I will admit that my post was reactionary. I am tired of the evolutionists/ atheists/ other groups looking down upon me and others who believe in creation simply because they disagree with me. Your contempt is palpatable in your post, and regardless of what you purport to be doing, what you are truly trying to accomplish is to draw me into a debate about my beliefs. I will not give you an opportunity to "prove" to everyone that your beliefs are more sound than mine, that I am some lunatic because my beliefs do not agree with your "science". "Science" has become a religion of its own making. And I never asked you to accept my beliefs as "scientific"-- I merely stated that I have as much right to believe what I want as you do, no matter how wrong you think I am. What are you really afraid of? Because, if you are not afraid of something, if you really think I am wrong, then WHY are you bothering to reply to my posts? What do you get out of it, except the "thrill" of shooting me down? I do understand your mindset, you know. You are going to cling to your beliefs as stubbornly as I cling to mine. The difference is, I am willing to admit that I believe something. You will always stick to the idea that somehow, your beliefs are not beliefs, but exist in some kind of limbo you call "evidence", entirely forgetting that you CHOOSE to believe that evidence. I never have and never will try to even argue you or anyone else out of their beliefs (regardless of how absurd and bizarre I find them). What I am arguing is how evolutionists refuse to admit that their beliefs take as much faith as mine do. After all-- no human being has ever OBSERVED the kind of evolution that is claimed as responsible for our existence. (I don't argue against micro evolution, which IS observable) Evolutionists simply BELIEVE that evolution is true because they look at scientific data and interpret it that way. Which is their right. Just because we (creationists) interpret the data a different way, does not make us less intelligent than you (and yes, I know you never said that, but that is the way a lot of evolutionists think and, honey, other people are reading this besides you). What this whole argument (from my perspective) has been about is the unwillingness of a group of people to admit that they put their faith in a religion they choose to call "science", because they are afraid they will be lumped together with us "religious fanatics".
I am sure it would surprise you to learn that as a "religious fanatic", I have no designs on brainwashing anyone. My God wants willing, intelligent converts who CHOOSE Him-- not people who let themselves be fooled or bullied into faith in Him. And whether you are willing to admit it or not, the whole reason anyone attacks a creationist point of view is not because you really care WHAT I believe. It is because, in order for me to be right, there has to be God-- a super intelligent designer with limitless power, which you admit to be a foreign (and from your tone, repugnant) concept. And perhaps a frightening one? Because surely such a being would not only have the power, but the right to judge you (and me).
Lastly-- my response was NOT intended to address anything YOU said, but rather to address what your comments reflect-- the mindset of many evolutionists; you just happen to be the only one thus far to respond to anything I have posted. This is the last time I will post in this thread, as I have no wish to argue my faith against yours.
"It's not the beliefs of creationists that bother me, it's their desire to foist their non-scientific beliefs into science classrooms and their patent dishonesty when attempting to support their agenda."
Two things: 1)When, in my post, did I attempt to force my beliefs into any classroom you or any of your offspring attend? (Keeping in mind that right now, children across our country learn ONLY evolution in school, regardless of what their parents believe). 2)What agenda are you asserting me to have? Did I affiliate myself with ANY group that offends you? Did I even try to argue that you should believe what I believe? (The only thing I can can think of is that you checked the sites I provided for reference as to what I believe and disagreed with them-- but as I said, I will not be drawn into a debate of beliefs: you have the right to your beliefs, and so do I!)
"Now please, spare me the fallacious arguments regarding "belief". I'm not so stupid as to believe that "belief" that a chair will support my weight is the same as belief in a god. Please look up the equivocation fallacy."
Firstly, I was not putting forth the example of the chair as an argument of any kind-- thereby nullifying your assertion that it is a fallacious statement (perhaps YOU should look up the meaning). I was using the chair ILLUSTRATION to show that, in order to believe something (anything), one must have faith that it is true. You BELIEVE a god does not exist-- therefor, you have faith that the knowledge to which you have access proves this to you.
Another illustration might be: You most likely believe (as do I) that there is gold in Fort Knox. Why do we believe this? It is unlikely that either of us have been able to see or touch it. But we are told it is there, by people who have. We have faith that there is gold in Fort Knox because we choose to believe the evidence presented to us that it is there. You have chosen to believe that the evidence you have about the origins of the universe reflects evolution as fact. This still requires the faith that the facts you have, and your interpretation of those facts, are correct. My beliefs fall into that same catergory-- I have faith that my interpretation of the facts I have are correct. I suppose that we will only discover which one of is right after we die. But consider this: if you're right about no god, then fine-- but if you're wrong...
Enjoy your beliefs. I have no "agenda" to stuff mine down your throat. As for anyone else reading this: Have you ever thought it odd that when you agree with someone else, they consider you "open- minded"? But, when you disagree with them, all of a sudden, you are a "closed minded" bigot with some kind of "hidden" agenda? I wonder why? And why are my beliefs "bizarre and absurd"? Because they do not agree with mainstream "scientific" beliefs? Hmfph! I thought the definition of the term "open- minded" was a willingness to accept all points of view as valid-- that everyone was entitled to an opinion. It is obvious to me that some people do not believe in my right to profess my own belief -- "It's okay to believe what you want, so long as you never talk about it." Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
You know what I find most interesting? That so many of those who accept evolution as true become so extremely irritated with those of us who do not. Why do you care whether we believe in evolution or creation? I do not believe any of us (my darling husband included) ever held a gun to anyone's head and forced you to accept our beliefs. That's right, I said beliefs. Granted, my interpretation of certain scientific facts (which I refuse to debate-- check out creationism.org or drdino.com if you wish), takes some faith. What I think Timex has put forth is his wish (and mine) that those of you who believe in evolution admit that it takes a little faith on your part too. You must believe that the scientific evidence points to "natural selection" and mutations that, over time, improve the species. Your faith is in your interpretation of data viewed through the filter that you do not believe in a god. I have faith in my God, therefor, I view the data through the filter of that faith. The crux of the argument is faith, whether you believe in God, or that you believe that a god does not exist. You still must admit that you believe something. An illustration might be something like this: it takes faith to sit in a chair. Yes, you read that right. Let us assume that you have a choice to either sit in a chair, or not to sit in a chair (and not factor in any other variables, such as tiredness etc. , for the sake of the illustration). You MUST believe that the chair will support your weight before you will sit in it. If it is your belief that the chair will not support your weight, then you will not sit in it. So too, must one hold some sort of belief about the origins of mankind when one accepts one theory or another. You either believe that the theory will support the weight of your beliefs or you do not.
Slashdot Mirror
I will admit that my post was reactionary. I am tired of the evolutionists/ atheists/ other groups looking down upon me and others who believe in creation simply because they disagree with me. Your contempt is palpatable in your post, and regardless of what you purport to be doing, what you are truly trying to accomplish is to draw me into a debate about my beliefs. I will not give you an opportunity to "prove" to everyone that your beliefs are more sound than mine, that I am some lunatic because my beliefs do not agree with your "science". "Science" has become a religion of its own making. And I never asked you to accept my beliefs as "scientific"-- I merely stated that I have as much right to believe what I want as you do, no matter how wrong you think I am. What are you really afraid of? Because, if you are not afraid of something, if you really think I am wrong, then WHY are you bothering to reply to my posts? What do you get out of it, except the "thrill" of shooting me down? I do understand your mindset, you know. You are going to cling to your beliefs as stubbornly as I cling to mine. The difference is, I am willing to admit that I believe something. You will always stick to the idea that somehow, your beliefs are not beliefs, but exist in some kind of limbo you call "evidence", entirely forgetting that you CHOOSE to believe that evidence. I never have and never will try to even argue you or anyone else out of their beliefs (regardless of how absurd and bizarre I find them). What I am arguing is how evolutionists refuse to admit that their beliefs take as much faith as mine do. After all-- no human being has ever OBSERVED the kind of evolution that is claimed as responsible for our existence. (I don't argue against micro evolution, which IS observable) Evolutionists simply BELIEVE that evolution is true because they look at scientific data and interpret it that way. Which is their right. Just because we (creationists) interpret the data a different way, does not make us less intelligent than you (and yes, I know you never said that, but that is the way a lot of evolutionists think and, honey, other people are reading this besides you). What this whole argument (from my perspective) has been about is the unwillingness of a group of people to admit that they put their faith in a religion they choose to call "science", because they are afraid they will be lumped together with us "religious fanatics".
I am sure it would surprise you to learn that as a "religious fanatic", I have no designs on brainwashing anyone. My God wants willing, intelligent converts who CHOOSE Him-- not people who let themselves be fooled or bullied into faith in Him. And whether you are willing to admit it or not, the whole reason anyone attacks a creationist point of view is not because you really care WHAT I believe. It is because, in order for me to be right, there has to be God-- a super intelligent designer with limitless power, which you admit to be a foreign (and from your tone, repugnant) concept. And perhaps a frightening one? Because surely such a being would not only have the power, but the right to judge you (and me).
Lastly-- my response was NOT intended to address anything YOU said, but rather to address what your comments reflect-- the mindset of many evolutionists; you just happen to be the only one thus far to respond to anything I have posted. This is the last time I will post in this thread, as I have no wish to argue my faith against yours.
"It's not the beliefs of creationists that bother me, it's their desire to foist their non-scientific beliefs into science classrooms and their patent dishonesty when attempting to support their agenda."
Two things:
1)When, in my post, did I attempt to force my beliefs into any classroom you or any of your offspring attend? (Keeping in mind that right now, children across our country learn ONLY evolution in school, regardless of what their parents believe).
2)What agenda are you asserting me to have? Did I affiliate myself with ANY group that offends you? Did I even try to argue that you should believe what I believe? (The only thing I can can think of is that you checked the sites I provided for reference as to what I believe and disagreed with them-- but as I said, I will not be drawn into a debate of beliefs: you have the right to your beliefs, and so do I!)
"Now please, spare me the fallacious arguments regarding "belief". I'm not so stupid as to believe that "belief" that a chair will support my weight is the same as belief in a god. Please look up the equivocation fallacy."
Firstly, I was not putting forth the example of the chair as an argument of any kind-- thereby nullifying your assertion that it is a fallacious statement (perhaps YOU should look up the meaning). I was using the chair ILLUSTRATION to show that, in order to believe something (anything), one must have faith that it is true. You BELIEVE a god does not exist-- therefor, you have faith that the knowledge to which you have access proves this to you.
Another illustration might be: You most likely believe (as do I) that there is gold in Fort Knox. Why do we believe this? It is unlikely that either of us have been able to see or touch it. But we are told it is there, by people who have. We have faith that there is gold in Fort Knox because we choose to believe the evidence presented to us that it is there. You have chosen to believe that the evidence you have about the origins of the universe reflects evolution as fact. This still requires the faith that the facts you have, and your interpretation of those facts, are correct. My beliefs fall into that same catergory-- I have faith that my interpretation of the facts I have are correct. I suppose that we will only discover which one of is right after we die. But consider this: if you're right about no god, then fine-- but if you're wrong...
Enjoy your beliefs. I have no "agenda" to stuff mine down your throat. As for anyone else reading this: Have you ever thought it odd that when you agree with someone else, they consider you "open- minded"? But, when you disagree with them, all of a sudden, you are a "closed minded" bigot with some kind of "hidden" agenda? I wonder why? And why are my beliefs "bizarre and absurd"? Because they do not agree with mainstream "scientific" beliefs? Hmfph! I thought the definition of the term "open- minded" was a willingness to accept all points of view as valid-- that everyone was entitled to an opinion. It is obvious to me that some people do not believe in my right to profess my own belief -- "It's okay to believe what you want, so long as you never talk about it." Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
You know what I find most interesting? That so many of those who accept evolution as true become so extremely irritated with those of us who do not. Why do you care whether we believe in evolution or creation? I do not believe any of us (my darling husband included) ever held a gun to anyone's head and forced you to accept our beliefs. That's right, I said beliefs. Granted, my interpretation of certain scientific facts (which I refuse to debate-- check out creationism.org or drdino.com if you wish), takes some faith. What I think Timex has put forth is his wish (and mine) that those of you who believe in evolution admit that it takes a little faith on your part too. You must believe that the scientific evidence points to "natural selection" and mutations that, over time, improve the species. Your faith is in your interpretation of data viewed through the filter that you do not believe in a god. I have faith in my God, therefor, I view the data through the filter of that faith. The crux of the argument is faith, whether you believe in God, or that you believe that a god does not exist. You still must admit that you believe something. An illustration might be something like this: it takes faith to sit in a chair. Yes, you read that right. Let us assume that you have a choice to either sit in a chair, or not to sit in a chair (and not factor in any other variables, such as tiredness etc. , for the sake of the illustration). You MUST believe that the chair will support your weight before you will sit in it. If it is your belief that the chair will not support your weight, then you will not sit in it. So too, must one hold some sort of belief about the origins of mankind when one accepts one theory or another. You either believe that the theory will support the weight of your beliefs or you do not.