Comments on: Something Awful

by: james

Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:30:46 +0000

It sounds like you are trying to argue creationism over evolution based on morality. As the secular humanists have said for quite some time, you do not need religion to have morality. Society can dictate what is right or wrong and in some cases much better than religion can.

We can easily see that it is “bad” to steal, kill, adulter, etc, based entirely on observation of those actions’ effects on society. Many times when religion is brought into the scenario people start blurring what is right by society and what is right by them. I think, and mind you this is pure speculation, that more wars have been fought under the guise or pretense of religion than ANY OTHER reason.

I’m not saying religion is bad, I’m saying zealotry is bad.

I’m not saying you are a zealot.

To your point about laying evolution and creationism’s accounts side by side and seeing which one science sides with… I’m not exactly sure what you are getting at. Science will obviously hold with evolution, because it is scientific. Not to bash creationism, but it has no scientific basis.

by: anonymouse

Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:30:29 +0000

I apologize for using “anonymous”, but I was unable to create, uh, I mean design, uh, evolve a blogger account.
I, too, think that Creationists should disassociate themselves from Intelligent Design - not because the argument has no worth, but because of the disingenuousness of pretending to be something you are not.
I am a christian and I believe in a literal 6 day creation - and I am not afraid to say it.
I also believe in science - and I am not afraid to stand up in church and say that, either.
The debate is between evolution and creation; Genesis does not allow any middle ground (Gap theory, Modified gap theory, Theistic evolution, or some amorphous Intelligent design).
Arguments rage, point and counter-point are raised and discussed, but in the end, I choose to believe in the Creation of the universe and all that is in it, and someone else chooses to believe in the evolution of it all.

Fine.
But in so choosing what we will believe, we must accept the implications that come with that choice.
If I choose evolution, then I choose to believe there is no right or wrong, no good or bad. Why? Because there is no ultimate authority to say, “This is right, and this is wrong. And it is right or wrong simply because I say so.”
Do you know anyone who actually lives this way? I don’t.
The very argument that creationism “should” be excluded from the classroom is based on the notion that not doing so isn’t “right”.
If evolution is the truth, I should be willing, nay, Eager to lay it side by side with the Bible’s account of the creation and just see which one science allies itself with.
Can we do that?

by: james

Wed, 21 Dec 2005 23:01:00 +0000

Thought this was worth adding.

The John Templeton Foundation, a major funder of projects that aim to reconcile religion and science, has given none of its $36 million in annual science-related grants to intelligent design research, said foundation spokeswoman Pamela Thompson. “We do not consider it a hard science,'’ she said. “We feel that it is not something that’s important to universities.'’

by: mindy

Sat, 10 Dec 2005 04:23:00 +0000

sorry, i thought i had to be a member of nerd.com before i could voice my opinions on here

by: james

Fri, 09 Dec 2005 20:07:00 +0000

I wouldnt say either way, but based entirely on religion it would imply that they are. Protestant 52%, Roman Catholic 24%, Mormon 2%, Jewish 1%, Muslim 1%, other 10%, none 10% (2002 est.) source

by: Sarah

Fri, 09 Dec 2005 19:28:00 +0000

Hahaha.
To be fair, Creationists are hardly a majority. They’re just a really, really vocal minority with a lot of backing.

by: james

Fri, 09 Dec 2005 01:44:00 +0000

Perhaps, but at least I’m willing to put my name behind my opinions.

by: Anonymous

Thu, 08 Dec 2005 20:59:00 +0000

you are a nut, and some day your stong opinions and refusal to back down are going to get you in trouble