I believe the fear is that the more we , as a Nation , turn our backs on God, he will turn His back on us. Nobody needs Him to turn away from us. We are in a sorry enough state. Ignore Him, He ignores you. Give Him the credit He deserves, then bring us to shame on how poorly we attempt to get His message across.

On the topic of "Intelligent Design" being unconstitutional since the seperation of Church and State...

Isn't having the words, "In God We Trust" printed on our money just as unconstitutional given the premise?

And that's all very true.

But I think that where Christianity (and all religions) need to evolve is toward becoming less about the mythology our primitive ancestors required ("why is thunder? where do you go when you die?") and more about giving people meaning and direction in their lives.

I could go on ad nauseam about this one, believe me.

BZZZZT! Wrong answer assumption. The idea of god for many is his/her ability to perform miracles... something that us mortals cannot. And science, if not now then definitely in the long run, challenges this belief.

Perhaps I need to rephrase what I was trying to say - to me, the essence of Christianity is the teachings of Christ. The Golden Rule - "Love your neighbor as yourself." "Even as ye have done unto the least of these, ye have done unto me."

All the mythology and cosmology and everything else is, at the end of the day, irrelevant. Whether the Lord created the heavens and the earth, whether there was a great flood that covered the earth for forty days and forty nights, whether man was created as is or evolved from other organisms - it's all irrelevant when it comes to how Christians should live their lives. "Love your neighbor" isn't conditional on who created what how, or even who said it.

They've invested too much in all their mythology, and lost track of the meaning. And that meaning isn't threatened by science, isn't even touched by it.

Science does not say there is no God, no one can say there is or there is not, however, science does say that a lot of things written or believed or vehiculated by religious dogma is false, thus, not difficult for me to understand why Believers would come to the conclusion that science is against their religion ie: their God me think

Yes, you heathen. First prove to me that everything you've ever asserted is not completely false, and then I'll just tell you that my deity made it look that way to screw with you and test your faith.



I just don't get it. Nothing in any part of science says "There's no God - religious people, you're wrong." It's a battle they can't win and have no real reason to fight. But they do anyway ...

So basically if you can't prove the speed of light, the freezing point of water, and the universal gravity constant haven't changed in the last 2000 years, your argument is null.

after hearing a relative talk about the reasons the earth was young (less than 10,000 years) I decided to do some googling on how they arrived at these conclusions. I found a site that condensed it all down with links to further reading.
Although it tries to be as unbiased as possible, by their own admission, it leans a bit toward the skeptic side. I think they do a pretty good job.
Promoting religious tolerance and freedom

Here's the articles I found on Indicators of a Young Earth, with rebuttals
and Indications of an Old Earth, with rebuttals

There's a lot of God made it look old on purpose answers when they had no other explanation.

There's a lot of God made it look old on purpose answers when they had no other explanation.

Rebuttal: This calculation assumes that the freezing point of water has remained constant over the past thousands of years. There is no proof that this has happened.

You only think that because it's too complex for us to understand. The designer surely has a purpose for these things that our feeble minds can not grasp.


Example of why its impossible to converse with a fundie. I think it's a mental illness, the blind faith. I've had so many frustrating conversations with my sister (a Missionary!! also a Chemical Engineer!! Talk about a paradox) that make no sense whatsoever. Their faith grows like a cancer, and somehow shuts off the "logic" switch in their brains. Ug.

My husband, the biologist, has a whole list of things a truly intelligent designer would have gotten right.

The spine thing is one; it's awkward and doesn't work well.

Another is the fact that we take food and air into the same pipe - too easy to choke.

Eyes would have been either more plentiful or spaced differently so that we would have a wider range of vision.

Also, in primate eyes, light has to pass through blood vessels to get to the cells that collect it. Apparently, it's the opposite in an octopus. From a design standpoint, optopi are much more elegant.

Women can die during childbirth. This makes no sense. In fact, birth defects in general don't make sense; genetic defects are bad planning.

Yeah, the appendix doesn't make sense. We don't use it to process food like rodents and stuff do. Or at least, we don't anymore.

He said that allergies don't make sense, either.

The thing that perhaps is closest to all of us is our own skeleton, and there are certainly all kinds of stupidity in our design. No self-respecting engineering student would make the kinds of dumb mistakes that are built into us.

So is this evolution or is this plain stupid design?

Not to be too crude, but, I don't think it was too
intelligent to place a males most pain producing
organs in such a volnerable place (a sack between
the legs). Who thought that one up?