildings all in the name of religion and religious intimidation. And the way I see it, ridiculing one because of their faith (which means belief without evidence) is no different than the cross burning bigots of the past.
And again, you demonstrate your ignorance of the difference between "different views" and "treasonous action".
I don't condone killing Republicans becasue of what they believe, it's for what they do. And what they do is launch savage assaults on America. Setting up death camps is an action, not a belief.
Your ignorance of history is embarrassing, but I guess ignorance is what keeps you from blushing. Comparing Guantanamo Bay, where one prisoner died due to illness, to true death camps where billions have either been actively murdered or worked or starved to death is telling of your extremist views. The inmates at Guantanamo have better nutrition, health care and religious freedoms than the countries that they came from. If that's a death camp, you need a new term for Auschwitz.
You're missing the point. Yahweh was more right than the other guy, on the subject of evolution. He's no more right than anyone, necessarily, in saying God exists or doesn't: i.e., in non-testable religious beliefs. But evolution is a very different animal from a religious belief, just as heliocentrism or accepting that the Earth is a sphere. It's one thing to say God exists and wants us to be/do/believe whatever, but it's another thing entirely to target a principle of science which is well-document and backed up by enormous amounts of evidence, and declare that you don't believe it because of your religion. "I believe in God" is a perfectly acceptable statement of religious beliefs. "I don't believe in evolution" or "I don't believe in the germ theory of disease" or "I don't believe in a spherical Earth" is a different thing entirely.
I agree with the evolution point. That's not where I have an issue. I have problems with him calling someone stupid because of their beliefs. Religion is more important to some people than their creed, country or the color of their skin. Therefor, it is that much more offensive to insult someone based on their beliefs. Saying "I disagree" is completely permissible, even encouraged. Saying "you are an idiot and you should die" as he has said many times over, is 100% NOT OK.
Religion is supposed to deal with the "why". But most fundamentalists in most modern religions claim divine knowledge of the what, how, and when also.
The book of Genesis is not about the "why"... it is the what, how, and when to many misguided fundamentalist Christians and Jews.
There are wackos on the far reaches of everything from religion to politics to cars to sports. Saying all Muslims are terrorists, all Democrats are Communists or all Republicans are bigots is applying a stereotype on the majority that is based on the minority fringes.
The Bible states that God said "Let there be X", and there was. This is a bit vague in my opinion and does not go into the how. It is up to science to decide what happened between the divine decree and the actual existence. Science determines the how. The "Why" is up to philosophers, and theologians to work out. (as you pointed out that religion was supposed to do)
Evolution is a fact. 100% absolutely proven beyond any possible doubt.
Here, I'll prove it to you:
Ever seen a dog?
There you go.
WOW! It's all so clear now. I am convinced! A dog. Why did I not see it before?
At first I thought you were a fucking moron for spending so much time trying to convince me that evolution is a fact after I stated that I have no qualm with evolution or it being taught in schools. Then, you made that dog statement and it removed all doubt.
My point was that you are a true asshole for insulting someone's religion and their intelligence for believing in that religion. That makes you a grade-A, class 5 asshole. You are no more right than anyone else, and it shows your terribly misplaced conceit to think otherwise. You have no right to force your beliefs on others, just as others can not force their beliefs on you. That's what the freedom or religion is all about. I'll kill or die defending that right, and any true patriot will do the same for the Constitution. If you have a problem with that document, I hear Cuba does not have such backwards ideals as a freedom or religion. I also hear it's quite nice this time of year.
In other words, that makes you a pussy. See, it takes no courage to sit there behind your keyboard and type your drivel. However, if you had real guts and conviction, you'd go a bar that serves the a nearby military base and tell them how you think it's patriotic to murder Republicans, and I assume anyone else that has different views than your own. Hell, since most military personnel are Republican, you could go ahead and prove your patriotism by trying to take a Marine or two out. Or, more on topic, travel to the nearest mosque during their daily prayers, walk in and tell your views on their beliefs and stupid they are for believing them. You are wasting your time arguing with me, as you pointed out, I'm just a liar and a fool. Maybe you should try your luck with a few hundred angry Muslims. If you are so confident that you can prove your point, then you shouldn't have any problems. Hell, you could solve that whole radical Muslim thing once and for all!
You are correct. Gravity is a bad example. Especially since I was always told it was "The Law of Gravity", not "The Theory..." I was using the GP's (or some other nearby post's) example.
Why do you think Russia's such a hot destination for Evangelical Christian missionary programs? With all those years of Stalinism keeping religion under its heel, it's ripe for the picking. And naturally, ID and Creationism follows fundamental evangelical Christian teachings around the globe.
Want to bet on the chances that when the onion is peeled back, Focus On The Family or some other famous US-based evangelical organization is behind the suit? "Send us your dollars so we can do God's work in Russia and force their schools to teach Creationism rather than the Devil's work, Evolution!"
Not to be a troll, but would prefer Muslims take over Russia? You said yourself that it is ripe for the picking. Someone is going to go in there. I'd prefer "turn the other cheek" Christians to "submit by the sword" Muslims.
If your faith is so weak that you need the courts to help you believe, then maybe you need to look in the mirror for the problem?
Yup, gotta get rid of those tempting "ideas" out there in the big bad world. Might lead a person to think.
Wait a sec. I thought bucking the system, questioning authority, considering multiple ideas, and not believing everything you were told were good things. Are we now saying that this girl should sit down, shut up and believe what the government tells her? When did that become cool?
(Note: I'm not saying she is right, but it seems when someone bucks the system when it comes to Iraq, wiretapping, Internet censorship or whatever, it's a good thing. But when someone bucks the system for their religion, they can't think. A little consistency is all I'm asking for.)
A giant meatball slipped off that plate and thus our earth was born.
Fascinating! Where to I send my dollar?
>As a creationist, I'd be content with a statement saying that evolution isn't proven
so you'd be content with a lie, then?
evolution is a fact. get over it. you are wrong about creationism and no amount of whinging can change a fact.
Who the hell are you to tell this guy his belief system is wrong? Are some sort of deity yourself, or do you just think you are God? Fact is, evolution is theory, much like the theory of gravity or big bang theory . So you are either telling a lie yourself or you don't know the difference between theory and fact. Your post supports both theories.
Note: I'm not claiming that evolution is wrong. I am claiming that you are an asshole for insulting this guy's religion.
Saying that Evolution is not proven shows a very basic lack of understanding of the scientific process. But hey, don't let me, or anyone else, stop you from continually making a fool of yourself everytime you say a theory isn't proven.
Which would explain the the parent post is asking that evolution is not presented as fact, but as a theory, much like the theory of relativity, the big bang theory and so on are all presented as theories. Unfortunately, I've seen too many instances where evolution is presented as fact, not a theory. As you eloquently stated, it is a theory and those presenting it as fact are wrong.
Curiously, how does one "believe in ID?" Seriously, explain your view.
Since you asked:
It's quite simple really. God created the heavens and the earth and all the oceans, seas, lands, and plants and creatures. What is not explained is how. That's where science comes in.
Don't take my word for it. The best philosophers in history have argued for and against first cause. I'm a mental midget compared to some of these guys. And unless your name is Descartes (pronounced Day-Cart), I'm guessing you are as well. No offense meant, of course.
Or perhaps, who are you to say whether God created man...?
As I stated, I am a Christian, which means I know that God created man. As a humble Christian, I willfully admit that I don't know how God created man, which means that I am in no position to tell anyone that they are wrong, or what they should teach in schools, and especially what they should believe themselves. All I ask is that you grant me the same respect and stop trying to tell me what I should be believing or that my belief system is somehow not compatible with reality. Such an argument would be futile anyhow as I've already claimed ignorance to the how, just not the who. And quite frankly, no one can prove the WHO one way or another anyhow.
Faith and intelligence are in no way mutually exclusive.
Evolution does not claim that man evolved from apes, but that man and apes share a common ancestor, as do all creatures. Just man and the ape's ancestors were a little more recent that, say, the common ancestor between man and jellyfish.
Disclaimer: I'm a Christian and believe in ID myself. However, I feel that "Darwinism" should be taught in schools. Who am I to say how God created man. I feel that evolution is more of a miracle than Him simply saying "Let it Be" anyway! Just my $0.02