Maine GOP Governor Candidates Asked About Teaching Creationism

Politics • Views: 3,769

In a debate last night, the seven Republican candidates for governor of Maine were asked whether they support the teaching of creationism alongside evolution in schools.

The results: three said, “Yes,” three said, “No,” and one, Matt Jacobson, said, “Teach evolution in philosophy, and teach science in science.” Which might have been a misstatement, but given the invincible ignorance currently fashionable on the right, it’s hard to say for sure.

It’s appalling that even in Maine of all places, half of the GOP candidates think it’s a winning issue to promote teaching Dark Ages ignorance to children as science.

(Hat tip: freetoken.)

Jump to bottom

271 comments
1 jamesfirecat  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:20:57am

The sixty four hundred dollar question is, will this kind of craziness seep into the races for the GOP senate seats in Maine. Because if it does Snow and Collins are both gonna be history and I doubt someone noticeably more conservative than them (especially a new comer) would be able to win election in Maine….

2 Killgore Trout  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:22:45am

I can’t imagine this is going to go over well with the electorate up there.

3 Locker  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:24:33am

The Creationism and warming denier people are so reminiscent of flat earthers it’s scary.

4 Glenn Beck's Grand Unifying Theory of Obdicut  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:24:38am

How do you teach Creationism or Intelligent Design anyway? They’re non-logical, so I’d think it’d take like five minutes to say:

And some people believe that god created everything 6000 years ago, which is contradicted by all scientific evidence. Others believe every moment of creation has been ‘guided’ by god’s hand, which is contradicted by all scientific evidence. Still others believe that only some moments of creation have been so ‘guided’, but again, no scientific support for that.

What else is there to Creationism or ID? Are they supposed to teach all the fabricated nonsensical criticism of evolution that they bring? If they do, shouldn’t they teach that all these criticisms are weak, poor, dismiss able things— given that’s the truth?

5 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:24:54am

Simple. Three “yeas”? Don’t vote for them. Problem solved.

6 MrSilverDragon  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:27:36am

“Teach evolution in philosophy, and teach science in science.”

What’s next? Teach math as myth and teach English in astronomy?

Wow.

7 Varek Raith  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:28:56am

Whose version of “Creation”???
There’s, like, thousands of them!
9_9

8 jamesfirecat  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:33:19am

I hate to thread jack, more like thread detour really but my sense of common decency and watching my friend’s backs insists that I let everyone know they should go directly to [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…] and down ding the hell out of it.

I want that comment to reach negative triple digits, because it’s the most personally insulting thing I’ve seen posted on this blog.

9 jamesfirecat  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:34:17am

re: #7 Varek Raith

Whose version of “Creation”???
There’s, like, thousands of them!
9_9

World is carried through space on the back of a gigantic turtle while resting on the back of four elephants!

10 middy  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:35:21am

Maine is pretty backwoods. I’d name them honorary southerners if they weren’t so dang yankee.

11 Varek Raith  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:35:36am

re: #9 jamesfirecat

World is carried through space on the back of a gigantic turtle while resting on the back of four elephants!

BLASPHEMY!
Turtles. All the way down.
Image: turtles-all-the-way-down.jpg

13 Randy W. Weeks  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:36:19am

I’m surprised that two of them had the guts to say no.

14 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:43:38am

re: #13 LoneStarSpur

I’m surprised that two of them had the guts to say no.

It was actually three of them. Hopefully, one of those three is the frontrunner.

15 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:48:03am

Wow, looks like I ducked out at the right time last night. I may have blown a gasket if I’d stayed 5 more minutes.

16 Randy W. Weeks  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:48:06am

re: #14 Dark_Falcon

It was actually three of them. Hopefully, one of those three is the frontrunner.

Good point. I didn’t count him because, well, he responded with gibberish so I wasn’t exactly sure where he stood. I doubt he knows either.

17 Stanley Sea  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:48:48am

re: #15 cliffster

Wow, looks like I ducked out at the right time last night. I may have blown a gasket if I’d stayed 5 more minutes.

Me too. What a asshole.

18 RogueOne  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:49:23am

re: #8 jamesfirecat

I hate to thread jack, more like thread detour really but my sense of common decency and watching my friend’s backs insists that I let everyone know they should go directly to [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…] and down ding the hell out of it.

I want that comment to reach negative triple digits, because it’s the most personally insulting thing I’ve seen posted on this blog.

I’m on mobile, signed on just to downding. I’m getting weird lag so if I mistakenly downdinged you I’ll fix it later.

19 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:49:26am

re: #4 Obdicut

How do you teach Creationism or Intelligent Design anyway? They’re non-logical, so I’d think it’d take like five minutes to say:

And some people believe that god created everything 6000 years ago, which is contradicted by all scientific evidence. Others believe every moment of creation has been ‘guided’ by god’s hand, which is contradicted by all scientific evidence. Still others believe that only some moments of creation have been so ‘guided’, but again, no scientific support for that.

What else is there to Creationism or ID? Are they supposed to teach all the fabricated nonsensical criticism of evolution that they bring? If they do, shouldn’t they teach that all these criticisms are weak, poor, dismiss able things— given that’s the truth?

If you can believe in G-d, why is it so hard to believe that G-d created it all? And don’t say “scientific evidence.” If this god is capable of putting any of this in motion, why limit him to following any laws or rules of science.

The holy texts, the Hebrew and Greek scriptures certainly portray a god who performs outright miracles, well beyond the boundaries of possible science, so, what is all this confusion about creationism.

If you can’t divorce yourself from a belief in G-d, then you should not limit that god, or limit the possibilities that are presented in the holy texts.

I don’t think creationism should be taught in schools, and if any of these politicians suggest that, then that should be considered, but if you are a believer, then what gives any believer the right to suggest that you shouldn’t believe in creationism, that there is something wrong with these politicians stating a belief in creationism.

20 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:50:23am

re: #16 LoneStarSpur

Good point. I didn’t count him because, well, he responded with gibberish so I wasn’t exactly sure where he stood. I doubt he knows either.

Actually, there are 7 candidates. 3 are creationists, three believe in science, and one waffled.

21 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:55:56am

re: #19 Walter L. Newton

If you can believe in G-d, why is it so hard to believe that G-d created it all? And don’t say “scientific evidence.” If this god is capable of putting any of this in motion, why limit him to following any laws or rules of science.

The holy texts, the Hebrew and Greek scriptures certainly portray a god who performs outright miracles, well beyond the boundaries of possible science, so, what is all this confusion about creationism.

If you can’t divorce yourself from a belief in G-d, then you should not limit that god, or limit the possibilities that are presented in the holy texts.

I don’t think creationism should be taught in schools, and if any of these politicians suggest that, then that should be considered, but if you are a believer, then what gives any believer the right to suggest that you shouldn’t believe in creationism, that there is something wrong with these politicians stating a belief in creationism.

What if God created the Big Bang which in turn created the Universe? My belief in God in no way clouds my judgment about evolution.

Maimonides (a scientist and biblical scholar) said that if science contradicts the Torah than it is the Torah we do not understand clearly.

22 darthstar  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:57:59am

re: #7 Varek Raith

Whose version of “Creation”???
There’s, like, thousands of them!
9_9



I believe Marduk is the four eared, four eyed god who did most of the hard work:

(the Enuma Elish is a kick-ass creation myth…I highly recommend reading the whole thing…you world of warcraft fantasy types will find some new role models here, I guarantee)

In the beginning, neither heaven nor earth had names. Apsu, the god of fresh waters, and Tiamat, the goddess of the salt oceans, and Mummu, the god of the mist that rises from both of them, were still mingled as one. There were no mountans, there was no pasture land, and not even a reed-marsh could be found to break the surface of the waters.

It was then that Apsu and Tiamat parented two gods, and then two more who outgrew the first pair. These further parented gods, until Ea, who was the god of rivers and was Tiamat and Apsu’s geat-grandson, was born. Ea was the cleverest of the gods, and with his magic Ea became the most powerful of the gods, ruling even his forebears.

Apsu and Tiamat’s descendents became an unruly crowd. Eventually Apsu, in his frustration and inability to sleep with the clamor, went to Tiamat, and he proposed to her that he slay their noisy offspring. Tiamat was furious at his suggestion to kill their clan, but after leaving her Apsu resolved to proceed with his murderous plan. When the young gods heard of his plot against them, they were silent and fearful, but soon Ea was hatching a scheme. He cast a spell on Apsu, pulled Apsu’s crown from his head, and slew him. Ea then built his palace on Apsu’s waters, and it was there that, with the goddess Damkina, he fathered Marduk, the four-eared, four-eyed giant who was god of the rains and storms.

23 ShaunP  Fri, May 14, 2010 7:58:43am

Sorry to go off topic so early in the thread, but I just saw this and had to share. Buckle up everyone…

Youtube Video
24 Killgore Trout  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:02:26am

OT: Good news for Mac geeks….
Portal is Free

Youtube Video

It really is one of the most worthwhile games I’ve played in a very long time. Highly recommended. Don’t google it because you’ll probably get some spoilers. Just play it, trust me.

25 darthstar  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:03:01am

re: #23 ShaunP

I’ve shared that video in the past…it’s quite beautiful. Too bad the US won’t run a commercial like that. We have to have a talking dog or people won’t pay attention.

26 rwdflynavy  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:03:22am

re: #24 Killgore Trout

OT: Good news for Mac geeks…
Portal is Free

[Video]

It really is one of the most worthwhile games I’ve played in a very long time. Highly recommended. Don’t google it because you’ll probably get some spoilers. Just play it, trust me.


Concur, Great fun!!! the cake is a lie!!!!

27 Ericus58  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:05:48am

re: #23 ShaunP

Sorry to go off topic so early in the thread, but I just saw this and had to share. Buckle up everyone…


[Video]

Geezzzz dude, that actually made my eyes get a bit misty and my heart skipped a beat.
To be taken away from that which the most important part of life - those you love - because of not being wise.

Thanks.
Now excuse me as I make sure my co-workers don’t see the older guy get weepy.

28 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:07:30am

U.S. Joins U.N. Initiative Whose Stated Goal Is to Bridge Islam-West Divide

The U.S. has signed on to a U.N. project whose stated aim is to build bridges between Islam and the West, but critics worry it is linked to an agenda that restricts free expression, especially when it comes to media coverage viewed as critical towards Islam.

State Department spokesman Philip Crowley announced Thursday that the U.S. has joined 119 countries and organizations in a “Group of Friends” supporting the Alliance of Civilizations (AoC), and as such will take part in the AoC’s third global forum in Brazil in late May.

…Among factors identified as contributing to difficulties between Islam and the West, the report highlighted “Israel’s continuing occupation of Palestinian and other Arab territories and the unresolved status of Jerusalem.”

The report acknowledged that terrorism, “committed by radical groups on the fringes of Muslim societies,” was a factor, but attributed it to Western policies and repression in the Islamic world, not to Islamist ideology.

“In evaluating the relations between Western and Muslim societies it is important to note that Islamist activism does not necessarily produce Islamist militancy within societies and the latter does not automatically lead to violent confrontation with the West,” it said.

“It is the invasion of certain Muslim countries by Western military forces and their continued presence in these countries, combined with the suppression of political movements in the Muslim world, that are among the reasons for violent manifestations.”

Because of terrorism, the report said, Islam was perceived by some as a violent religion, a view that was “at best manifestly incorrect and at worst maliciously motivated.”

29 rwdflynavy  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:08:19am

re: #24 Killgore Trout

OT: Good news for Mac geeks…
Portal is Free

[Video]

It really is one of the most worthwhile games I’ve played in a very long time. Highly recommended. Don’t google it because you’ll probably get some spoilers. Just play it, trust me.

This was a triumph, I’m making a note here, huge success.

30 darthstar  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:08:24am

re: #28 NJDhockeyfan

U.S. Joins U.N. Initiative Whose Stated Goal Is to Bridge Islam-West Divide

Good. More peace. Less war.

31 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:08:41am

re: #21 marjoriemoon

What if God created the Big Bang which in turn created the Universe? My belief in God in no way clouds my judgment about evolution.

Maimonides (a scientist and biblical scholar) said that if science contradicts the Torah than it is the Torah we do not understand clearly.

(Note: take the “teaching it in school out of my conversation, that’s not what I am talking about, I’m suggesting a more nuanced idea here. I don’t believe in teaching any religious concept of any sort in science class.)

That’s not what I am suggesting in the least. But, I am suggesting that lately, ANY politician or public official has been tagged with a “suspected” tag if they believe in any form of creationism that doesn’t involve evolution as a companion mechanism to sciences rather evident theory of evolution.

So, my question is to all believers, you who believe in a god, which for me is as magical and mythical as believing in creationism of any form, yet you have problems with accepting that another believer could believe that creationism alone produced life on this planet (and maybe all other things physical).

The holy books that taught you about G-d states the “facts” about creationism, the holy books that informed you about the existence of G-d documented all the many miracles he performed though out the ages… this is the foundational material for your god, yet you question someone’s capacity for critical thinking if they state that they believe in the literal creation concept in those texts.

A magical, mystical, mythical G-d, yet so many problems letting another believer accept a magical, mystical, mythical concept of creation.

32 wrenchwench  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:13:08am

I’m voting for that Peter Mills guy.

/oh, wait. I don’t live anywhere near there.

33 darthstar  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:13:48am

re: #31 Walter L. Newton

I taught creation mythology to my students (High School Freshmen English) for a few years…it was the best way to start the year, I thought. First, they were all coming out of middle school, so getting hit with a ‘heavy’ high school kind of class hooked them, and hooked them well. The Christian kids did just as well as the rest of the students, and by the end of the first four weeks we’d have good discussions of creation mythology (including the Christian myth from the bible) as just that…mythology. And the best part is, they brought up Genesis on their own, after seeing similarities to it in the other creation myths.

34 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:16:28am

re: #30 darthstar

Good. More peace. Less war.

Heh…right. The Islamists are going to love us now.

Peace in our time!

35 Randy W. Weeks  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:17:22am

re: #20 Dark_Falcon

Actually, there are 7 candidates. 3 are creationists, three believe in science, and one waffled.

haha…OK. I surrender. I was just trying to be cute and failed miserably. ;)

36 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:18:17am

re: #31 Walter L. Newton

(Note: take the “teaching it in school out of my conversation, that’s not what I am talking about, I’m suggesting a more nuanced idea here. I don’t believe in teaching any religious concept of any sort in science class.)

That’s not what I am suggesting in the least. But, I am suggesting that lately, ANY politician or public official has been tagged with a “suspected” tag if they believe in any form of creationism that doesn’t involve evolution as a companion mechanism to sciences rather evident theory of evolution.

So, my question is to all believers, you who believe in a god, which for me is as magical and mythical as believing in creationism of any form, yet you have problems with accepting that another believer could believe that creationism alone produced life on this planet (and maybe all other things physical).

The holy books that taught you about G-d states the “facts” about creationism, the holy books that informed you about the existence of G-d documented all the many miracles he performed though out the ages… this is the foundational material for your god, yet you question someone’s capacity for critical thinking if they state that they believe in the literal creation concept in those texts.

A magical, mystical, mythical G-d, yet so many problems letting another believer accept a magical, mystical, mythical concept of creation.

From a Jewish perspective and I’m in no way a Torah scholar, but even as you know, Genesis is one of the more challenging books of the bible. Some take it literally, some do not. Whatever it is I do not understand, I put on the shelf until I can learn a bit more. I do believe, however, that the 6 days of creation may not have been 24 hour days, but millions of years which to me means that both “theories” (biblical theory and scientific theory being two completely different kinds of theories) can both be true.

Having said that, I do agree with you that teaching Genesis or any book of the Bible is not appropriate in public schools.

37 Cannadian Club Akbar  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:20:22am

I just gave a downding. Think it is my first ever.

38 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:21:24am

re: #36 marjoriemoon

From a Jewish perspective and I’m in no way a Torah scholar, but even as you know, Genesis is one of the more challenging books of the bible. Some take it literally, some do not. Whatever it is I do not understand, I put on the shelf until I can learn a bit more. I do believe, however, that the 6 days of creation may not have been 24 hour days, but millions of years which to me means that both “theories” (biblical theory and scientific theory being two completely different kinds of theories) can both be true.

Having said that, I do agree with you that teaching Genesis or any book of the Bible is not appropriate in public schools.

I do not want my kids taught religion by the teachers in school, that’s what churches are for. They have plenty of other things to learn like the three Rs.

39 Mad Al-Jaffee  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:23:00am

re: #37 Cannadian Club Akbar

I just gave a downding. Think it is my first ever.

in bed?

40 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:24:43am

re: #33 darthstar

I taught creation mythology to my students (High School Freshmen English) for a few years…it was the best way to start the year, I thought. First, they were all coming out of middle school, so getting hit with a ‘heavy’ high school kind of class hooked them, and hooked them well. The Christian kids did just as well as the rest of the students, and by the end of the first four weeks we’d have good discussions of creation mythology (including the Christian myth from the bible) as just that…mythology. And the best part is, they brought up Genesis on their own, after seeing similarities to it in the other creation myths.

As long as a politician or elected school board member or any believer in creationism can effect change in science classes and inject creationism as a “science” topic, then I have a problem.

But I also see a problem with ANYONE tagging a person as problematic just because they believe in creationism. I have seen to much of a tendency lately to simple consider anyone who believes in creationism as flawed, illogical, incapable of critical thinking.

My point, if you have a belief in a god, you better check your distaste for creationism at the door, because you are technically in the same boat with the creationist… a belief in a magical, mystical, mythical concept based on flawed foundation material (holy text).

41 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:24:49am

re: #36 marjoriemoon

Agreed on the not appropriate for public schools thing. On another note, it makes me sad to see people openly ridiculing folks for their beliefs. I’m not referring to you, of course. One may not believe in creationism, but that also doesn’t make it right to mock and ridicule those that do. It is partially a reaction to frustration at having religion pushed into the classroom, but it’s still not kind.

42 Cannadian Club Akbar  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:25:21am

re: #39 Mad Al-Jaffee

in bed?

Don’t push it, mister. I’m on a little red button hot streak.:)

43 Liberal Classic  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:26:19am

re: #42 Cannadian Club Akbar

Don’t push it, mister. I’m on a little red button hot streak.:)

Come feel the power of the red side.

44 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:27:37am

re: #15 cliffster

Wow, looks like I ducked out at the right time last night. I may have blown a gasket if I’d stayed 5 more minutes.

Yeah. I can’t remember getting quite so angry with something written on a message board.

45 MandyManners  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:29:07am

re: #15 cliffster

Wow, looks like I ducked out at the right time last night. I may have blown a gasket if I’d stayed 5 more minutes.

What happened?

46 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:29:20am

re: #36 marjoriemoon

From a Jewish perspective and I’m in no way a Torah scholar, but even as you know, Genesis is one of the more challenging books of the bible. Some take it literally, some do not. Whatever it is I do not understand, I put on the shelf until I can learn a bit more. I do believe, however, that the 6 days of creation may not have been 24 hour days, but millions of years which to me means that both “theories” (biblical theory and scientific theory being two completely different kinds of theories) can both be true.

Having said that, I do agree with you that teaching Genesis or any book of the Bible is not appropriate in public schools.

I’m going to put it more simple, clipping a part of my last comment…

My point, if you have a belief in a god, you better check your distaste for creationism at the door, because you are technically in the same boat with the creationist… a belief in a magical, mystical, mythical concept based on flawed foundation material (holy text).

Simple as that. You can’t no more prove scientifically that G-d exists than a creationist can prove that G-d could have created everything in one fell swoop, replete with all the science in place.

Suspicion of a person mental capabilities just because they don’t believe in evolution is akin to tagging someone as deviant, flawed, broke, in need of fixing, reeducation, enlightenment…

In that case, all believers better get in line, because they are coming for you next.

47 Cannadian Club Akbar  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:29:55am

re: #45 MandyManners

See #8 on this thread.

48 ShaunP  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:29:59am

re: #45 MandyManners

What happened?

re: #8 jamesfirecat

See here:

I hate to thread jack, more like thread detour really but my sense of common decency and watching my friend’s backs insists that I let everyone know they should go directly to [Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…] and down ding the hell out of it.

I want that comment to reach negative triple digits, because it’s the most personally insulting thing I’ve seen posted on this blog.

49 McSpiff  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:30:36am

re: #45 MandyManners

What happened?

A troll ruined all the fun. I’m not sure its worth getting into beyond that, but I’m sure others will fill you in.

50 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:31:11am

re: #48 ShaunP

Deleted

51 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:31:15am

re: #45 MandyManners

What happened?

Click on jamesfirecat link in #8.

52 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:32:10am

re: #41 cliffster

Agreed on the not appropriate for public schools thing. On another note, it makes me sad to see people openly ridiculing folks for their beliefs. I’m not referring to you, of course. One may not believe in creationism, but that also doesn’t make it right to mock and ridicule those that do. It is partially a reaction to frustration at having religion pushed into the classroom, but it’s still not kind.

You hit my nail right on the head. I’ve been trying to explain it in more of a logical, philosophical way, but you cut to the chase… if this sort of ridiculing continues, it won’t be long before all believers better get in line, because they are coming for you next.

53 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:32:16am

re: #41 cliffster

Agreed on the not appropriate for public schools thing. On another note, it makes me sad to see people openly ridiculing folks for their beliefs. I’m not referring to you, of course. One may not believe in creationism, but that also doesn’t make it right to mock and ridicule those that do. It is partially a reaction to frustration at having religion pushed into the classroom, but it’s still not kind.

Actually, I think most (many?) people who do not want creationism taught in the classroom are religious people. Religious people who understand what separation of church and state means.

54 Liberal Classic  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:32:44am

re: #42 Cannadian Club Akbar

You were supposed to downding that. lol

55 Cannadian Club Akbar  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:34:05am

re: #54 Liberal Classic

You were supposed to downding that. lol

I’ve done one downding in 4 1/2 years. I chose them wisely.
/

56 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:34:18am

re: #7 Varek Raith

Whose version of “Creation”???
There’s, like, thousands of them!
9_9

You know whose.

57 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:34:53am

re: #53 marjoriemoon

Actually, I think most (many?) people who do not want creationism taught in the classroom are religious people. Religious people who understand what separation of church and state means.

Marjoriemoon… politicians and public officials are being tagged as creationist period, it’s become a blood sport no matter if that person cares a whit about it being taught anywhere.

If this sort of “marking” continues, it won’t be long before all believers in G-d better get in line, because they are coming for you next.

58 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:35:11am

re: #34 NJDhockeyfan

Heh…right. The Islamists are going to love us now.

Peace in our time!

The Chamberlain reference is premature. Such initiatives have potential, as long as the parties involved understand what they can and cannot do. Outreach can win over some of the more moderate Muslims and thus help isolate the hardcore Islamists. As long as its understood by all participating that there is still going to be a need for anti-terrorist action, such outreach programs are beneficial.

59 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:36:28am

re: #49 McSpiff

A troll ruined all the fun. I’m not sure its worth getting into beyond that, but I’m sure others will fill you in.

The troll was actually a previously banned poster.

60 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:36:57am

re: #19 Walter L. Newton

If you can believe in G-d, why is it so hard to believe that G-d created it all? And don’t say “scientific evidence.” If this god is capable of putting any of this in motion, why limit him to following any laws or rules of science.

The holy texts, the Hebrew and Greek scriptures certainly portray a god who performs outright miracles, well beyond the boundaries of possible science, so, what is all this confusion about creationism.

If you can’t divorce yourself from a belief in G-d, then you should not limit that god, or limit the possibilities that are presented in the holy texts.

I don’t think creationism should be taught in schools, and if any of these politicians suggest that, then that should be considered, but if you are a believer, then what gives any believer the right to suggest that you shouldn’t believe in creationism, that there is something wrong with these politicians stating a belief in creationism.

We don’t teach religion in science classes in the public schools.

Period.

This is entirely separate from my own beliefs about either God or the creation of the world.

Any questions?

61 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:38:37am

re: #60 SanFranciscoZionist

We don’t teach religion in science classes in the public schools.

Period.

This is entirely separate from my own beliefs about either God or the creation of the world.

Any questions?

You must be missing my disclaimer… I’m not talking about teaching anything, anywhere… as per my note above…

(Note: take the “teaching it in school out of my conversation, that’s not what I am talking about, I’m suggesting a more nuanced idea here. I don’t believe in teaching any religious concept of any sort in science class.)

62 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:39:55am

re: #33 darthstar

I taught creation mythology to my students (High School Freshmen English) for a few years…it was the best way to start the year, I thought. First, they were all coming out of middle school, so getting hit with a ‘heavy’ high school kind of class hooked them, and hooked them well. The Christian kids did just as well as the rest of the students, and by the end of the first four weeks we’d have good discussions of creation mythology (including the Christian myth from the bible) as just that…mythology. And the best part is, they brought up Genesis on their own, after seeing similarities to it in the other creation myths.

My English class does classical mythology in the fall, at the same time that Genesis is being taught in their Bible class. It’s a really good unit. If I were going to be here next year, I would propose a cross-department project between English and religion.

63 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:40:17am

I challenge someone, anyone, to explain to me how I.D. is a theory at all. It is a claim against another theory, but holds no specific claims of its own. The concept of the “irreducible complexity” of complex life is self-contradictory, because it requires the intelligence of the designer to be emergent (and thus not irreducibly complex) in order for it to not be a theistic claim.

Frankly it gets me all fired up and angry, not because it is ignorance, that I can understand, but rather because it is inherently intellectually dishonest.

64 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:43:32am

re: #57 Walter L. Newton

Marjoriemoon… politicians and public officials are being tagged as creationist period, it’s become a blood sport no matter if that person cares a whit about it being taught anywhere.

If this sort of “marking” continues, it won’t be long before all believers in G-d better get in line, because they are coming for you next.

Maybe I’m just a bit froggy from staying up so late on that thread last night… but I’m not sure I’m following you.

I’m ok with being called a “creationist” although I don’t really consider myself as such, but I do believe Torah is truth and therefore Genesis is truth even if I don’t fully understand it. If they want to call me a creationist, well ok, but I’m a creationist that beliefs in separation of church and state. And evolution is scientific fact.

65 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:43:56am

re: #63 Fozzie Bear

I challenge someone, anyone, to explain to me how I.D. is a theory at all. It is a claim against another theory, but holds no specific claims of its own. The concept of the “irreducible complexity” of complex life is self-contradictory, because it requires the intelligence of the designer to be emergent (and thus not irreducibly complex) in order for it to not be a theistic claim.

Frankly it gets me all fired up and angry, not because it is ignorance, that I can understand, but rather because it is inherently intellectually dishonest.

I take it one step further, I think it’s inherently intellectually dishonest to have a problem with creationism and at the same time espouse a belief in a god… especially if it’s the god of the Hebrew and Greek texts.

66 ShaunP  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:44:21am

re: #63 Fozzie Bear

I challenge someone, anyone, to explain to me how I.D. is a theory at all. It is a claim against another theory, but holds no specific claims of its own. The concept of the “irreducible complexity” of complex life is self-contradictory, because it requires the intelligence of the designer to be emergent (and thus not irreducibly complex) in order for it to not be a theistic claim.

Frankly it gets me all fired up and angry, not because it is ignorance, that I can understand, but rather because it is inherently intellectually dishonest.

Actually it’s a way of reconciling the differences between religion and science. If you believe in a G-d, but still trust science, it’s a logical step forward. I’m not sure that you should waste anger on that…

67 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:44:41am

re: #41 cliffster

Agreed on the not appropriate for public schools thing. On another note, it makes me sad to see people openly ridiculing folks for their beliefs. I’m not referring to you, of course. One may not believe in creationism, but that also doesn’t make it right to mock and ridicule those that do. It is partially a reaction to frustration at having religion pushed into the classroom, but it’s still not kind.

I have some frustration with people whose interpretation of the text is so painfully literal that they must deny scientific truths—having been raised on the Rambam, who, as Marjorie pointed out above, believed that science could not contradict Torah.

That said, people are free to believe as they like; my only concern is whether people in public life allow their religious beliefs to affect their public work negatively.

68 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:45:24am

re: #46 Walter L. Newton

I’m going to put it more simple, clipping a part of my last comment…

My point, if you have a belief in a god, you better check your distaste for creationism at the door, because you are technically in the same boat with the creationist… a belief in a magical, mystical, mythical concept based on flawed foundation material (holy text).

Simple as that. You can’t no more prove scientifically that G-d exists than a creationist can prove that G-d could have created everything in one fell swoop, replete with all the science in place.

Suspicion of a person mental capabilities just because they don’t believe in evolution is akin to tagging someone as deviant, flawed, broke, in need of fixing, reeducation, enlightenment…

In that case, all believers better get in line, because they are coming for you next.

Walter, you’re on a little kick with this these days.

69 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:45:28am

re: #52 Walter L. Newton

You hit my nail right on the head. I’ve been trying to explain it in more of a logical, philosophical way, but you cut to the chase… if this sort of ridiculing continues, it won’t be long before all believers better get in line, because they are coming for you next.

Hmm, I don’t feel like anyone’s coming for me, and I don’t think they’re coming for people who believe that the earth was created less than 10,000 years ago. There’s a difference between being a prick to someone and “coming after them”…

70 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:46:25am

re: #58 Dark_Falcon

The Chamberlain reference is premature. Such initiatives have potential, as long as the parties involved understand what they can and cannot do. Outreach can win over some of the more moderate Muslims and thus help isolate the hardcore Islamists. As long as its understood by all participating that there is still going to be a need for anti-terrorist action, such outreach programs are beneficial.

Here’s some Islamic love coming our way…

Pakistani Taliban say America will “burn”

The United States is convinced Pakistani Taliban militants allied with al Qaeda and operating out of northwestern Pakistani border regions were behind an attempted car-bomb attack in New York’s Times Square on May 1.

The Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility for the attempted bombing. If confirmed, it would be the first time their members were involved in an attempted attack in the West.

A Pakistani Taliban spokesman, in a video message obtained by Reuters, repeated a claim of responsibility, saying:

“The movement proved what America could not have even imagined … It was just an explosive-laden vehicle which did not explode.

“But it (America) will see, all imperialist forces will see that it will explode also and America will also burn,” said the spokesman, Azim Tariq, sitting cross-legged on the ground in front of a rock face and speaking in Urdu.

America’s allies would meet the same fate, he said.

“They can neither eliminate the mujahideen nor jihad, nor they can harm Islam,” he said, referring to Muslim holy warriors and holy war.

“Instead, they will have to die themselves, they will be burned themselves, they will have to dig their own graves,” said the spokesman, sporting a long black beard and turban.

71 researchok  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:47:00am

re: #62 SanFranciscoZionist

My English class does classical mythology in the fall, at the same time that Genesis is being taught in their Bible class. It’s a really good unit. If I were going to be here next year, I would propose a cross-department project between English and religion.

I like that idea- lots of really good possibilities.

72 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:48:04am

re: #64 marjoriemoon

Maybe I’m just a bit froggy from staying up so late on that thread last night… but I’m not sure I’m following you.

I’m ok with being called a “creationist” although I don’t really consider myself as such, but I do believe Torah is truth and therefore Genesis is truth even if I don’t fully understand it. If they want to call me a creationist, well ok, but I’m a creationist that beliefs in separation of church and state. And evolution is scientific fact.

Creationist is starting to become a distasteful description for a person, especially a politician to be tagged with. I’m saying that this is akin to screaming heretic and witch. How much longer and they will it be before reporters and the public ask a politician if they believe in a god, and what effect will that have.

Question.

If a politician was asked (left, right what ever politician, I don’t care) if they believe in creationism by a reporter, and they said they do, and they even claimed that evolution is bunk, but they also flatly stated that they don’t want creationism taught in school, would you consider voting for that person if you agreed with most of his other political positions?

73 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:48:16am

re: #65 Walter L. Newton

I take it one step further, I think it’s inherently intellectually dishonest to have a problem with creationism and at the same time espouse a belief in a god… especially if it’s the god of the Hebrew and Greek texts.

Walter, please don’t take this the wrong way, but I could not possibly care less what your beliefs about belief are.

74 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:49:40am

re: #66 ShaunP

Actually it’s a way of reconciling the differences between religion and science. If you believe in a G-d, but still trust science, it’s a logical step forward. I’m not sure that you should waste anger on that…

The Catholic Church teaches that evolution is the mechanism by which God chose to create.

This seems elegant to me, and entirely in keeping with the Rambam’s teaching referenced above.

I do not see why it requires a different ‘theory’ of its own.

75 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:50:21am

re: #67 SanFranciscoZionist

I have some frustration with people whose interpretation of the text is so painfully literal that they must deny scientific truths—having been raised on the Rambam, who, as Marjorie pointed out above, believed that science could not contradict Torah.

That said, people are free to believe as they like; my only concern is whether people in public life allow their religious beliefs to affect their public work negatively.

Right and we also have freedom of religion which is to believe what you like, including nothing at all. Freedom of religion and separation of church and state. No one is going to “come for me” because of those two wise declarations.

I don’t feel threatened by those who would mock creationists (if that’s what you’re saying) if those creationists think the bible should be taught in public school. Maybe I personally wouldn’t mock them, but I am also frustrated by them.

76 ShaunP  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:51:03am

re: #74 SanFranciscoZionist

The Catholic Church teaches that evolution is the mechanism by which God chose to create.

This seems elegant to me, and entirely in keeping with the Rambam’s teaching referenced above.

I do not see why it requires a different ‘theory’ of its own.

Ask a Baptist or Lutheran what they think about Catholic teachings…

77 MandyManners  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:51:18am

Well, dagnabit. It’s gone and The Bunny was booted. Forty dings, eh? Musta’ been really bad.

78 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:51:27am

re: #74 SanFranciscoZionist

The Catholic Church teaches that evolution is the mechanism by which God chose to create.

This seems elegant to me, and entirely in keeping with the Rambam’s teaching referenced above.

I do not see why it requires a different ‘theory’ of its own.

It’s not elegant, it’s a cop out because they just can’t admit that their whole theological foundation falls apart if they can’t rectify science and flawed scripture.

79 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:52:12am

re: #76 ShaunP

Ask a Baptist or Lutheran what they think about Catholic teachings…

Or don’t. My point is that I.D. seems sort of superfluous to me.

80 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:52:34am

re: #67 SanFranciscoZionist

I have some frustration with people whose interpretation of the text is so painfully literal that they must deny scientific truths—having been raised on the Rambam, who, as Marjorie pointed out above, believed that science could not contradict Torah.

That said, people are free to believe as they like; my only concern is whether people in public life allow their religious beliefs to affect their public work negatively.

They can believe what they want to believe, and really one can mock them if they like. Believing in said strict interpretation doesn’t make you a jerk; mocking people on the other hand…

And really, at the end of the day (Day 8??), I wasn’t here 6000 years ago so what do I know?

81 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:52:41am

As Maine goes, so goes the nation.

We’re doomed.

82 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:53:07am

re: #70 NJDhockeyfan

We’ll see how cocksure that ‘spokesman’ feels when the Hellfire flies through his window. The Pakistani Taliban are being pummeled and this is just a desperate counterattack that achieved nothing save to deliver several of their operatives into our hands and expose several more to drone strikes.

83 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:53:30am

re: #72 Walter L. Newton

Creationist is starting to become a distasteful description for a person, especially a politician to be tagged with. I’m saying that this is akin to screaming heretic and witch. How much longer and they will it be before reporters and the public ask a politician if they believe in a god, and what effect will that have.

Question.

If a politician was asked (left, right what ever politician, I don’t care) if they believe in creationism by a reporter, and they said they do, and they even claimed that evolution is bunk, but they also flatly stated that they don’t want creationism taught in school, would you consider voting for that person if you agreed with most of his other political positions?

Anyone who says evolution is bunk is a nimrod. That statement would make me think they’re a little religiously loony more than anything else. Evolution is scientific fact, despite whatever your religious belief is.

As to voting for them? More than likely anyone who wants creationism taught in schools doesn’t have other ideas that I agree with, as seems to be the case with the present “creationists”.

84 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:53:30am

re: #76 ShaunP

Ask a Baptist or Lutheran what they think about Catholic teachings…

Now, why would I want to do that.

Bloody heretics.

85 ShaunP  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:53:40am

re: #77 MandyManners

Well, dagnabit. It’s gone and The Bunny was booted. Forty dings, eh? Musta’ been really bad.

Yah, LGF is probably not the place to go around blaming rape on the victim…

86 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:54:15am

re: #82 Dark_Falcon

We’ll see how cocksure that ‘spokesman’ feels when the Hellfire flies through his window. The Pakistani Taliban are being pummeled and this is just a desperate counterattack that achieved nothing save to deliver several of their operatives into our hands and expose several more to drone strikes.

Lets hope whomever they sent here to attack us are just as inept as the last two.

87 MandyManners  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:54:23am

re: #72 Walter L. Newton

Creationist is starting to become a distasteful description for a person, especially a politician to be tagged with. I’m saying that this is akin to screaming heretic and witch. How much longer and they will it be before reporters and the public ask a politician if they believe in a god, and what effect will that have.

Question.

If a politician was asked (left, right what ever politician, I don’t care) if they believe in creationism by a reporter, and they said they do, and they even claimed that evolution is bunk, but they also flatly stated that they don’t want creationism taught in school, would you consider voting for that person if you agreed with most of his other political positions?

I would have little problem voting for such a person. I might have a qualm or two voting for that person for a board of education but if I found her to be a woman of integrity who lived up to her word, I’d vote for her.

88 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:54:26am

re: #81 Cato the Elder

As Maine goes, so goes the nation.

We’re doomed.

I’d disagree with that, Cato. Maine has been wrong electorally before, and more than one GOP candidate rejected creationism.

89 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:54:45am

re: #72 Walter L. Newton

Creationist is starting to become a distasteful description for a person, especially a politician to be tagged with. I’m saying that this is akin to screaming heretic and witch. How much longer and they will it be before reporters and the public ask a politician if they believe in a god, and what effect will that have.

This is silly - you form your opinions on politicians based on, among other things, their beliefs. Decide not to vote for someone based on their views is not akin to holding an Auto de Fé.

90 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:55:06am

re: #77 MandyManners

Well, dagnabit. It’s gone and The Bunny was booted. Forty dings, eh? Musta’ been really bad.

Yea, but it was kinda fun until we found out it was a cretin stalker than apparently enjoys being abused.

91 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:56:04am

re: #86 NJDhockeyfan

Lets hope whomever they sent here to attack us are just as inept as the last two.

From your mouth to God’s ear.

92 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:56:17am

re: #83 marjoriemoon

Anyone who says evolution is bunk is a nimrod. That statement would make me think they’re a little religiously loony more than anything else. Evolution is scientific fact, despite whatever your religious belief is.

As to voting for them? More than likely anyone who wants creationism taught in schools doesn’t have other ideas that I agree with, as seems to be the case with the present “creationists”.

You must not have read my comment carefully… I said… ” and they even claimed that evolution is bunk, but they also flatly stated that they don’t want creationism taught in school, would you consider voting for that person if you agreed with most of his other political positions”

Anyone who says god exists is a nimrod. That statement would make me think they’re a little religiously loony more than anything else. G-d is not a provable fact, despite whatever your religious belief is.

See how easy it is to turn that around to the believer?

93 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:56:53am

You’re reaching Walter. A bit too far.

94 ShaunP  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:57:45am

re: #79 SanFranciscoZionist

Or don’t. My point is that I.D. seems sort of superfluous to me.

Just saying you can’t look at Christianity as a single, cohesive unit. It shouldn’t be necessary, but if it gives some people some renewed faith in science; i don’t have a problem with it…

95 ShaunP  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:58:13am

re: #94 ShaunP

Just saying you can’t look at Christianity as a single, cohesive unit. It shouldn’t be necessary, but if it gives some people some renewed faith in science; i don’t have a problem with it…

Faith was a bad choice; let’s go with “trust”…

96 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:58:35am

re: #77 MandyManners

Well, dagnabit. It’s gone and The Bunny was booted. Forty dings, eh? Musta’ been really bad.

It was. But the thread was a lot of fun before turning sour.

97 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 8:59:49am

re: #89 Nimed

This is silly - you form your opinions on politicians based on, among other things, their beliefs. Decide not to vote for someone based on their views is not akin to holding an Auto de Fé.

You use hyperbole… I never said anything like that. But you make my point, at what point in the future does a politicians belief in G-d come into possible play… at what point will reporters ask that question? You tell me it’s not possible?

I’m an atheist, I have no god in this fight, but I see all this angst about peoples beliefs in general backfiring someday, someday when any mystical, magical, mythical belief makes a persons suspect as to their mental capabilities.

98 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:00:14am

re: #93 Fozzie Bear

You’re reaching Walter. A bit too far.

Do you believe in G-d?

99 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:00:40am

re: #96 Nimed

It was. But the thread was a lot of fun before turning sour.

True. It was silly but fairly fun.

100 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:00:54am

re: #94 ShaunP

Just saying you can’t look at Christianity as a single, cohesive unit. It shouldn’t be necessary, but if it gives some people some renewed faith in science; i don’t have a problem with it…

I wouldn’t either—if it were just a matter of philosophy. But they seem to think it’s science.

101 MandyManners  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:02:03am

re: #90 marjoriemoon

Yea, but it was kinda fun until we found out it was a cretin stalker than apparently enjoys being abused.

Which one?

102 garhighway  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:02:38am

OT: Is anyone else having a problem with the Master Spy function? I access LGF through an Opera browser (which is normally great) but for some reason I haven’t been able to get the Spy function to work all morning.

103 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:02:38am

re: #53 marjoriemoon

Actually, I think most (many?) people who do not want creationism taught in the classroom are religious people. Religious people who understand what separation of church and state means.

Yeah, why in the world anyone would want a teacher they don’t know to teach religion to their kid, is beyond me. Their beliefs could be anything, and thus they may teach the material with whatever kind of negative or positive spin they want.

104 William Barnett-Lewis  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:02:39am

re: #24 Killgore Trout

OT: Good news for Mac geeks…
Portal is Free

[Video]It really is one of the most worthwhile games I’ve played in a very long time. Highly recommended. Don’t google it because you’ll probably get some spoilers. Just play it, trust me.

My wallet really didn’t need to be reminded that Steam/Mac was online. Sure, Portal is free but Torchlight isn’t … ;)

William

105 MandyManners  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:02:50am

re: #96 Nimed

It was. But the thread was a lot of fun before turning sour.

Mean Bunny.

106 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:02:57am

re: #92 Walter L. Newton

You must not have read my comment carefully… I said… ” and they even claimed that evolution is bunk, but they also flatly stated that they don’t want creationism taught in school, would you consider voting for that person if you agreed with most of his other political positions”
Anyone who says god exists is a nimrod. That statement would make me think they’re a little religiously loony more than anything else. G-d is not a provable fact, despite whatever your religious belief is.
See how easy it is to turn that around to the believer?

I’m trying to understand you Walter, really I am.

Anyone who says evolution is bunk is an idiot. No matter what else they said after that, I wouldn’t think very highly of their other opinions if they can’t acknowledge what we know to be scientifically true.

I generally do not have much in common with people who do not “believe” in evolution so I think your example doesn’t fit anywhere in the real world.

107 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:03:26am

re: #98 Walter L. Newton

Do you believe in G-d?

No, but there is nothing logically inconsistent with the belief that the universe was created with laws set up such that the emergence of intelligent life is inevitable.

You can be a believer in God, and simultaneously believe that life in its current form evolved. There’s no conflict there.

108 ShaunP  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:03:39am

re: #100 SanFranciscoZionist

I wouldn’t either—if it were just a matter of philosophy. But they seem to think it’s science.

Baby steps… :)

109 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:03:45am

re: #101 MandyManners

Which one?

Possum.

110 wrenchwench  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:04:54am

re: #102 garhighway

OT: Is anyone else having a problem with the Master Spy function? I access LGF through an Opera browser (which is normally great) but for some reason I haven’t been able to get the Spy function to work all morning.

I saw your question there. It’s working for me on Firefox.

111 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:04:58am

re: #106 marjoriemoon

I’m trying to understand you Walter, really I am.

Anyone who says evolution is bunk is an idiot. No matter what else they said after that, I wouldn’t think very highly of their other opinions if they can’t acknowledge what we know to be scientifically true.

I generally do not have much in common with people who do not “believe” in evolution so I think your example doesn’t fit anywhere in the real world.

Some of those same people who say “evolution is bunk” also believe in the same god that you do.

112 ShaunP  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:05:07am

re: #107 Fozzie Bear

No, but there is nothing logically inconsistent with the belief that the universe was created with laws set up such that the emergence of intelligent life is inevitable.

You can be a believer in God, and simultaneously believe that life in its current form evolved. There’s no conflict there.

The conflict comes from the religious text stating how G-d made it happen. For many, challenging the scripture on any level is just not possible…

113 Killgore Trout  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:05:13am

“Obama is a ……..shoe?”
/Tea Party

114 garhighway  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:05:19am

re: #103 cliffster

Yeah, why in the world anyone would want a teacher they don’t know to teach religion to their kid, is beyond me. Their beliefs could be anything, and thus they may teach the material with whatever kind of negative or positive spin they want.

I disagree. Some sort of Survey of World Religions course, where kids learn the basics of the major belief systems, would be a good thing. I agree that you would want that curriculum to be pretty tightly designed and that it would have to be delivered without editorializing, but all in all, isn’t it better that kids are taught about the major faiths?

115 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:06:06am

re: #97 Walter L. Newton

You use hyperbole… I never said anything like that. But you make my point, at what point in the future does a politicians belief in G-d come into possible play… at what point will reporters ask that question? You tell me it’s not possible?

I’m an atheist, I have no god in this fight, but I see all this angst about peoples beliefs in general backfiring someday, someday when any mystical, magical, mythical belief makes a persons suspect as to their mental capabilities.

But personal belief in God already comes into play. In every Presidential election there is sort of a mini competition to see which candidate is more devout. And an atheist has essentially zero chance of being elected.

116 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:06:26am

re: #111 Walter L. Newton

Some of those same people who say “evolution is bunk” also believe in the same god that you do.

Some people who set car bombs in Times Square believe in the same God I do.

I still believe they’re evil, so I think I can believe that a fellow believer is not too bright without causing enormous offense.

117 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:07:08am

re: #111 Walter L. Newton

Some of those same people who say “evolution is bunk” also believe in the same god that you do.

Well that’s their failing, what can I say.

If we all had the same exact understanding of God, there would probably be peace on earth. OTOH, evolution IS exactly what it IS. Well as far as we know about it now and we’re learning new things every day.

118 Mad Al-Jaffee  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:07:51am

re: #105 MandyManners

Mean Bunny.

Image: HolyGrail180.jpg

119 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:07:52am

re: #115 Nimed

But personal belief in God already comes into play. In every Presidential election there is sort of a mini competition to see which candidate is more devout. And an atheist has essentially zero chance of being elected.

Can’t remember if it was Time or Newsweek that had the God-O-Meter during the election.

120 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:07:58am

The bottom line is, I think denying that evolution occurred on Earth is somewhat akin to insisting that the moon is made of cheese, or that the sun is a golden chariot in the sky. It goes a little beyond what is conventionally understood as a ‘theory’.

121 MandyManners  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:08:04am

re: #109 marjoriemoon

Possum.

Never heard of it.

122 Slap  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:08:07am

re: #67 SanFranciscoZionist

That said, people are free to believe as they like; my only concern is whether people in public life allow their religious beliefs to affect their public work negatively.

This, for me, is the real issue. Hard to gauge sometimes, admittedly — and I would tend to vote against a candidate whose line between their personal beliefs about evolution and their belief about its place in policy seems uncertain. Belief and skepticism are not “litmus test” issues for me in and of themselves when evaluating a candidate.

I’ll admit, however, that in the absence of any other factors, I’d tend to vote against someone I perceive to have an overtly theologically-inclined bias in their approach to policy. And I’d further say that if a candidate chooses to use his/her belief in evolution as a favorable campaign issue, my decision to vote NO is virtually guaranteed.

123 Cannadian Club Akbar  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:08:18am

re: #113 Killgore Trout

“Obama is a …shoe?”
/Tea Party

I think it was a flip flop.:)

124 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:09:17am

Economic Woes Threaten Chavez’s Socialist Vision


Venezuela’s economy is in trouble despite the country’s huge oil reserves. Blackouts plague major cities. Its inflation rate is among the world’s highest. Private enterprise has been so hammered, the World Bank says, that Venezuela is forced to import almost everything it needs.

The situation is creating a serious challenge to President Hugo Chavez’s efforts to transform his country into a socialist state.

… But these days, Venezuela is being left behind: The rest of Latin America is expected to grow at a healthy rate this year, according to the World Bank.

Guerra, the former Central Bank economist, says the government must reconsider its policies — and drop the statist socialist model that Chavez adopted.

“The government has to consider that the socialist point of view is not so good for the economy,” Guerra says. “Chavez believes in the old-fashioned socialism. This kind of socialism is dead, definitely dead, it doesn’t apply to any country in the world.”

In a recent speech, Chavez acknowledged the economic troubles, but he said he wasn’t worried.

Instead, he spoke of a worldwide capitalist crisis, which he said provided a marvelous opportunity for Venezuela to push a new model.

Socialism sucks.

125 MandyManners  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:09:38am

re: #118 Mad Al-Jaffee

Image: HolyGrail180.jpg

It’s always the quiet ones.

126 JeffM70  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:10:01am

re: #10 middy

As a Mainer, I can say we have our share of rednecks, but we are not infected with that special brand of religion-based ignorance and stupidity so pervasive in the south.

127 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:10:06am

re: #114 garhighway

I disagree. Some sort of Survey of World Religions course, where kids learn the basics of the major belief systems, would be a good thing. I agree that you would want that curriculum to be pretty tightly designed and that it would have to be delivered without editorializing, but all in all, isn’t it better that kids are taught about the major faiths?

Sure. In a very general sort of way. Page 27 - Christians believe there was a man named Jesus who was sent by God to save the people of the world. Page 38 thru page 58 - World War II.

128 garhighway  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:10:15am

re: #110 wrenchwench

I saw your question there. It’s working for me on Firefox.


Thanks. I switched to IE (ugh) and it works on that.

129 Cannadian Club Akbar  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:10:21am

re: #124 NJDhockeyfan

Economic Woes Threaten Chavez’s Socialist Vision

Socialism sucks.

Reeducation camp for you, sir.
/

130 Vicious Babushka  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:10:46am

re: #96 Nimed

It was. But the thread was a lot of fun before turning sour.

I learned a bunch of stuff.

131 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:11:16am

re: #122 Slap

Yeah that pretty much sums it up for me. If you can’t see that all life is related, and you won’t acknowledge what essentially amounts to the grand unifying theory of the life sciences, then you aren’t capable of making decisions based on the real world as it actually is, rather than as you want it to be.

There is no way anyone who openly denies evolution will ever get my vote.

132 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:11:26am

re: #127 cliffster

Sure. In a very general sort of way. Page 27 - Christians believe there was a man named Jesus who was sent by God to save the people of the world. Page 38 thru page 58 - World War II.

The sixth and seventh grade Social Studies standards in California cover the basics of the major religions pretty well.

133 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:11:43am

re: #111 Walter L. Newton

Some of those same people who say “evolution is bunk” also believe in the same god that you do.

Some people who voted for Barack Obama believe in the same god I do.

134 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:12:25am

re: #133 cliffster

Some people who voted for Barack Obama believe in the same god I do.


Well, at least we have SOME common ground!

;)

135 MandyManners  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:13:05am

re: #124 NJDhockeyfan

Economic Woes Threaten Chavez’s Socialist Vision


Socialism sucks.

When Venezuela’s former ambassador to the United Nations, Diego Arria, learned that President Hugo Chávez had expropriated his ranch, his first reaction was to announce that he would submit a complaint to the Cuban Embassy. That’s where the real power in Venezuela lies, he said.

SNIP

He added that Venezuela officially signed a 2005 contract with Cuba to help manage Venezuela’s national identification and public registry services, “which means that all issues on who owns a property are now in the hands of Cubans.”

Granted, Arria’s public protest was a publicity stunt by a wealthy Venezuelan who is known to have political ambitions. But it’s also a reflection of growing anxiety within Venezuela’s political and military circles over the growing influence of Cuban advisors in key government offices.

In addition to the more than 30,000 Cuban teachers, physicians and sports coaches in the country in exchange for Venezuela’s massive oil subsidies, there has been a steady increase of Cuban advisors who are helping manage — or control, depending on who you ask — key branches of the armed forces, police agencies, the president’s security guard, telecommunications, ports and airports and national identification and public registries.

SNIP

UNHAPPY GENERALS

SNIP

136 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:13:12am

re: #115 Nimed

But personal belief in God already comes into play. In every Presidential election there is sort of a mini competition to see which candidate is more devout. And an atheist has essentially zero chance of being elected.

A declared atheist.

You declared yesterday that you strongly suspect both Clinton and Obama are atheists.

137 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:13:49am

re: #107 Fozzie Bear

No, but there is nothing logically inconsistent with the belief that the universe was created with laws set up such that the emergence of intelligent life is inevitable.

You can be a believer in God, and simultaneously believe that life in its current form evolved. There’s no conflict there.

Except for the fact that almost any believer was informed about their god through holy texts, in the case of our discussion, the Hebrew and Greek scriptures.

Almost NO ONE was just suddenly infused with a “god knowledge.” They were taught, nurtured, first by their family (what ever that comprised of), then possibly by a rabbi, priest, minister or wise person, then maybe some self-examination, study, what ever, but they came upon the concept based on those holy writings.

And this is where science comes in. The science behind archeology, textual criticism, linguistics, geology, I could go on and on. And science has proven that the foundational material, the holy books, are flawed, in many areas. The writings are a collection of existing myths borrowed from other cultures, partial history, mystical events that scientifically could not have happened, outright misstatements of facts and so on.

Creationism, even 6 day creationism is a plausible as any other concept connected with the god of the Hebrew and Greek texts. Genesis starts with “…G-D created…” If you believe in that G-d, everything that comes after that statement is possible.

138 Killgore Trout  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:13:55am

re: #123 Cannadian Club Akbar

I think it was a flip flop.:)

Ah, I forgot about the “flip flop” thing.

139 garhighway  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:14:14am

re: #127 cliffster

Sure. In a very general sort of way. Page 27 - Christians believe there was a man named Jesus who was sent by God to save the people of the world. Page 38 thru page 58 - World War II.

You don’t think they should know of (for example) the relationship between Judaism and Christianity, and the source and major beliefs of the major subsets of Christianity?

There’s some great World History in there (and in fact I think it is hard to truly understand a lot of our history without understanding a lot of that) that can make for some compelling teaching.

140 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:14:26am

re: #136 Cato the Elder

A declared atheist.

You declared yesterday that you strongly suspect both Clinton and Obama are atheists.

I would consider it a miracle (irony intended) if an openly atheist candidate were to be elected to the presidency.

141 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:15:36am

re: #118 Mad Al-Jaffee

Image: HolyGrail180.jpg

:)
Ah, what the hell. Sooner or later, somebody is going to link to this more accurate image of Bunny:

Image: 500full-donnie-darko-poster.jpg

142 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:15:43am

re: #133 cliffster

Some people who voted for Barack Obama believe in the same god I do.

Well, you know, there is only one :)

143 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:15:54am

re: #120 Fozzie Bear

The bottom line is, I think denying that evolution occurred on Earth is somewhat akin to insisting that the moon is made of cheese, or that the sun is a golden chariot in the sky. It goes a little beyond what is conventionally understood as a ‘theory’.

I think claiming that G-d exists is somewhat akin to insisting that the moon is made of cheese.

144 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:15:59am

re: #4 Obdicut

What else is there to Creationism or ID? Are they supposed to teach all the fabricated nonsensical criticism of evolution that they bring? If they do, shouldn’t they teach that all these criticisms are weak, poor, dismiss able things— given that’s the truth?

To the extent that ID proponents (read: cdesign proponentsists) actually try to teach their claims as science, they are teaching bad science.

There are oodles and oodles of ID claims that get thrown around, and people insufficiently informed have a difficult time refuting them or understanding why they’re wrong. See: [Link: www.talkorigins.org…]

145 Killgore Trout  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:16:05am

Seekrit Socialist Muslim speaking now about the oil leak which he created to take over the country…
[Link: www.cnn.com…]

146 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:16:47am

re: #137 Walter L. Newton

Hence my general objection to literal interpretations of religious texts.

147 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:16:49am

re: #136 Cato the Elder

A declared atheist.

You declared yesterday that you strongly suspect both Clinton and Obama are atheists.

Right.

148 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:17:37am

God. Not G-d.

Circumlocutions do not apply cross-linguistically.

149 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:17:38am

Spurned By Dem Leadership, Dorgan Threatens Filibuster On Wall Street Reform

What started as a minor skirmish among Democrats over Wall Street reform could turn into a big problem, if party leaders stand in Byron Dorgan’s way. And with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid hoping to draw debate to a close by Wednesday next week, they don’t have much time to act.

On the Senate floor this evening, the North Dakota Democrat told Harry Reid and Chris Dodd he’d try to block financial reform legislation from coming to a vote unless they give one of his amendments a fair hearing. “I just told the leader and the committee chairman that I wouldn’t be voting for cloture—I’d be voting against cloture—unless my amendment is considered,” a frustrated Dorgan told me and one other reporter on his way out of the chamber.

He also publicly called into question the efficacy of the overall bill, which he says may not be up to the task of reining in financial industry excess. “I understand everybody thinks their amendment’s important, but the question of the unbelievable speculation in credit default swaps that have no insurable interest—if we can’t vote on something like that, given what we’ve seen in recent years, then it’s not really financial reform,” Dorgan said.

150 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:17:45am

re: #137 Walter L. Newton

Except for the fact that almost any believer was informed about their god through holy texts, in the case of our discussion, the Hebrew and Greek scriptures.

Almost NO ONE was just suddenly infused with a “god knowledge.” They were taught, nurtured, first by their family (what ever that comprised of), then possibly by a rabbi, priest, minister or wise person, then maybe some self-examination, study, what ever, but they came upon the concept based on those holy writings.

And this is where science comes in. The science behind archeology, textual criticism, linguistics, geology, I could go on and on. And science has proven that the foundational material, the holy books, are flawed, in many areas. The writings are a collection of existing myths borrowed from other cultures, partial history, mystical events that scientifically could not have happened, outright misstatements of facts and so on.

Creationism, even 6 day creationism is a plausible as any other concept connected with the god of the Hebrew and Greek texts. Genesis starts with “…G-D created…” If you believe in that G-d, everything that comes after that statement is possible.

And biblical archeology has actually corroborates much of the Torah so….

151 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:17:54am

re: #146 Fozzie Bear

Hence my general objection to literal interpretations of religious texts.

Isn’t accepting the existence of “god” in those text literal?

152 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:18:11am

re: #123 Cannadian Club Akbar

I think it was a flip flop.:)

And a red one at that. The sign isn’t too bad, though, and all the signs in that photo are within the line.

153 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:19:02am

re: #147 Nimed

Right.

On what basis? And given the general requirement that ambitious people in this country have to make gestures towards a deity, why would you not suspect Bushes I and II of the same thing?

154 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:19:04am

My husband is wearing his favorite atheist tshirt and I took a picture. Now to figure out how to upload it here. brb

155 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:19:05am

re: #148 Cato the Elder

God. Not G-d.

Circumlocutions do not apply cross-linguistically.

I don’t care Cato… many years ago on LGF, I was chided for not respecting some religious proclivities to the use of that word in text, so, out of respect, I continue to use that form.

156 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:19:19am

re: #143 Walter L. Newton

I think claiming that G-d exists is somewhat akin to insisting that the moon is made of cheese.

Me too, but that is unprovable, so I’ll stick to what is provable. Evolution happened, and all life on Earth is related. That much we have proven beyond doubt.

157 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:19:53am

re: #155 Walter L. Newton

I don’t care Cato… many years ago on LGF, I was chided for not respecting some religious proclivities to the use of that word in text, so, out of respect, I continue to use that form.

Pure silliness.

158 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:19:59am

re: #118 Mad Al-Jaffee

Image: HolyGrail180.jpg

Thankfully, Stinky had access to the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch.

159 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:20:41am

re: #151 Walter L. Newton

Isn’t accepting the existence of “god” in those text literal?

I suppose so, but I think religion is crap anyway, so asking me is sort of like asking a mathematician questions about art.

160 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:20:51am

re: #156 Fozzie Bear

Me too, but that is unprovable, so I’ll stick to what is provable. Evolution happened, and all life on Earth is related. That much we have proven beyond doubt.

I ain’t related to no slime mold!

161 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:21:45am

re: #150 marjoriemoon

And biblical archeology has actually corroborates much of the Torah so…

Did you see my comment… “partial history.” I don’t deny where the Hebrew text agrees with archeological history. I can show you as many agreements with archeological science in the Hebrew texts as I can show you confirmed and outright disagreements. Biblical archeology is a subject very dear to me. The book is still flawed.

162 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:21:54am

re: #160 Cato the Elder

I ain’t related to no slime mold!

No, your ancestry branched off long ago, Cato. ;)

163 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:22:47am

re: #160 Cato the Elder

I ain’t related to no slime mold!

It’s just a cousin, eleventy billion times removed. I think you could safely intermarry if you wanted to.

164 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:23:09am

re: #161 Walter L. Newton

Did you see my comment… “partial history.” I don’t deny where the Hebrew text agrees with archeological history. I can show you as many agreements with archeological science in the Hebrew texts as I can show you confirmed and outright disagreements. Biblical archeology is a subject very dear to me. The book is still flawed.

So is “The Origin of Species”.

Flaws in a book do not negate its value.

165 subsailor68  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:23:16am

Morning all! Here’s a transcript of the exchange between Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan during the Scopes trial. (IIRC, a similar exchange was written into the play “Inherit the Wind”.)

“You have given considerable study to the Bible, haven’t you, Mr. Bryan?”
“Yes, sir; I have tried to … But, of course, I have studied it more as I have become older than when I was a boy.”
“Do you claim then that everything in the Bible should be literally interpreted?”
“I believe everything in the Bible should be accepted as it is given there …”
Darrow continued to question Bryan on the actuality of Jonah and the whale, Joshua’s making the sun stand still and the Tower of Babel, as Bryan began to have more difficulty answering.
Q: “Do you think the earth was made in six days?”
A: “Not six days of 24 hours … My impression is they were periods …”
Q: “Now, if you call those periods, they may have been a very long time?”
A: “They might have been.”
Q: “The creation might have been going on for a very long time?”
A: “It might have continued for millions of years …”

Link

166 Slap  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:23:47am

re: #159 Fozzie Bear

Reminds me of another favorite Zappa quote (at least, that is the attribution I’ve seen):

“Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.”

167 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:24:43am

re: #159 Fozzie Bear

I suppose so, but I think religion is crap anyway, so asking me is sort of like asking a mathematician questions about art.

Everyone wants to tiptoe around the fact that almost all knowledge of the Judeo-Christian god came from the foundational texts and those texts are FLAWED, beyond a scientific shadow of a doubt.

If you can tell me that you came upon your “god knowledge” totally apart from the social and religious influences of the texts, than I may be interested in how you found G-d.

168 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:24:49am

re: #166 Slap

Reminds me of another favorite Zappa quote (at least, that is the attribution I’ve seen):

“Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.”

Hey, Jews dance about their synagogues all the time. What are you trying to say?

169 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:25:20am

re: #165 subsailor68

Morning all! Here’s a transcript of the exchange between Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan during the Scopes trial. (IIRC, a similar exchange was written into the play “Inherit the Wind”.)

“You have given considerable study to the Bible, haven’t you, Mr. Bryan?”
“Yes, sir; I have tried to … But, of course, I have studied it more as I have become older than when I was a boy.”
“Do you claim then that everything in the Bible should be literally interpreted?”
“I believe everything in the Bible should be accepted as it is given there …”
Darrow continued to question Bryan on the actuality of Jonah and the whale, Joshua’s making the sun stand still and the Tower of Babel, as Bryan began to have more difficulty answering.
Q: “Do you think the earth was made in six days?”
A: “Not six days of 24 hours … My impression is they were periods …”
Q: “Now, if you call those periods, they may have been a very long time?”
A: “They might have been.”
Q: “The creation might have been going on for a very long time?”
A: “It might have continued for millions of years …”

Link

Bryan was foolish to agree to get on the witness stand. He was not prepared to face the questioning of a skilled lawyer and so failed rather badly.

170 jamesfirecat  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:25:25am

re: #34 NJDhockeyfan

Heh…right. The Islamists are going to love us now.

Peace in our time!

If we don’t at least consider peace at least a possibility we might as well just bring out the nukes MOABs, mow them all down and be done with it.

171 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:25:32am

re: #159 Fozzie Bear

I suppose so, but I think religion is crap anyway, so asking me is sort of like asking a mathematician questions about art.

[Link: www.maths.surrey.ac.uk…]

172 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:25:38am

re: #153 Cato the Elder

On what basis? And given the general requirement that ambitious people in this country have to make gestures towards a deity, why would you not suspect Bushes I and II of the same thing?

All of this is speculation, of course. You are right that, since candidates are required to make those gestures, they are of practically no value to determine their true beliefs. I believe both Clinton and Obama (specially Obama) had a life experience more conducive to an atheist, or at least agnostic, view of the world than the Bushes. But who knows?

173 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:26:04am

re: #167 Walter L. Newton

I never found God, nor me him. I don’t think there is, or even could be one. I’m not sure what you are getting at. I am an atheist.

174 Kragar (Antichrist )  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:26:17am

re: #165 subsailor68

Morning all! Here’s a transcript of the exchange between Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan during the Scopes trial. (IIRC, a similar exchange was written into the play “Inherit the Wind”.)

“You have given considerable study to the Bible, haven’t you, Mr. Bryan?”
“Yes, sir; I have tried to … But, of course, I have studied it more as I have become older than when I was a boy.”
“Do you claim then that everything in the Bible should be literally interpreted?”
“I believe everything in the Bible should be accepted as it is given there …”
Darrow continued to question Bryan on the actuality of Jonah and the whale, Joshua’s making the sun stand still and the Tower of Babel, as Bryan began to have more difficulty answering.
Q: “Do you think the earth was made in six days?”
A: “Not six days of 24 hours … My impression is they were periods …”
Q: “Now, if you call those periods, they may have been a very long time?”
A: “They might have been.”
Q: “The creation might have been going on for a very long time?”
A: “It might have continued for millions of years …”

Link

All I want to know is when do I get my army of undead warriors to fight for me, like in the Bible. Necromancy is cool.

175 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:26:20am

re: #172 Nimed

All of this is speculation, of course. You are right that, since candidates are required to make those gestures, they are of practically no value to determine their true beliefs. I believe both Clinton and Obama (specially Obama) had a life experience more conducive to an atheist, or at least agnostic, view of the world than the Bushes. But who knows?

What life experience is conducive to being an atheist?

176 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:26:49am

re: #164 Cato the Elder

So is “The Origin of Species”.

Flaws in a book do not negate its value.

Flaws in a book supposedly inspired or authored by G-d negates it’s value.

177 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:27:18am

re: #174 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

All I want to know is when do I get my army of undead warriors to fight for me, like in the Bible. Necromancy is cool.

I think that was Lord of the Rings, actually.

178 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:27:37am

re: #172 Nimed

All of this is speculation, of course. You are right that, since candidates are required to make those gestures, they are of practically no value to determine their true beliefs. I believe both Clinton and Obama (specially Obama) had a life experience more conducive to an atheist, or at least agnostic, view of the world than the Bushes. But who knows?

You don’t, and I don’t. They do, but if they are crypto-atheists they are sure not gonna tell us.

Bush Senior worships money and Skull and Bones, and that’s it, as far as I can tell. But I don’t know.

179 Kragar (Antichrist )  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:27:54am

re: #175 SanFranciscoZionist

What life experience is conducive to being an atheist?

Hearing from religious “experts” and seeing the fallout from the multitude of various church scandals?

180 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:28:06am

I think I’d be a believer if I ever saw a zombie army. That might change my mind.

181 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:28:34am

re: #173 Fozzie Bear

I never found God, nor me him. I don’t think there is, or even could be one. I’m not sure what you are getting at. I am an atheist.

Sorry, that was a general question for the thread, using your comment as sort of an outline for a thought I had, I should have stated it apart from your comment.

Like I said above, I’m and atheist too.

182 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:28:55am

re: #176 Walter L. Newton

Flaws in a book supposedly inspired or authored by G-d negates it’s value.

And that is the opinion you have been flogging for a week or so now determinedly, and the fact that none of the believers seem to agree is perfectly irrelevent to you. Hence, my difficulty in proceeding further with this conversation. You’re perfectly clear about what you believe. Mazal tov.

183 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:29:20am

re: #139 garhighway

You don’t think they should know of (for example) the relationship between Judaism and Christianity, and the source and major beliefs of the major subsets of Christianity?

There’s some great World History in there (and in fact I think it is hard to truly understand a lot of our history without understanding a lot of that) that can make for some compelling teaching.

eh, I think a good bit of world history can be taught by talking about the relationships and power struggles between different faiths, without talking so much about the details of that faith. Not a hot-button issue for me, though, if like you said, the teacher doesn’t get into much personal commentary about it.

184 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:29:27am

re: #177 SanFranciscoZionist

I think that was Lord of the Rings, actually.

And before that, there’s a similar theme in the Mabinogi.

185 Kragar (Antichrist )  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:30:01am

re: #177 SanFranciscoZionist

I think that was Lord of the Rings, actually.

Nope, Ezekiel. Raises an army of the dead:

“The hand of the Lord was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the Lord and set me down in the middle of the valley; [1] it was full of bones. 2 And he led me around among them, and behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, they were very dry. 3 And he said to me, “Son of man, can these bones live?” And I answered, “O Lord God, you know.” 4 Then he said to me, “Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. 5 Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath [2] to enter you, and you shall live. 6 And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live, and you shall know that I am the Lord.”

7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I prophesied, there was a sound, and behold, a rattling, [3] and the bones came together, bone to its bone. 8 And I looked, and behold, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them. But there was no breath in them. 9 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, Thus says the Lord God: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live.” 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.”

186 subsailor68  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:30:02am

re: #169 Dark_Falcon

Bryan was foolish to agree to get on the witness stand. He was not prepared to face the questioning of a skilled lawyer and so failed rather badly.

Hi DF! Absolutely! The next observation in the link supports your point exactly:

Darrow had set his trap and Bryan walked right in. Darrow asked for and was granted an immediate direct verdict, thereby blocking Bryan from giving his speech.

187 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:30:25am

re: #180 Fozzie Bear

I think I’d be a believer if I ever saw a zombie army. That might change my mind.

You’d believe in God if you saw zombies?

188 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:30:29am

re: #175 SanFranciscoZionist

What life experience is conducive to being an atheist?

Well, I believe knowing people from a lot of different religious backgrounds really helps.

189 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:31:17am

re: #185 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Nope, Ezekiel. Raises an army of the dead:

“The hand of the Lord was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the Lord and set me down in the middle of the valley; [1] it was full of bones. 2 And he led me around among them, and behold, there were very many on the surface of the valley, and behold, they were very dry. 3 And he said to me, “Son of man, can these bones live?” And I answered, “O Lord God, you know.” 4 Then he said to me, “Prophesy over these bones, and say to them, O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. 5 Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath [2] to enter you, and you shall live. 6 And I will lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live, and you shall know that I am the Lord.”

7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I prophesied, there was a sound, and behold, a rattling, [3] and the bones came together, bone to its bone. 8 And I looked, and behold, there were sinews on them, and flesh had come upon them, and skin had covered them. But there was no breath in them. 9 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, Thus says the Lord God: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live.” 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.”

Oh, right, Ezekiel. Sorry ‘bout that.

190 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:31:24am

0re: #170 jamesfirecat

If we don’t at least consider peace at least a possibility we might as well just bring out the nukes MOABs, mow them all down and be done with it.

OK, I’ll play. What would you say to the Taliban & AQ? What would you offer them? Tell me how we could obtain peace with them.

191 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:31:29am

re: #187 SanFranciscoZionist

You’d believe in God if you saw zombies?

Or anything else just completely impossible, right before my eyes. Actually, scratch that. I’d probably assume I had lost my mind, as that seems more likely.

192 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:32:02am

re: #188 Nimed

Well, I believe knowing people from a lot of different religious backgrounds really helps.

It may ‘help’, but I don’t think it necessarily ‘leads to’.

193 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:32:13am

re: #182 SanFranciscoZionist

And that is the opinion you have been flogging for a week or so now determinedly, and the fact that none of the believers seem to agree is perfectly irrelevent to you. Hence, my difficulty in proceeding further with this conversation. You’re perfectly clear about what you believe. Mazal tov.

Disagreement does not negate the facts. And what’s wrong with “flogging for a week.” Do not subjects at hand come up over and over on this blog, and we approach them over and over, sometimes from the same point, sometimes from a new one.

Interesting that certain subjects are best left along, and others we can flog until there is no flesh left. When this subject comes up, I’m not about to sit back and be quiet, even though you would rather I was.

194 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:32:35am

re: #191 Fozzie Bear

Or anything else just completely impossible, right before my eyes. Actually, scratch that. I’d probably assume I had lost my mind, as that seems more likely.

It’s impossible for a man to fly. Better stay away from airports if you want to keep on that atheism thing…

195 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:33:20am

re: #176 Walter L. Newton

Flaws in a book supposedly inspired or authored by G-d negates it’s value.

Wrong.

Inspiration is different from authorship. This is where Christianity (the non-insane parts) differs from Islam.

Bibliolatry is emphatically not part of Catholic doctrine, and after some initial resistance, the Catholic contribution to biblical textual criticism has been and continues to be a major one.

The problems of genre, transmission, interpretation and translation are all solidly part of the Catholic approach to the Bible, which is not seen as divinely authored, but inspired. Inspiration, of course, occurs with varying degrees of potency and success. No Catholic claims, for example, that every pithy little two-liner in “Proverbs” is binding as a guide to daily life.

196 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:33:54am

re: #186 subsailor68

Hi DF! Absolutely! The next observation in the link supports your point exactly:

Darrow had set his trap and Bryan walked right in. Darrow asked for and was granted an immediate direct verdict, thereby blocking Bryan from giving his speech.

William Jennings Bryan had clearly forgotten how a trial works and put his foot right in it. Clarence Darrow skillfully used procedure to get the results he wanted.

197 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:34:35am

re: #194 cliffster

It’s impossible for a man to fly. Better stay away from airports if you want to keep on that atheism thing…

I have faith in induction and deduction. So flying is fine. (In planes anyway)

198 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:34:54am

re: #187 SanFranciscoZionist

You’d believe in God if you saw zombies?

He would soil himself and pray to God. Not the same as belief.

Foxholes, and all that.

199 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:35:14am

I think what Walter is trying to say is Creationists need love too. So everyone, hug a creationist today!

200 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:36:09am

re: #192 SanFranciscoZionist

It may ‘help’, but I don’t think it necessarily ‘leads to’.

Right. But, in order to maintain belief, you really are required to sophisticate the hell out of your personal view of God.

201 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:36:13am

re: #193 Walter L. Newton

Disagreement does not negate the facts. And what’s wrong with “flogging for a week.” Do not subjects at hand come up over and over on this blog, and we approach them over and over, sometimes from the same point, sometimes from a new one.

Interesting that certain subjects are best left along, and others we can flog until there is no flesh left. When this subject comes up, I’m not about to sit back and be quiet, even though you would rather I was.

No, I don’t particularly care if you bring it up. I just don’t care to discuss it with you much. Carry on.

202 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:36:39am

re: #195 Cato the Elder

Wrong.

Inspiration is different from authorship. This is where Christianity (the non-insane parts) differs from Islam.

Bibliolatry is emphatically not part of Catholic doctrine, and after some initial resistance, the Catholic contribution to biblical textual criticism has been and continues to be a major one.

The problems of genre, transmission, interpretation and translation are all solidly part of the Catholic approach to the Bible, which is not seen as divinely authored, but inspired. Inspiration, of course, occurs with varying degrees of potency and success. No Catholic claims, for example, that every pithy little two-liner in “Proverbs” is binding as a guide to daily life.

Now I understand… a pick and chose religion… sort of like a buffet. Find the text that support your position. I think there were a number of wars started over that methodology.

Spare me the twisted reasonings, I’ve heard them all before.

203 steve_davis  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:36:41am

re: #4 Obdicut

How do you teach Creationism or Intelligent Design anyway? They’re non-logical, so I’d think it’d take like five minutes to say:

And some people believe that god created everything 6000 years ago, which is contradicted by all scientific evidence. Others believe every moment of creation has been ‘guided’ by god’s hand, which is contradicted by all scientific evidence. Still others believe that only some moments of creation have been so ‘guided’, but again, no scientific support for that.

What else is there to Creationism or ID? Are they supposed to teach all the fabricated nonsensical criticism of evolution that they bring? If they do, shouldn’t they teach that all these criticisms are weak, poor, dismiss able things— given that’s the truth?

Obdicut, ID’s biggest problem is that the only way to nuance its creationist basis is to pretend that it isn’t really saying that God created everything—just some intelligent entity. And as every court that’s ever bothered to look at this has pointed out, it just isn’t credible to pretend that this intelligent entity is something other than an omnipotent creator. What are the alternatives? Doctor Who?

204 jc717  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:36:59am

re: #153 Cato the Elder

On what basis? And given the general requirement that ambitious people in this country have to make gestures towards a deity, why would you not suspect Bushes I and II of the same thing?

Not sure about Bushes I and II, but it’s pretty common knowledge around DC that Carl Rove is an agnostic.

205 prairiefire  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:37:05am

re: #152 Dark_Falcon

And a red one at that. The sign isn’t too bad, though, and all the signs in that photo are within the line.

It really makes me chuckle. For years I have been lectured about my threatening lefty comrades from super law abiding Republicans.
Now you guys have to police yourselves! At least you are making the attempt. The level of vitriol from disgruntled Bush supporters does not surprise me at all.

206 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:37:41am

re: #199 marjoriemoon

I think what Walter is trying to say is Creationists need love too. So everyone, hug a creationist today!

I’m in a Catholic school…we have some Baptist students, but if I go around randomly hugging students there may be an issue…

207 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:38:07am

re: #200 Nimed

Right. But, in order to maintain belief, you really are required to sophisticate the hell out of your personal view of God.

Eh, maybe. I feel all right.

208 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:38:48am

The bottom line is, for me, that there is no direct conflict between a belief in God, in the abstract sense, and an understanding of evolution. There is certainly a conflict between an understanding of evolution and a textually literal belief in a specific religious text, but then, I think that’s obvious.

Then again, I tend to think that anyone who takes a textually literal view of religion is insane, so that’s a different issue. If that includes people here, well, I’m sure you are nice people an all, but yes, I think you are nuts.

209 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:38:50am

re: #202 Walter L. Newton


Spare me the twisted reasonings, I’ve heard them all before.

Yes, that would be the reason I’m staying in the shallow end of this conversation.

210 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:39:10am

re: #200 Nimed

Right. But, in order to maintain belief, you really are required to sophisticate the hell out of your personal view of God.

Would you atheists please stop telling believers what they are required to do?

I’m not trying to convert you away from your simple-minded belief that disbelieving in God makes you smarter than me. Feel free. I could not care less what you believe or don’t.

It’s still belief, not proof.

And that’s the point.

211 subsailor68  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:39:59am

re: #196 Dark_Falcon

William Jennings Bryan had clearly forgotten how a trial works and put his foot right in it. Clarence Darrow skillfully used procedure to get the results he wanted.

True, and I sometimes wonder whether Bryan’s health problems also played a part (on top of Darrow’s clearly superior skills). From the link:

Just five days after the trial ended, Bryan lay down for a Sunday afternoon nap and never woke up. The diabetes with which he had contended for years had finally taken his life.

I’d suppose the stress of the trial may have contributed to his death - given how shortly thereafter it occurred - but as to the impact on his performance, it’s anybody’s guess.

212 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:40:29am

re: #202 Walter L. Newton

Now I understand… a pick and chose religion… sort of like a buffet. Find the text that support your position. I think there were a number of wars started over that methodology.

Spare me the twisted reasonings, I’ve heard them all before.

You obviously do not understand, so I’ll spare you further discussion from me. Carry on.

213 Liberal Classic  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:41:22am

re: #210 Cato the Elder

Would you atheists please stop telling believers what they are required to do?

Irony so strong.

214 prairiefire  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:42:27am

Walter, why don’t you call up a JW office and ask them these questions? I think you have some residual pissed offness.

215 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:42:45am

re: #212 Cato the Elder

You obviously do not understand, so I’ll spare you further discussion from me. Carry on.

Would you believers please stop telling us atheist what we understand or don’t understand?

216 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:43:08am

This is going places.

217 Achilles Tang  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:43:34am

re: #175 SanFranciscoZionist

What life experience is conducive to being an atheist?

Having been a theist, then agnostic, then deist first, perhaps.

218 Dark_Falcon  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:44:53am

re: #212 Cato the Elder

re: #215 Walter L. Newton

Today on LGF, we have Walter versus Cato. These two actually have met in real life. They also are both good debaters and firm adherents to the saying “Never Back Down!”. This should be a classic matchup.

219 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:45:54am

I think believing in God is sort of like believing that the sun is really made of microscopic magical toasters that are really hot because of all the toasting they do.

You can’t disprove it, because it’s magic. But why would you believe it either?

In the end, an abstract belief in God bother me not at all. Religions of the more orthodox varieties scare the hell out of me.

220 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:46:14am

re: #218 Dark_Falcon

re: #215 Walter L. Newton

Today on LGF, we have Walter versus Cato. These two actually have met in real life. They also are both good debaters and firm adherents to the saying “Never Back Down!”. This should be a classic matchup.

Got a Tale of the Tape?

221 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:46:27am

re: #218 Dark_Falcon

re: #215 Walter L. Newton

Today on LGF, we have Walter versus Cato. These two actually have met in real life. They also are both good debaters and firm adherents to the saying “Never Back Down!”. This should be a classic matchup.

Hasn’t Cato actually taken a dump in Walter’s toilet?

222 lostlakehiker  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:46:32am

re: #40 Walter L. Newton

As long as a politician or elected school board member or any believer in creationism can effect change in science classes and inject creationism as a “science” topic, then I have a problem.

But I also see a problem with ANYONE tagging a person as problematic just because they believe in creationism. I have seen to much of a tendency lately to simple consider anyone who believes in creationism as flawed, illogical, incapable of critical thinking.

My point, if you have a belief in a god, you better check your distaste for creationism at the door, because you are technically in the same boat with the creationist… a belief in a magical, mystical, mythical concept based on flawed foundation material (holy text).

There’s a big difference. The creationist is standing on ground that isn’t there, insisting out of religious conviction that the civil war didn’t happen because the universe isn’t 145 years old. (He may as well be insisting that; the evidence for the civil war is no stronger than the evidence for an old earth or for evolution). The believer in God has not committed himself to a counterfactual stand on matters that are as well settled as any question of fact can be settled when it pertains to things not here right before our eyes.

What politicians believe in is votes. They’ll say almost anything, and some will do almost anything, and a few will do anything at all, to win and hold office. Even the best ones will hold their tongue and slide around a question when they know that a straight answer would hurt them with the voters. That’s because there’s no such thing as a politician who gives straight answers all the time; the voters won’t stand for the insufferable prig. :-(

We, the voting public, are as much at fault for this as our politicians. Politics has its own process and it works a little bit like evolution. Various meme-clouds are out there in the idea-sphere, and if a politician adapts one as his own and runs with it, he wins or loses. The winning meme-cloud multiplies and is propagated with variation to other politicians. The losing meme-cloud is driven to extinction.

We voters decide and determine the quality of our politicians. Not a flattering thought, is it?

223 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:47:41am

re: #219 Fozzie Bear

I think believing in God is sort of like believing that the sun is really made of microscopic magical toasters that are really hot because of all the toasting they do.

You can’t disprove it, because it’s magic. But why would you believe it either?

In the end, an abstract belief in God bother me not at all. Religions of the more orthodox varieties scare the hell out of me.

What do you do the all the money you have with the icky phrase “In God We Trust” printed on it?

224 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:48:20am

re: #213 Liberal Classic

Irony so strong.

Meant that way.

Lots of atheists became atheists because of believers telling them what they must accept.

Works just as poorly for the atheists as it does for the believers.

225 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:48:29am

re: #223 NJDhockeyfan

What do you do the all the money you have with the icky phrase “In God We Trust” printed on it?

I spend it, and understand that the idiots in the 50’s who had that added are just harmless idiots.

226 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:49:11am

re: #221 cliffster

Hasn’t Cato actually taken a dump in Walter’s toilet?

For which reason I shall not shit in his Champagne flute.

227 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:49:59am

re: #210 Cato the Elder

Would you atheists please stop telling believers what they are required to do?

I’m not trying to convert you away from your simple-minded belief that disbelieving in God makes you smarter than me. Feel free. I could not care less what you believe or don’t.

It’s still belief, not proof.

And that’s the point.

I’m not trying to convert anybody or claiming that non-believers are smarter (I don’t think they are). All I’m saying is that permanent contact with several different conceptions of God through personal acquaintances usually forces people to deal with this particular cognitive dissonance. From this point, atheism/agnosticism, a concept of God as the Architect, or simply a God that chooses to reveal himself in different ways to different people, usually emerge. I don’t know what determines personal choices here, but I’m pretty sure intelligence isn’t it.

228 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:52:07am

re: #210 Cato the Elder

Would you atheists please stop telling believers what they are required to do?

I’m not trying to convert you away from your simple-minded belief that disbelieving in God makes you smarter than me. Feel free. I could not care less what you believe or don’t.

It’s still belief, not proof.

And that’s the point.

Not believing something, sans evidence, isn’t a belief. It’s the standard logical fallback position.

I don’t believe in God. I also don’t believe that the earth is orbited by invisible giant toasters. Does this make me a believer in the nonexistence of the great toaster, or just not a toaster believer. There is a difference.

229 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:52:32am

re: #226 Cato the Elder

For which reason I shall not shit in his Champagne flute.

Thanks goodness… I saw that dried up crap a few months ago when we were cleaning for Passover and my first thought was that you had something to do with it.

230 lostlakehiker  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:52:36am

re: #72 Walter L. Newton

Creationist is starting to become a distasteful description for a person, especially a politician to be tagged with. I’m saying that this is akin to screaming heretic and witch. How much longer and they will it be before reporters and the public ask a politician if they believe in a god, and what effect will that have.

Question.

If a politician was asked (left, right what ever politician, I don’t care) if they believe in creationism by a reporter, and they said they do, and they even claimed that evolution is bunk, but they also flatly stated that they don’t want creationism taught in school, would you consider voting for that person if you agreed with most of his other political positions?

Depends. Does he want wind farms constructed? Nuclear power plants? Solar energy pursued vigorously with a view to the earliest possible development of truly competitive technology? Then all else is excused. Otherwise, he’s in trouble with me.

Unfortunately, this is a purely hypothetical case. Those who disbelieve evolution disbelieve climate science as well. And why not? Climate science has not advanced to the same pitch of perfection in its understanding of climate, as evolution is in its understanding of the origin of species.

If the politician cannot understand the one, or if he understands it just fine but he knows his voters think different, he won’t understand the other either, or, again what amounts to the same thing, he will know his voters don’t understand the other either.

231 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:53:31am

re: #225 Fozzie Bear

I spend it, and understand that the idiots in the 50’s who had that added are just harmless idiots.

1864 actually. The ‘idiots’ were the Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase and Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville. Pennsylvania.


…The Congress passed the Act of April 22, 1864. This legislation changed the composition of the one-cent coin and authorized the minting of the two-cent coin. The Mint Director was directed to develop the designs for these coins for final approval of the Secretary. IN GOD WE TRUST first appeared on the 1864 two-cent coin.
…
232 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:54:09am

re: #231 NJDhockeyfan

OK, the ’60s, then!

233 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:54:33am

re: #230 lostlakehiker

Depends. Does he want wind farms constructed? Nuclear power plants? Solar energy pursued vigorously with a view to the earliest possible development of truly competitive technology? Then all else is excused. Otherwise, he’s in trouble with me.

Unfortunately, this is a purely hypothetical case. Those who disbelieve evolution disbelieve climate science as well. And why not? Climate science has not advanced to the same pitch of perfection in its understanding of climate, as evolution is in its understanding of the origin of species.

If the politician cannot understand the one, or if he understands it just fine but he knows his voters think different, he won’t understand the other either, or, again what amounts to the same thing, he will know his voters don’t understand the other either.

My point made… asking if he believes in creationism is one step away from questioning his belief in G-d.

Watch out.

234 What, me worry?  Fri, May 14, 2010 9:55:56am

It really isn’t so difficult.

Education deals with facts. Churches deal with faith. Why is this so freakin hard to understand?

What, pray tell, is the religion of Creationists who want to push religion in schools? Jews? Muslims? Buddhists? No, Christian “extremists” and I add the word “extremist” because certainly not all (and I don’t even believe most) feel this way. But for those who are on a Mission from God, as it were, they are Christians who want Christianity taught in school and they’re using the excuse of creationism = science to do it.

235 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:01:41am

If you want to teach creationism in public schools, then you want to make people dumber. This is how I see it. It’s quite simple.

The rest about God and all that is ancillary. That we can agree to disagree about, for now.

236 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:02:49am

re: #231 NJDhockeyfan

I was referring to paper money. But sure, people have been trying to force religion on everyone else since the beginning of time. Why should I think it would stop here?

237 Vicious Babushka  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:03:42am

re: #229 Walter L. Newton

Thanks goodness… I saw that dried up crap a few months ago when we were cleaning for Passover and my first thought was that you had something to do with it.

Wait, you’re a staunch atheist and you believe the Torah is a bunch of freaking fairy tales but you celebrate Passover with your family? (As, the “Angel of Death” passed over the houses of the Israelites which were marked with lamb’s blood, but smote the first-born of the Egyptians)

Head splodey.

238 Walter L. Newton  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:07:54am

re: #237 Alouette

Wait, you’re a staunch atheist and you believe the Torah is a bunch of freaking fairy tales but you celebrate Passover with your family? (As, the “Angel of Death” passed over the houses of the Israelites which were marked with lamb’s blood, but smote the first-born of the Egyptians)

Head splodey.

The “events” as presented in the Hebrew texts about Passover deal with the subject of freedom, a concept that is understandable and valued by most people. We use a custom made Haggadah (no Maxwell House Haggadah around here) that has a number of family written passages about freedom through out the ages.

You don’t have to believe in a place like “Oz” to understand and appreciated the concept of “there’s no place like home.”

239 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:08:59am

re: #236 Fozzie Bear

I was referring to paper money. But sure, people have been trying to force religion on everyone else since the beginning of time. Why should I think it would stop here?

Putting IN GOD WE TRUST on money is forcing religion on everyone?

240 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:09:14am

So…uhhh…did i miss a bender of an overnight thread or what???

241 Nimed  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:09:30am

re: #210 Cato the Elder

Would you atheists please stop telling believers what they are required to do?

I’m not trying to convert you away from your simple-minded belief that disbelieving in God makes you smarter than me. Feel free. I could not care less what you believe or don’t.

It’s still belief, not proof.

And that’s the point.

re: #227 Nimed

Just to make it clear, it’s not what I or atheists require, it’s what people require from themselves when facing a diversity of conceptions of divinity. I do agree that the God-as-a-space-toaster is pretty simple minded argument that doesn’t recognize that the concept of God falls in a separate ontological category from toasters. It’s at best a starting point for a discussion, and at worst what atheists say to feel good about themselves.

Now will you please stop attributing me bad intentions whenever I talk about this stuff?

242 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:10:33am

re: #239 NJDhockeyfan

Putting IN GOD WE TRUST on money is forcing religion on everyone?

It’s fairly self evident that it is at least putting religious propaganda on a completely secular device. Are you denying this?

243 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:12:00am

re: #242 Fozzie Bear

It’s fairly self evident that it is at least putting religious propaganda on a completely secular device. Are you denying this?

What religion is being forced on you and how has this harmed you?

244 cliffster  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:12:27am

re: #240 Aceofwhat?

So…uhhh…did i miss a bender of an overnight thread or what???

Yes - you’ve been very bad and I think you need a spanking.

245 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:13:43am

re: #241 Nimed

re: #227 Nimed

Just to make it clear, it’s not what I or atheists require, it’s what people require from themselves when facing a diversity of conceptions of divinity. I do agree that the God-as-a-space-toaster is pretty simple minded argument that doesn’t recognize that the concept of God falls in a separate ontological category from toasters. It’s at best a starting point for a discussion, and at worst what atheists say to feel good about themselves.

Now will you please stop attributing me bad intentions whenever I talk about this stuff?

but you’re still saying that we require it, “it” being the contortions which you mentioned above.

i believe that at the moment, you cannot conceive of how such a belief can be reached without such contortions. however, you can’t extrapolate your experience to others. plenty of folks have arrived at their faith through very simple paths.

246 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:14:40am

re: #243 NJDhockeyfan

Theism in general, and no, not a bit. It still strikes me as a remarkably silly and pointless attempt to make everything, including commerce, a religious event.

247 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:14:58am

re: #242 Fozzie Bear

It’s fairly self evident that it is at least putting religious propaganda on a completely secular device. Are you denying this?

People of faith often see too much in expressions of our cultural history. Don’t give them legitimacy by agreeing with them…

248 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:16:02am

re: #247 Aceofwhat?

People of faith often see too much in expressions of our cultural history. Don’t give them legitimacy by agreeing with them…

You can’t get far as an atheist unless you learn to find it amusing rather than annoying. Sometimes, it’s both.

249 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:16:28am

re: #244 cliffster

Yes - you’ve been very bad and I think you need a spanking.

I’m good, thanks, but i support your right to enjoy such a thing;)

250 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:17:56am

re: #248 Fozzie Bear

You can’t get far as an atheist unless you learn to find it amusing rather than annoying. Sometimes, it’s both.

Heh. as long as you aren’t really concerned that it’s propaganda, as opposed to a nod towards our cultural heritage, i hear ya-

251 NJDhockeyfan  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:18:25am

re: #246 Fozzie Bear

Theism in general, and no, not a bit. It still strikes me as a remarkably silly and pointless attempt to make everything, including commerce, a religious event.

Well if it hasn’t harmed you what all the bitchin’ about?

BTW…I’ll say a prayer for you later. ;)

252 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:18:42am

re: #250 Aceofwhat?

Heh. as long as you aren’t really concerned that it’s propaganda, as opposed to a nod towards our cultural heritage, i hear ya-

Haha, once again, I think it’s both.

253 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:19:59am

re: #251 NJDhockeyfan

Well if it hasn’t harmed you what all the bitchin’ about?

BTW…I’ll say a prayer for you later. ;)

It hasn’t harmed me lately. I wouldn’t say that religion has been anything but a negative force in my life in the past. This stuff doesn’t come from nowhere, you know. (My opinions, I mean)

254 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:23:47am

re: #252 Fozzie Bear

Haha, once again, I think it’s both.

Seriously? So the cross on Dartmouth’s crest is also christian propaganda?

255 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:27:13am

re: #254 Aceofwhat?

Are we going to go through a list or something?

256 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:29:06am

re: #255 Fozzie Bear

Are we going to go through a list or something?

nope. just this one. because there isn’t a good answer to it. if an educational institution like Dartmouth can acknowledge its history without being paranoid about “propaganda”, so can our country.

it’s that simple.

257 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:32:17am

re: #256 Aceofwhat?

No, it isn’t that simple. The religious slogans inserted on to paper money in 1955 where there previously were none were clearly an attempt to insert religious imagery and dogma into a public place it did not previously exist.

The crest at Dartmouth is the crest to a private institution with an overtly religious history.

Apples and oranges.

258 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:38:35am

re: #257 Fozzie Bear

No, it isn’t that simple. The religious slogans inserted on to paper money in 1955 where there previously were none were clearly an attempt to insert religious imagery and dogma into a public place it did not previously exist.

The crest at Dartmouth is the crest to a private institution with an overtly religious history.

Apples and oranges.

alrighty. and the “all-seeing eye” is Illuminati-Masonic sekrit propaganda, too, in that case.

i don’t mean to be sardonic…it’s just that i’ll need your help to create a distinction between the two (in God we trust and the eye), because to me they’re either both harmless or they’re both propaganda.

259 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:40:14am

re: #258 Aceofwhat?

alrighty. and the “all-seeing eye” is Illuminati-Masonic sekrit propaganda, too, in that case.

i don’t mean to be sardonic…it’s just that i’ll need your help to create a distinction between the two (in God we trust and the eye), because to me they’re either both harmless or they’re both propaganda.

Once again, they can be both.

260 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:41:26am

re: #257 Fozzie Bear

No, it isn’t that simple. The religious slogans inserted on to paper money in 1955 where there previously were none were clearly an attempt to insert religious imagery and dogma into a public place it did not previously exist.

The crest at Dartmouth is the crest to a private institution with an overtly religious history.

Apples and oranges.

ps - the USA has an overtly religious history, too. kids go to Dartmouth without having to fear that the history will become required belief…proof that the same historical acknowledgments can occur elsewhere in similarly nonthreatening fashion, in direct contradiction to Mrs. Palin’s misunderstandings…

261 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:43:59am

re: #259 Fozzie Bear

Once again, they can be both.

ok. i disagree, but i’m happy to agree to disagree on this point - you’ve helped me to understand where you’re coming from, which was my primary goal…

262 Fozzie Bear  Fri, May 14, 2010 10:44:55am

re: #260 Aceofwhat?

Well, keep in mind my postings on this topic have more to do with the likes of Palin than with people like yourself. I don’t care if people want to believe whatever they want to believe. I do think religion often has a corrosive influence on reasonable discourse, but I don’t think that it necessarily does.

Hence my distinctions above between abstract belief and textual literalism. Textual literalism is manifestly dangerous, imo, but a belief in a God, by itself, is not. One requires the believer to discard any information that conflicts with a pre-determined cosmology, the other is far more flexible.

263 SanFranciscoZionist  Fri, May 14, 2010 11:19:30am

re: #239 NJDhockeyfan

Putting IN GOD WE TRUST on money is forcing religion on everyone?

Well, yes.

264 kirkspencer  Fri, May 14, 2010 11:34:05am

re: #124 NJDhockeyfan

Economic Woes Threaten Chavez’s Socialist Vision

Socialism sucks.

I present Sweden as an example of why the implied “always” is false.

265 goddamnedfrank  Fri, May 14, 2010 11:39:01am

re: #243 NJDhockeyfan

What religion is being forced on you and how has this harmed you?

Monotheism, not so much a formal “religion” as a specific category of spiritualism, and the Constitution has been abrogated, which inherently harms us all by weakening it through an official display of open defiance.

266 Achilles Tang  Fri, May 14, 2010 11:42:15am

re: #264 kirkspencer

I present Sweden as an example of why the implied “always” is false.

Sweden is very much a capitalist country. Just because, like all of Europe, they have universal health care among a few other things, doesn’t make them remotely comparable to a wannabe dictator like Chavez.

267 kirkspencer  Fri, May 14, 2010 11:56:32am

re: #266 Naso Tang

Sweden is very much a capitalist country. Just because, like all of Europe, they have universal health care among a few other things, doesn’t make them remotely comparable to a wannabe dictator like Chavez.

True, Sweden is not in reality though it is frequently considered such.

Functionally, Venezuela is becoming a non-socialist (dictatorship) country, but by its constitution it is, still, socialist. Therefor I will give constitutionally declared socialist comparisons. India is the largest that’s doing well, I suppose. Sri Lanka seems to be also doing well. And since the 1986 DoiMoi, Viet Nam has been improving.

For what it’s worth, a friend of mine coined (or repeated) a term I’ve come to like that seems endemic to poorly behaving countries. They all tend to be thugocracies, though their ‘official’ labels cover the spectrum. Chavez’s Venezuela is such, it appears.

268 Aceofwhat?  Fri, May 14, 2010 12:05:37pm

re: #265 goddamnedfrank

Monotheism, not so much a formal “religion” as a specific category of spiritualism, and the Constitution has been abrogated, which inherently harms us all by weakening it through an official display of open defiance.

the constitution has been abrogated? where?

269 goddamnedfrank  Fri, May 14, 2010 1:27:34pm

re: #268 Aceofwhat?

the constitution has been abrogated? where?

Congress mandating “In God We Trust” on currency is an official governmental sanctioning of monotheism, this falsely implies that polytheistic and atheistic belief systems are somehow incompatible with our constitutional republic.

270 Cato the Elder  Fri, May 14, 2010 3:50:24pm

re: #269 goddamnedfrank

Congress mandating “In God We Trust” on currency is an official governmental sanctioning of monotheism, this falsely implies that polytheistic and atheistic belief systems are somehow incompatible with our constitutional republic.

Bullshit.

A Hindu might read it as “In [My Favorite God] We Trust”.

And atheists? Everyone knows they don’t count.

But feel free to send me all your monotheistic coin. I will exchange it for old paperbacks.

271 JRCMYP  Fri, May 14, 2010 4:22:30pm

If creationists want to have their beliefs taught in science class, then they will have to move over and make room for all the other creationist theories that the world has sprouted. Queue the mythologies of ancient religions.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Good Liars at Miami Trump Rally [VIDEO] Jason and Davram talk with Trump supporters about art, Mike Lindell, who is really president and more! SUPPORT US: herohero.co SEE THE GOOD LIARS LIVE!LOS ANGELES, CA squadup.com SUBSCRIBE TO OUR AUDIO PODCAST:Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.comSpotify: open.spotify.comJoin this channel to ...
teleskiguy
1 weeks ago
Views: 510 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Ranked-Choice Voting Has Challenged the Status Quo. Its Popularity Will Be Tested in November. JUNEAU — Alaska’s new election system — with open primaries and ranked voting — has been a model for those in other states who are frustrated by political polarization and a sense that voters lack real choice at the ...
Cheechako
4 weeks ago
Views: 399 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 2