Champion Rabbit wrote:Gramsci, I think it's possible that you have this backwards.

I don't believe for a second that the US admin genuinely believes in this crap, do you? US admin believes in two things; power and money. Their (ab)use of religion as a hurding tool for the voters is, I think, entirely cynical.

I think there is a parasite like co-dependance between the nutjobs and the evil sons-of-bitches in the US govt at the moment.

Like how Libertarians vote Republican just for the tax cut, but don't seem to mind having a few civil liberties fucked in the ass. They make me sick.

what a fucking fuckheaded bag of ignorant fuckknucklery.

yarr.

davesec wrote:i think bush is an idiot but he really didn't say that much and the reporter seemed to be pushing.

i mean for all you know bush meant for intelligent design or whatever to be taught in history class instead of biology.

as stupid as the bible is, it's an important part in literature & history as it's shaped a lot of the world.

i don't think it's stupid at all to tell a kids in school that a bunch of people honestly believe what this ridiculous book has to say about how we got to where we are, and as a result there was a lot of conflict and struggle before evolution was accepted as fact

Give a theist an inch and he'll put a gun to your head and force a Bible into your hand.

The sooner the human race consign that book to the same place as Greek mythology the better it will be for all of us.

I wont even vote for someone if they aren't an atheist. If I can't trust their intelligence how can I trust them to do anything?

george bush, the actual person and not the fake account wrote:"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought, and I'm not suggesting — you're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes."

I think this is the first time I have ever agreed with something this man said.

I think both sides of this particular debate are already given an equal enough representation so there isn't a compelling reason to start representing them more equally, but I do agree that the exposure to different ideas is a good thing. A brilliant "spin" if you will on a difficult position to defend, but a good thing nonetheless. [/quote]

Gramsci wrote:
Give a theist an inch and he'll put a gun to your head and force a Bible into your hand.

The sooner the human race consign that book to the same place as Greek mythology the better it will be for all of us.

I wont even vote for someone if they aren't an atheist. If I can't trust their intelligence how can I trust them to do anything?

1. i don't think that's true, while a lot of people are pretty proactive about their religion there's a lot of people who are happy with their spirituality/religion and have never bothered me about it.
2. i agree
3. i know this is kind of going off on a tangent but i kind of think that people who don't believe in god are just as stupid as people who do, because i don't think the existance of a god can be proved either way. science definitely explains everything a billion times better than the bible ever could, but outside of that i don't think anyone will reach a conclusion.

davesec wrote:

Gramsci wrote:
because i don't think the existance of a god can be proved either way.

What, so we just let people "make shit up" to fill in the gaps of human understanding of the universe? Sorry but that is just retarded.

You can't prove I don't have a translucent lion shaped spirit guide called Norman, but if I told you I did would you say, "well I guess we'll just have to take your word for it". Come on!

As for intelligence… well I’m sure there are plenty of stupid atheists, theism just maker stupid people stupider…

ironyengine wrote:I think this is the first time I have ever agreed with something this man said.

...but I do agree that the exposure to different ideas is a good thing.

This is not how science works. You don't give equal time to ideas that are clearly not equal. There is no debate in the scientific community whether or not evolution took place, only about some of the minor details involved in evolution (punctuated equilibrium vs. slow continual change, etc). Let me repeat that: THERE IS NO REAL DEBATE IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY BETWEEN EVOLUTION AND CREATIONISM. The figures of scientists (and I'm talking real scientists, not foot doctors who decided to study outside their field and obscure their credentials, or "scientists" who purchased their academic letters from unaccredited degree mills) who believe in some sort of creationism or intelligent design is something like less than 1%. Don't be mistaken, this is a cultural debate, not a scientific one.

Gramsci wrote:Give a theist an inch and he'll put a gun to your head and force a Bible into your hand.

This is dead-on. As ridiculously stupid as the right is, the one genius they possess is how to sell their ideologies to the masses for acceptance. This whole "Aw schucks, intelligent design has nothin' to do with God...we just want to be fair with ideas!" tactic is pure bullshit. Part of the right's genius in marketing nonsense to the public is to do it in baby steps. This is one of those baby steps. And since when-the-fuck have they ever cared about things like "fairness," anyway? PURE BULLSHIT. They have an agenda, and they'll make it happen no matter what it takes or how long it takes.

Gramsci wrote:

davesec wrote:

Gramsci wrote:
because i don't think the existance of a god can be proved either way.

What, so we just let people "make shit up" to fill in the gaps of human understanding of the universe? Sorry but that is just retarded.

You can't prove I don't have a translucent lion shaped spirit guide called Norman, but if I told you I did would you say, "well I guess we'll just have to take your word for it". Come on!

As for intelligence… well I’m sure there are plenty of stupid atheists, theism just maker stupid people stupider…

no, making shit up is stupid. like i wrote a few minutes ago, i think science does a wonderful job in proving how everything happened and i think the bible is garbage.

if you told me you have a translucent lion shaped spirit guide called Norman, i would say "you are stupid, you can't prove that". if you said 'there is an all knowing being that knows everything', i would say "you are stupid, you can't prove that". if you said 'god doesn't exist', i would say "you are stupid, you can't prove that".

davesec wrote:1. i don't think that's true, while a lot of people are pretty proactive about their religion there's a lot of people who are happy with their spirituality/religion and have never bothered me about it.

When these idealized, hippy versions of Christians are the ones running the government and spending my tax dollars, then we'll talk. Until then...

stewie wrote:Someone show me scientific proof that God created this planet, and I'll happily let it get taught to my kids. Until then, keep it in the religion lesson.

Trust me - I'm on your side. The problem is that I can't show you any scientific proof that God didn't create the universe. There's lots of scienctific data about the universe from t = 0 and forward, but I haven't seen much about t - 1. It's also impossible to determine whether or not the universe is a sort of chess set for some all-powerful entity (maybe God designed all the rules of physics which shape our world). I dont' really put much credence in this, but a lot of people (including a lot of scientists, Einstein chiefly among them) do.

And when I say expose kids to creationism, I'm not saying give them two nights' worth of Bible study, but explain the general theory, discuss its origins, give any scientific evidence in its favor (which should go pretty quickly) and then give the factual evidence against it (which should fill the rest of the period). I think a scientific discussion of creationism is a worthwhile use of an hour of time especially since this is a case where science and religion intersect. At least it would shut some people up - that their little theory doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny is their problem.

Dan