Stop Forcing Their Religion…

[anynameyouwish]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

 

[anynameyouwish]

13. “…long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.

But this is a falsehood, and its falsity is ever more obvious in today’s culture wars, which are increasingly divided according to whether one believes in a deity — and, by extension, an objective standard outside oneself — or not.

The culture war is in fact a religious war between relativism and orthodoxy, between the belief that truth is subjective and the belief that truth is objective, knowable, independent of one’s opinions about it, and merits reverence.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'





What happens when one doesn’t toe the transgender line?


“Actress shares photo of vagina cupcakes to ‘honor’ International Women’s Day. Then she’s forced to apologize. You already know why.

As a result, Messing faced heavy backlash on social media because she didn't include transgender women without a vagina in her tribute to women.” Actress shares photo of vagina cupcakes to ‘honor’ International Women’s Day. Then she’s forced to apologize. You already know why.




The secularist mafia will destroy you if you don't accept their indoctrination.

says the religious lunatic who wants to destroy everyone who doesn't agree with her lunacies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

Now.....why would you be demanding that no one read the posts?

Is this why?

Everything I post is linked, sourced, and documented.


I'm never wrong.

 

[PoliticalChic]

13. “…long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.

But this is a falsehood, and its falsity is ever more obvious in today’s culture wars, which are increasingly divided according to whether one believes in a deity — and, by extension, an objective standard outside oneself — or not.

The culture war is in fact a religious war between relativism and orthodoxy, between the belief that truth is subjective and the belief that truth is objective, knowable, independent of one’s opinions about it, and merits reverence.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'





What happens when one doesn’t toe the transgender line?


“Actress shares photo of vagina cupcakes to ‘honor’ International Women’s Day. Then she’s forced to apologize. You already know why.

As a result, Messing faced heavy backlash on social media because she didn't include transgender women without a vagina in her tribute to women.” Actress shares photo of vagina cupcakes to ‘honor’ International Women’s Day. Then she’s forced to apologize. You already know why.




The secularist mafia will destroy you if you don't accept their indoctrination.

says the religious lunatic who wants to destroy everyone who doesn't agree with her lunacies.

Destroy you????

No.....I love when you post.....you prove everything I write about how stupid Leftists are.


Write soon, y'hear.

 

[BlindBoo]

Glad you are looking into the sham called 'Darwinian theory.'

Evolution Theory. What did Darwin know about the Cambrian Era?

The sudden change of the Cambrian Era was, in relative terms, not too sudden for the process of evolution. The changes during the Cambrian Era did not occur over decades, centuries, or even thousands of years; they occurred over millions of years—plenty of time for evolutionary change. However, for millions of years beforehand, body plans of animals had remained relatively constant. Not until this time period did a significant change occur. The remaining questions are: What triggered the Cambrian Explosion? And why did so much change occur at this time? Several different theories address the origin of the Cambrian Explosion, proposing that dramatic environmental changes must have opened up new niches for natural selection to operate upon.....

While the causes of the Cambrian Explosion remain a topic of open and exciting debate, the continued fossil discoveries from the Cambrian and Precambrian Eras are bringing more clarity to the evolutionary puzzle. These fossils provide valuable insight, particularly for envisioning the common ancestors of diverse groups. For instance, both vertebrates (fish) and echinoderms (sea urchins, starfish) are part of the group called deuterostomes. Without fossil evidence, it is hard to envision what a common ancestor would look like for these very different creatures. The Cambrian fossils are filling in the picture.14"

Does the Cambrian Explosion pose a challenge to evolution? - Common-questions

 

[anynameyouwish]

….down American’s throats.


Time and again we find some government school grad railing against religious folks ‘ramming their religion down my throat,’ or ‘imposing your religious beliefs blah blah blah.’

“You Bible thumpers ARE trying to ram your superstitions down our throats.” Does America Need Be Saved From Theocracy?

And demands that opposing thought be shut down:

"Hatred is not just an "opinion." It is an attempt to hurt others.
These venues have no obligation to give this fraud a forum. Judging from the posted link, the city councils concluded that his speech would offend their community values."
Wales has banned parents from stopping their children learning about sex, religion and LGBT people



Careful consideration of this subject, and so very many more, prove rule #2:
To know what the Left is guilty of, just watch what they blame the other side of doing.

And nowhere is that more clear than in demanding others adhere to their beliefs.




1.”Barr: The Real People Trying To ‘Impose Their Values’ On Others Are ‘Militant Secularists’

It has been long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.

2. …religion is being driven out of the marketplace of ideas and there’s a organized militant secular effort to drive religion out of our lives” “To me the problem today is not that religious people are trying to impose their views on nonreligious people, it’s the opposite — it’s that militant secularists are trying to impose their values on religious people and they’re not accommodating the freedom of religion of people of faith.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'

as long as we still have public schools that we all pay for then NO RELIGION should be allowed to proselytize.

should anyone wish to pray on their own time then they HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO SO

should anyone choose to ignore everything the teacher/instructor is talking about and spend all of their time QUIETLY praying then they HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO SO

The fact that you WANT TO BRAINWASH MY KIDS with YOUR RELIGION kinda pisses me off........

 

[Lysistrata]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

 

[anynameyouwish]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

"but she did go hysterical yesterday"

she does that EVERY day

 

[PoliticalChic]

Glad you are looking into the sham called 'Darwinian theory.'

Evolution Theory. What did Darwin know about the Cambrian Era?

The sudden change of the Cambrian Era was, in relative terms, not too sudden for the process of evolution. The changes during the Cambrian Era did not occur over decades, centuries, or even thousands of years; they occurred over millions of years—plenty of time for evolutionary change. However, for millions of years beforehand, body plans of animals had remained relatively constant. Not until this time period did a significant change occur. The remaining questions are: What triggered the Cambrian Explosion? And why did so much change occur at this time? Several different theories address the origin of the Cambrian Explosion, proposing that dramatic environmental changes must have opened up new niches for natural selection to operate upon.....

While the causes of the Cambrian Explosion remain a topic of open and exciting debate, the continued fossil discoveries from the Cambrian and Precambrian Eras are bringing more clarity to the evolutionary puzzle. These fossils provide valuable insight, particularly for envisioning the common ancestors of diverse groups. For instance, both vertebrates (fish) and echinoderms (sea urchins, starfish) are part of the group called deuterostomes. Without fossil evidence, it is hard to envision what a common ancestor would look like for these very different creatures. The Cambrian fossils are filling in the picture.14"

Does the Cambrian Explosion pose a challenge to evolution? - Common-questions

".... remain a topic of open and exciting debate...."


Time to teach you a new word: Spin.

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.





You've just fallen for the secularist's spin.


The Final Nail in Darwinism's Coffin

1. . "THE ABRUPT manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations, has been urged by several palæontologists—for instance, by Agassiz, Pictet, and Sedgwick—as a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species. If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution through natural selection."
Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.302

a. So Charles Darwin named the Litmus Test for his theory: see if new species arise gradually, or spontaneously. If the former, he's a winner....but if the latter....well...

2. The discovery of the Burgess Shale deposits pretty much nailed it. The significance of the Burgess Shale discoveries is that the many new body plans show disparity, major differences that separate phyla, classes and orders ....and careful study of earlier fossils did not reveal any evolutionary trail!

 

[PoliticalChic]

….down American’s throats.


Time and again we find some government school grad railing against religious folks ‘ramming their religion down my throat,’ or ‘imposing your religious beliefs blah blah blah.’

“You Bible thumpers ARE trying to ram your superstitions down our throats.” Does America Need Be Saved From Theocracy?

And demands that opposing thought be shut down:

"Hatred is not just an "opinion." It is an attempt to hurt others.
These venues have no obligation to give this fraud a forum. Judging from the posted link, the city councils concluded that his speech would offend their community values."
Wales has banned parents from stopping their children learning about sex, religion and LGBT people



Careful consideration of this subject, and so very many more, prove rule #2:
To know what the Left is guilty of, just watch what they blame the other side of doing.

And nowhere is that more clear than in demanding others adhere to their beliefs.




1.”Barr: The Real People Trying To ‘Impose Their Values’ On Others Are ‘Militant Secularists’

It has been long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.

2. …religion is being driven out of the marketplace of ideas and there’s a organized militant secular effort to drive religion out of our lives” “To me the problem today is not that religious people are trying to impose their views on nonreligious people, it’s the opposite — it’s that militant secularists are trying to impose their values on religious people and they’re not accommodating the freedom of religion of people of faith.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'

as long as we still have public schools that we all pay for then NO RELIGION should be allowed to proselytize.

should anyone wish to pray on their own time then they HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO SO

should anyone choose to ignore everything the teacher/instructor is talking about and spend all of their time QUIETLY praying then they HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO SO

The fact that you WANT TO BRAINWASH MY KIDS with YOUR RELIGION kinda pisses me off........

No, you dunce......religion is exactly what you were taught in government school: the religion of secularism.


You prove my thesis.


1.”Barr: The Real People Trying To ‘Impose Their Values’ On Others Are ‘Militant Secularists’

It has been long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.

2. …religion is being driven out of the marketplace of ideas and there’s a organized militant secular effort to drive religion out of our lives” “To me the problem today is not that religious people are trying to impose their views on nonreligious people, it’s the opposite — it’s that militant secularists are trying to impose their values on religious people and they’re not accommodating the freedom of religion of people of faith.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

1.”Barr: The Real People Trying To ‘Impose Their Values’ On Others Are ‘Militant Secularists’

It has been long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.

2. …religion is being driven out of the marketplace of ideas and there’s a organized militant secular effort to drive religion out of our lives” “To me the problem today is not that religious people are trying to impose their views on nonreligious people, it’s the opposite — it’s that militant secularists are trying to impose their values on religious people and they’re not accommodating the freedom of religion of people of faith.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

You wrote this lie yesterday, when I pointed out that your sort deprived a preacher of auditoriums that had agreed to let him speak....

I asked you for any examples of conservatives doing what you support, suppressing free speech.....as of yet, you haven't provided any.



"People who refer to themselves as "conservatives" demand lock-step conformity on every subject. One cannot speak of being pro-choice or on behalf of equality of the races, sexes, religions, or sexual orientations without being subjected to a barrage of name-calling and obscenity.

Anyway, this discussion does not involve crime of any sort. This guy can speak as long as he can find a venue. Piccadilly Circus maybe?

So what if my views are moderate-to-liberal? It depends on the issue. Am I committing a "thought crime"?"


Are you ready to admit you're a Fascist?

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

No

"but she did go hysterical yesterday"

she does that EVERY day

Any examples?

No?

Not any?


I love when you post.

 

[BlindBoo]

Glad you are looking into the sham called 'Darwinian theory.'

Evolution Theory. What did Darwin know about the Cambrian Era?

The sudden change of the Cambrian Era was, in relative terms, not too sudden for the process of evolution. The changes during the Cambrian Era did not occur over decades, centuries, or even thousands of years; they occurred over millions of years—plenty of time for evolutionary change. However, for millions of years beforehand, body plans of animals had remained relatively constant. Not until this time period did a significant change occur. The remaining questions are: What triggered the Cambrian Explosion? And why did so much change occur at this time? Several different theories address the origin of the Cambrian Explosion, proposing that dramatic environmental changes must have opened up new niches for natural selection to operate upon.....

While the causes of the Cambrian Explosion remain a topic of open and exciting debate, the continued fossil discoveries from the Cambrian and Precambrian Eras are bringing more clarity to the evolutionary puzzle. These fossils provide valuable insight, particularly for envisioning the common ancestors of diverse groups. For instance, both vertebrates (fish) and echinoderms (sea urchins, starfish) are part of the group called deuterostomes. Without fossil evidence, it is hard to envision what a common ancestor would look like for these very different creatures. The Cambrian fossils are filling in the picture.14"

Does the Cambrian Explosion pose a challenge to evolution? - Common-questions

".... remain a topic of open and exciting debate...."


Time to teach you a new word: Spin.

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.





You've just fallen for the secularist's spin.


The Final Nail in Darwinism's Coffin

1. . "THE ABRUPT manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations, has been urged by several palæontologists—for instance, by Agassiz, Pictet, and Sedgwick—as a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species. If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution through natural selection."
Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.302

a. So Charles Darwin named the Litmus Test for his theory: see if new species arise gradually, or spontaneously. If the former, he's a winner....but if the latter....well...

2. The discovery of the Burgess Shale deposits pretty much nailed it. The significance of the Burgess Shale discoveries is that the many new body plans show disparity, major differences that separate phyla, classes and orders ....and careful study of earlier fossils did not reveal any evolutionary trail!

All it proves is Darwin was wrong. Evolutionary changes appear to have had several periods of rapid diversification rather than a straight line of changes that eventually led to the organisms on earth today. But Darwin didn't have the fossil records to study either.

 

[22lcidw]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

You spout the gaia theory of the living breathing earth and then through documents like the Bible deball the natural instincts of men. The result is the Asians with their men are eating our lunch in the race for supremacy. We have a large head start but they are closing.

 

[Lysistrata]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

You spout the gaia theory of the living breathing earth and then through documents like the Bible deball the natural instincts of men. The result is the Asians with their men are eating our lunch in the race for supremacy. We have a large head start but they are closing.

Well, I do know some people who believe in Gaia. It's a religious belief and they are entitled to it. Otherwise, your post is just plain weird. It's not even remotely connected to anything I wrote. The "deball" thing is particularly strange. It was PoliticalChic who wrote that the UK had banned Christianity, not me.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Glad you are looking into the sham called 'Darwinian theory.'

Evolution Theory. What did Darwin know about the Cambrian Era?

The sudden change of the Cambrian Era was, in relative terms, not too sudden for the process of evolution. The changes during the Cambrian Era did not occur over decades, centuries, or even thousands of years; they occurred over millions of years—plenty of time for evolutionary change. However, for millions of years beforehand, body plans of animals had remained relatively constant. Not until this time period did a significant change occur. The remaining questions are: What triggered the Cambrian Explosion? And why did so much change occur at this time? Several different theories address the origin of the Cambrian Explosion, proposing that dramatic environmental changes must have opened up new niches for natural selection to operate upon.....

While the causes of the Cambrian Explosion remain a topic of open and exciting debate, the continued fossil discoveries from the Cambrian and Precambrian Eras are bringing more clarity to the evolutionary puzzle. These fossils provide valuable insight, particularly for envisioning the common ancestors of diverse groups. For instance, both vertebrates (fish) and echinoderms (sea urchins, starfish) are part of the group called deuterostomes. Without fossil evidence, it is hard to envision what a common ancestor would look like for these very different creatures. The Cambrian fossils are filling in the picture.14"

Does the Cambrian Explosion pose a challenge to evolution? - Common-questions

".... remain a topic of open and exciting debate...."


Time to teach you a new word: Spin.

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.





You've just fallen for the secularist's spin.


The Final Nail in Darwinism's Coffin

1. . "THE ABRUPT manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations, has been urged by several palæontologists—for instance, by Agassiz, Pictet, and Sedgwick—as a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species. If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution through natural selection."
Darwin, "On The Origin of Species," p.302

a. So Charles Darwin named the Litmus Test for his theory: see if new species arise gradually, or spontaneously. If the former, he's a winner....but if the latter....well...

2. The discovery of the Burgess Shale deposits pretty much nailed it. The significance of the Burgess Shale discoveries is that the many new body plans show disparity, major differences that separate phyla, classes and orders ....and careful study of earlier fossils did not reveal any evolutionary trail!

All it proves is Darwin was wrong. Evolutionary changes appear to have had several periods of rapid diversification rather than a straight line of changes that eventually led to the organisms on earth today. But Darwin didn't have the fossil records to study either.

"All it proves is Darwin was wrong."


Now read that verrrrrrrrry slowly......and answer why it is taught in secular government school as thought his thesis is fact.



. The science establishment continues to stone-wall the public, "There are no weaknesses in [Darwin's] theory of evolution."

This was the testimony of Eugenie Scott to the Texas State Board of Education in January when the Board was debating new state science curriculum standards.Dr. Scott is Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), ..." Stutz, T.Texas education board debates teaching of evolution. Dallas Morning News,January 21, 2009....


a. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer produced a binder of one hundred peer-reviewed scientific articles in which biologists described significant problems with the theory.
Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt."


. Eugenie C. Scott is a physical anthropologist, and executive director of the National Center for Science Education, Inc: ““If scientists do not oppose anti-evolutionism,it will reach more people with the mistaken idea that evolution is scientifically weak.”
EBSCOhost

“Avoid Debates. If your local campus Christian fellowship asks you to ‘defend evolution,’ please decline...you probably will get beaten.”
Scott, Eugenie C., "Monkey Business," The Sciences (January/February 1996), pp. 20-25.


Scott’s understanding of “opposition” had nothing to do with reasoned discussion. It had nothing to do with reason at all. Discussing the issue was out of the question.

This advice from the head of the National Center for Science Education, Inc..."organization whose stated mission is to educate the press and the public on the scientific and educational aspects of controversies surrounding the teaching ofevolution and climate change, and to provide information and resources to schools, parents, and other citizens working to keep those topics in public school science education."
National Center for Science Education - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. “It is quite simply a lie to say that atheism is not a religious belief. It cannot be empirically documented that there is no God.

My atheism or agnosticism is not a religion. To my mind, it is obvious and empirically documented that there is no convincing evidence FOR a God or any other supernatural phenomenon.

she's insane.

she spends HOURS writing lies, half truths, misrepresentations, false accusations.....She is really good at VOLUMINOUS CONTENT of nonsense and BS.


Rational people probably shouldn't waste any time arguing with the insane.

When she writes about "religion," she only means Christianity, and then only her brand of it. She never mentions what her brand is, but she did go hysterical yesterday when some British venues declined to host frankie graham, and she titled her thread "Christianity BANNED in the UK," which I don't think either the queen or the Archbishop of Canterbury or parliament would ever allow to happen. She just has a weird hobby.

You spout the gaia theory of the living breathing earth and then through documents like the Bible deball the natural instincts of men. The result is the Asians with their men are eating our lunch in the race for supremacy. We have a large head start but they are closing.

Well, I do know some people who believe in Gaia. It's a religious belief and they are entitled to it. Otherwise, your post is just plain weird. It's not even remotely connected to anything I wrote. The "deball" thing is particularly strange. It was PoliticalChic who wrote that the UK had banned Christianity, not me.

Actually, it was Caldron Pool....

"Christianity BANNED in the United Kingdom"
Christianity BANNED in the United Kingdom · Caldron Pool




Now....are you ready to retract your lie about conservatives, and admit that it is you Fascists who are in favor of suppressing speech that doesn't conform to your views?

You wrote this lie yesterday, when I pointed out that your sort deprived a preacher of auditoriums that had agreed to let him speak....

I asked you for any examples of conservatives doing what you support, suppressing free speech.....as of yet, you haven't provided any.



"People who refer to themselves as "conservatives" demand lock-step conformity on every subject. One cannot speak of being pro-choice or on behalf of equality of the races, sexes, religions, or sexual orientations without being subjected to a barrage of name-calling and obscenity.

Anyway, this discussion does not involve crime of any sort. This guy can speak as long as he can find a venue. Piccadilly Circus maybe?

So what if my views are moderate-to-liberal? It depends on the issue. Am I committing a "thought crime"?"Wales has banned parents from stopping their children learning about sex, religion and LGBT people


Are you ready to admit you're a Fascist?

 

[PoliticalChic]

14. “ ”Barr: The Real People Trying To ‘Impose Their Values’ On Others Are ‘Militant Secularists’

It has been long convenient for secularists to insist that it is possible for government to be neutral about religion by imposing their religion on everyone.
…religion is being driven out of the marketplace of ideas and there’s a organized militant secular effort to drive religion out of our lives” “To me the problem today is not that religious people are trying to impose their views on nonreligious people, it’s the opposite — it’s that militant secularists are trying to impose their values on religious people and they’re not accommodating the freedom of religion of people of faith.”
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'




[A.G.] Barr is just a representative of the half of America that believes in natural rights, in a written Constitution that restrains the government, and a God whose universe is explicable, orderly, and undergirds the whole shebang.


Those who embrace a “living Constitution,” on the contrary, despise external rules, order, and anything else that might work to limit their passions, which they sometimes style politics. These are the two polar opposite metaphysical positions that drive our culture clash.


Far worse than the rule of law is the rule of the powerful over the weak. Far worse than the law of God are the so-called laws of men. On one side is freedom. On the other is totalitarianism. It is no irony that the real totalitarians project the label their position deserves onto opponents as a smear.” Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'



Far worse than the law of God are the so-called laws of men. On one side is freedom. On the other is totalitarianism.

Yup.....those militant secularists who silence opposing voices.

 

[alang1216]

Actually.....totally accurate, point for point.
Now...about the origin of the universe.....and the fact that modern science now accepts the very same order of events as Genesis.....

1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Not totally accurate. In Genesis God created the Earth before he made the Big Bang. Science does not agree.