ray wrote:Denying females their most basic rights is work of European and American governments. Just make a list of things that secular godless nations do not let women do. You will be shocked. It will be longer and worse than Iran.

Creationist Batshit wrote:Students should be informed about different sides of "how the Earth came to be." To start if with I do understand that this may be "unconstitutional." However, I will adress in further detail what this means. It is said that teaching creationism as a science is unconstitutional only if: 1) They teach it as it being superior to other religions or beliefs. 2) Religion is superior to a secular lifestyle. In other words saying that you are forced to obey it or teach it as it is the only way.

Teaching Creationism in public schools CAN be constitutional if: 1) It is taught in a concept that people believe in it but not the truth. (I'm okay with this like many people, I think that it doesn't have to be taught that it is a truth because people should decide what they belive in) 2) It is not promoted as superior of as a secular lifestyle. This helps define the concept of Church vs. State process, there are certain qualifications to things and it is allowed for creationism to be taught in school under certain rules. I will provide this portion of my arguement in the
below where I found this information.

My first point is that it is falty to say evolution is stritcly a science. The definition of religion is: A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe. Evolution fits that well. To say that evolution should be taught in science class because it is a science makes that statement wrong right there. There is also a such thing as "Creation Science."

Not only can evolution be defined as a religion, it can be falty in saying it is a science. The main definition of science is: A branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws. I feel that evolution does not fit this very well because: 1) Evolution has not been entirely proven by facts of truths as of now. 2) Evolution as not been systematically aranged because the pieces of information they have for it are uncompleted and minimum. 3) Evolution does not tie in with the general laws of science. So to base teaching evolution in schools on it being a science can be falty and easily be argued to be wrong.

I will also argue that in modern times it is hard for a certain number of people to get a more religious aspect of things. Private schools can be expensive and times are busy for people who want to go to church but can't always make it. Not to mention some parents don't go to church with there kids and the children cannot help that.

It has been tested that almost half of American adults have not heard of "Creation Science." A student should be informed to the different sides of stories. It has been proven that students have a healthier developed mind when taught different types of information. We should let them decide for themselves what they believe in. That way we let our society be more even. Again, I'm not saying we should force children to believe in Creationism in school but be informed about it and even a little of other religions so they get more options to choose. Not everyone can have the option of learning this outside of school.

To end off with I will show results of polls concerning the debate of teaching creationism in public schools and put a link to these in the evidence below.

In 1999, "The Gallup Organization" made a poll for this topic. As much as 68% of people were in favor of teaching Creationism in schools. 29% opposed and 3% had no opinion. These numbers haven't changed much. Also considering one more poll in January 2002, Channel One News made a poll on the same thing. 31% said we should teach Creationism instead of Evolution, only 17% said we should teach Evolution instead of Creationism, and a huge 52% said we should teach both! The public speaks and most do this from tradition or standing up.

In closing this arguement, all the polls, points I made, etc. do prove effective because teaching Creationism as a science in public schools isn't necessarily "unconstitutional."

- http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_school.htm
- http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_school1.htm

Pombolo wrote:I would simply nominate almost any sentence from the long mental masturbation of ctrusk over at the Atheist Experience blog.

WARNING! You will have to wade through a lot to come out on the other side.

Oh, and here is a link to an edited (heavily) version of the original call. Go to the AE website for the full episode.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCc-5Z_3SKI[/youtube]

JWG wrote:I was discussing random topics by a camp fire the other night with one of my friends, and when the topic came to religion; I threw out an honest disclaimer that I do not believe in it, and much of his arguments made no sense to me. Throughout the conversation, he would interrupt, look up in the sky, and say "Forgive him he doesn't mean it." I just rolled my eyes and continued. The conversation actually did lead somewhere productive in the end, really.

LOLpologetics on omniscience and free will wrote:Of course he does, but it still implies a Paradox. That paradoxs happen is to be expected of an argument FOR God's existence, but you cannot use it against his existence, for then you take a belief in God outside your equation and are left with a Paradox you cannot reconcile.

Jesus was able to walk on water because at that time most of the world was at a magical worldview. The collective consciousness allowed it then. Today, however, with science and empiricism ruling consciousness, walking on water is no longer possible. I believe Jesus was indeed able to walk on water, literally, not that he was the son of God, but rather because he attained the highest stage of consciousness which was an out of body experience which was able to manipulate the lower consciousnesses.

(24 November 1999, California) One particular group of Christians attempted to follow in Jesus' footsteps more literally than most. They worked to master the secret of walking on water. Diligently, day by day, the group tried to be closer to God by making a sincere effort to walk on water. These Christians continued their unorthodox practices until the leader of this small Los Angeles group unexpectedly died while practicing in his bathtub. His wife said James spent many hours trying to perfect the technique of walking on water, but had not yet mastered the ability. He apparently drowned after slipping on a bar of soap.

Note from Giles Read -- "These people obviously haven't realised that anyone can walk on water. I've done it myself. Just wait until the lake freezes..."

(August 2006, Libreville, Gabon) During an impassioned sermon, a congregation was surprised to hear their 35-year old pastor insist that one could literally walk on water, if one had enough faith. His words were big and bold. He extolled the heavenly power possessed by a faithful man with such force that he may well have convinced himself.
Whether or not he believed in his heart, his speech only left room for shame should he leave his own faith untested. Thus, the fiery pastor set out to walk across a major estuary, along the path of a 20-minute ferry ride. Even though he could not swim.

Lacking the miraculous powers of David Copperfield, let alone Jesus Christ, this ill-fated cleric found only a damp Darwin Award at the end of his chosen path.

A related Personal Account from Palorca, Portugal: "I met an elder villager who once tried to walk on water. He strapped small floaters to his feet. He floated, all right, but upside down, head submerged. He was rescued by the spectators." --green1

Kytescall wrote:The floating upside down thing? That's happened to me once. Not fun.

Kytescall wrote:Do you ever take that little stroll down memory lane and get totally blown away by how stupid you were way back when? I'm having one of those moments now.

Kytescall wrote:Do you ever take that little stroll down memory lane and get totally blown away by how stupid you were way back when? I'm having one of those moments now.

"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose." - Romans 8:28

Pombolo wrote:I would simply nominate almost any sentence from the long mental masturbation of ctrusk over at the Atheist Experience blog.

WARNING! You will have to wade through a lot to come out on the other side.

Oh, and here is a link to an edited (heavily) version of the original call. Go to the AE website for the full episode.

blasphemer_number1 wrote:

Kytescall wrote:Do you ever take that little stroll down memory lane and get totally blown away by how stupid you were way back when? I'm having one of those moments now.

Yes... I can recall numerous times when I was young, I sought affirmation in the following bible verse:

"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose." - Romans 8:28

It was a kind of guarantee that if I were a good Christian, that good would come to me; confirmation bias built into the scripture.

"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose." - Romans 8:28

Binky wrote:The stupidest thing I ever heard was being told by a primary teacher that disabled children were punishments from god for the sins of the parents, a sort of redemptive albatross, and if they were properly looked after then god would forgive the parents and let the child die. Well done Miss Derwent, you stupid fucking bitch, if I met you now I would spit in your face.

Link wrote:

Binky wrote:The stupidest thing I ever heard was being told by a primary teacher that disabled children were punishments from god for the sins of the parents, a sort of redemptive albatross, and if they were properly looked after then god would forgive the parents and let the child die. Well done Miss Derwent, you stupid fucking bitch, if I met you now I would spit in your face.

FUCK! That's ignorance to the Nth degree

Jerry Falwell wrote:AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals