I was just given two AiG Newletters.
|
|
|
15-03-2012, 04:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
NEW AND IMPROVED! Twice the anger, Half the space! |
||||
15-03-2012, 04:14 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
Hmm, can you include the picture?
Maybe just a crappy snapshot from your phone? |
||||
15-03-2012, 04:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
(15-03-2012 04:14 PM)kineo Wrote: Hmm, can you include the picture? This is the creation theme park they are designing. ![]() “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.” -Mark Twain |
||||
![]() |
15-03-2012, 04:27 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
(15-03-2012 04:25 PM)germanyt Wrote:(15-03-2012 04:14 PM)kineo Wrote: Hmm, can you include the picture? Will the park have a flooding feature that will kill all the sinners? Occasional TTA returner then leaverer. |
||||
![]() |
15-03-2012, 04:28 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
lulz- a theme park too, I should have known! So they're building the entire thing on donations?! How much are they charging for admission and how much are the "investors" going to get back? Haha, just kidding, I know donators don't get their money back.
|
||||
15-03-2012, 07:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
Now I'm not making threats here but.....It WILL burn.
You see? I didn't make a threat.............................I made a promise. That's different. NEW AND IMPROVED! Twice the anger, Half the space! |
||||
16-03-2012, 06:48 PM
(This post was last modified: 16-03-2012 07:02 PM by Starcrash.)
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
(09-03-2012 10:57 AM)kingschosen Wrote: Skunks and the Smell Test! So an Argument from Incredulity, followed by an Argument from Ignorance (the main problem with almost all AiG arguments). Although I'm guessing it isn't real ignorance, as some biologist or another has probably studied why these traits evolved... but AiG simply won't accept the biologist's answer. I have to admit that I don't personally know about the evolution of skunks, but... so much to read, and so little time. (09-03-2012 11:13 AM)kingschosen Wrote: Evolution and Abortion Funny... I almost agree with Ken Ham on this one. Many of us atheists would argue that abortion of babies in the first trimester is okay because we see them as underdeveloped, just cells or clusters of cells --- and it's true, we don't place a high value on those clusters of cells. We don't necessarily define them as "animals", but we do define them as life forms that can't feel pain and don't understand death, so we don't have a big problem with women aborting them. His argument just doesn't work in practice. For example, I know that Dr. William Lane Craig believes in evolution but he is pro-life. I suspect this is also true of Kingschosen. So Ken Ham is just making an assumption. I could make the argument that a belief in evolution would result in disbelief in the bible, but I'd be wrong for the same exact reason --- which is why I don't make such an argument. My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan. |
||||
17-03-2012, 05:31 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
While the first article sounds like it's just filler, the second article is pretty much spot on. If evolution is true, then ascribing the concept of right or wrong to abortion is absurd. I think the point being made (maybe not so clearly) is that in an evolutionary paradigm, abortion fits perfectly well. It's in no way hypocritical. An evolutionist is likely to say "so what". A creationist is likely to say "look where this leads" - infanticide, eugenics, school shootings, genocide, etc. It's not to say that atheism or evolution is the root cause of those things, it's just to say that in an atheistic, evolutionary perspective, none of those things is really wrong.
|
||||
![]() |
17-03-2012, 08:34 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
(17-03-2012 05:31 AM)SixForty Wrote: While the first article sounds like it's just filler, the second article is pretty much spot on. If evolution is true, then ascribing the concept of right or wrong to abortion is absurd. I think the point being made (maybe not so clearly) is that in an evolutionary paradigm, abortion fits perfectly well. It's in no way hypocritical. An evolutionist is likely to say "so what". A creationist is likely to say "look where this leads" - infanticide, eugenics, school shootings, genocide, etc. It's not to say that atheism or evolution is the root cause of those things, it's just to say that in an atheistic, evolutionary perspective, none of those things is really wrong. I know, I know... I feel the same way. But it's not that his correlation doesn't demonstrate causation... the correlation isn't even there. A belief in evolution and a belief in the sacredness of fetal life is not mutually exclusive. My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan. |
||||
17-03-2012, 03:04 PM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: I was just given two AiG Newletters.
(17-03-2012 05:31 AM)SixForty Wrote: While the first article sounds like it's just filler, the second article is pretty much spot on. If evolution is true, then ascribing the concept of right or wrong to abortion is absurd. I think the point being made (maybe not so clearly) is that in an evolutionary paradigm, abortion fits perfectly well. It's in no way hypocritical. An evolutionist is likely to say "so what". A creationist is likely to say "look where this leads" - infanticide, eugenics, school shootings, genocide, etc. It's not to say that atheism or evolution is the root cause of those things, it's just to say that in an atheistic, evolutionary perspective, none of those things is really wrong. Darwin was the one who really promoted the "survival of the fittest" (AKA Natural Selection) concept, and the man tried to be the humblest and kindest person he could possibly be. The ridiculous belief, "survival of the fittest, therefore you lack empathy," is as true the argument, "you are related to the ape, therefore you will act like one". There is no correlation. One can believe in the core concept of Evolution, and still maintain morality and empathy, since those feelings are apart of Humanity's psychological evolution (empathy is apart of other animal's as well). Occasional TTA returner then leaverer. |
||||
![]() |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)