Now that Ive cooled off....

[Voice]

Thank you for saying word for word exactly what I said you'd say.

[KCAA]

Originally posted by Ryan H.


You LIED. Kerry never said during any of the three debates that we have lost six million jobs. Show me where he said that. The burden of proof is on you, since you made the claim. I would like to see where Kerry said we lost six million jobs.

And you only got the 2.7 million AFTER I put the figure into the thread, so no I will not acknowledge that you got jack shit right, because you didn't; I will, however, acknowledge that once you were called on your bullshit and proven wrong, you at least had the common sense to drop it.

Before i drop it(the thread itself), I want to state clearly.

We watched the debates in class. He said it two or three times. He emphasized it. Jeez. You obviously missed it or are too "ignorant" as you like to say to realize it. I'm not sure.

Originally posted by Ryan H.

Absolute ****ing bullshit.

If you're going to make dumbass ****ing lies like this, our conversation is over. It's bad enough you lied about unemployment, outsourcing, and everything else, and that your only argument seems to be we're a theocracy because your daddy says so, but to make dumbass, bald faced lies like this is just absolutely beneath contempt.

If our economy actually lost 6 million jobs, either net or gross, during Bush's presidency, we'd be in a depression. We've actually had a net gain during his administration, even after the recession and 9/11.

I can't ****ing stand liars.

I don't see 2.7 in there. There was another post before i posted 6million that talked about unemployment rate. No 2.7 million there. So don't give me this bullshit that you brought that figure here. Because I know for a fact I looked it up on factcheck.org before reposting and correcting my number. Please, for the love of god, admit that I am right here. If you can't admit that, please, I beg you point out where 2.7 came from in your posts. Because like you said above,

I can't stand ****ing liars.

[KCAA]

Originally posted by Voice


So go ahead and dismiss it, bring up aliens planning 9/11....do whatever you can to distract from my post. You're so high and mighty, that you didn't even TRY to comment on ANYTHING in that article at all. Did you even read it?

Aliens. I do think they helped build the pyramids :P

[svosen]

Originally posted by Voice
Not because of Science, because religion doesn't exist in the same realm of science, but because of their religious beliefs.

Please allow me to digress from the topics of this discussion to address a recurring comment in this thread:

I really do take exception to this notion that people who have faith (or "religion," as people insist on calling it) are incapable of scientific thought and reasoning. I have no source to allude to, but I do know of several Christian men who are indeed scientists (geologists, chemists, hydropaleontologits, etc.). I myself have degrees in Chemistry, environmental health, and water quality. I've taken many biology courses (microbiology, aquatic biology, macro/micro invertebrate biology, etc.). I even worked with polyaccrylamide gel electrophoresis to analyze DNA as part of my senior project. While I'm not a published scientist, I have a firm understanding of the concept of scientific thought. My own experience, and my knowledge of the existence of Christian scientists disproves your statements that science and "religion" are in different "realms."

It might alarm you to learn this, but it is BECAUSE OF my scientific thought that I am a Christian; it's not that I'm a Christian IN SPITE OF my scientific reasoning.

Let me show you some excerpts from a study bible I use frequently (it's the New International Version - NIV - Life Application Bible). The excerpts are discussing the very first verse of the Christian Bible: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

"The Bible does not discuss the subject of evolution. Rather, its worldview assumes God created the world. The Biblical view of creation is not in conflict with sciense; rather, it is in conflict with any worldview that starts without a creator.
Equally committed and sincere Christians have struggled with the subject of beginnings and come to differing conclusions. This, of course, is to be expected because the evidence is very old, and, due to the ravages of the ages, quite fragmented. Students of the Bible and of science should avoid polarizations and black/white thinking. Students of the Bible must be careful not to make the Bible say what it doesn't say, and students of science must not make science say what it doesn't say."

Further discussion of the same verse:

"Some scientists say that the number of stars in creation is equal to all the grains of all the sands on all the beaches of the world. Yet this complex sea of spinning stars functions with remarkable order and efficiency. To say that the universe 'just happened' or 'evolved' requires more faith than to believe that God is behind thes amazing statistics (added by sv: especially considering the scientific law of entropy, which states that all processes work increasingly toward disorder, not toward increased order)."

It is not my intention to start a debate about the creation of the universe here. It is only my intention to show everyone that science and Christian faith go very nicely together. It is the junk variety of science that doesn't favor Christianity. By that, I mean it's the people who seek to bend real science into something false in order to prove what they want to prove.
~~~~~~

He cannot be a true Catholic if he supports homosexual relationships.

Svosen can probably back me on this.

Gabe, this type of thing is so frustrating... It is always harmful to Christianity when its followers act with hypocrisy. But alas, ALL Christians are hypocrites. After all, we all know that we must strive to completely remove sin from our lives, but, as fallable humans, we are unable to do so this side of heaven.

My knee-jerk reaction was to agree with you, that this man could not possibly have been a "true" Catholic, given his stance on homosexuality (since the Bible is SO abundantly clear that it is a sin). However, here is what I really think: he may in fact be a true Catholic (Christian); it's just that he's at a different stage of his walk with Christ than others in the same faith.

It's true, the Bible says that homosexuality is an abomination before the Lord. Christ himself despises the ACTION of homosexuality (not the tendancy toward it, nor the people commiting the acts, just the action). However, none of us Christian believers is in fact like Christ while on this earth. Therefore, I think he could have been a "true" Catholic when he said that. As he grows in his faith, if he chooses to, he will hopefully change his stance.

Many of the people in history who were extremely useful to God's purposes had dubious backgrounds. Paul, the author of many New Testament books, and a huge figure in the early Christian chruch, actually pesued and killed Christians before becoming one himself. King David was guilty of adultery and murder, yet later on God referred to him as "a man after my own heart."

So you can see that a Christian's beliefs may change throughout his walk with the Lord.

~~~~~~~

Okay, sorry to sidetrack the thread so much.


(edit: bad formatting on the quotes)

[Voice]

By the way.....I never said what Ralph Whitehead was saying was fact, I simply stated that I liked what he said. I also said that his opinion on abortion, and alternative ways to control it, fall in line with my thinking.

[Voice]

Sabbas, I totally see where you are coming from with that, but creationism and evolution are two different worlds.

I never meant to imply that people of faith couldn't have scientific thought, or that people of science couldn't have faith.

I simply meant that the basic ideas of the two most commonly do not go hand in hand.

I'm talking about the extremes of the two. They don't exist in the same world....

I think it's possible that god was the creator, and is the controller of evolution.

[Ryan H.]

Originally posted by Voice
Thank you for saying word for word exactly what I said you'd say.

Voice, you don't seem to realize how ****ing stupid you're coming off. The fact that you 'knew' I'd point out the logical fallacy in your argument should have been indication number one that your argument was logically flawed.

So, you're welcome, I guess, for me pointing out once again why what you say should be mercilessly mocked for it's utter lack of intelligence.

[Ryan H.]

Originally posted by Voice
Sabbas, I totally see where you are coming from with that, but creationism and evolution are two different worlds.

I never meant to imply that people of faith couldn't have scientific thought, or that people of science couldn't have faith.

I simply meant that the basic ideas of the two most commonly do not go hand in hand.

I'm talking about the extremes of the two. They don't exist in the same world....

I think it's possible that god was the creator, and is the controller of evolution.

First of all, Svosen said that, not Sabbas. Are you even paying attention?

Your hasty and illogical generalizations about people of faith is not only insulting, it's stupid. First you try to claim that the only reason people oppose abortion is because of religion. You get proved wrong, and now you're spouting some bullshit about religion and science being two mutually exclusive entities.

Religion and science often coexist and share principles. That you're too ****ing dense to get that, and even dense enough to make ignorant statements excluding religion from scientific thought, makes me wonder why any of us are wasting time with you.

Lastly, you first say "creationism and evolution are two completely different worlds" and then say "I believe it's possible that god was the creator and that he controls evolution"......

How often can one person contradict themselves in one ****ing thread?

And please tell me that you are aware of the fact that creationism allows for a 'creator' that does not fit biblical description, right? That many scientists assign credibility to creationist theory based solely on scientific data that indicates the need for a creator, whether it be God or something else... nah, you're probably, once again, ****ing clueless.

[KCAA]

Ryan did you read my post above ^^ the one regarding 6million?

[Voice]

You're missing the point Ryan.

I'm pointing out YOUR willful ignorance of any opinion that differs from yours.

I'm pointing out your predictability.

Let's see what Ryan (god of all things political) has to say about a few of these things. BRB.

Ok, I said the EXTREMES of the two.....I.E The scientific minds who absolutely disagree with their being a creator, god.....etc. And then the people of faith, who absolutely deny scientific reasoning and evolution.

I myself, not being an extremist in either faction, can be of the opinion that god is the reason for evolution.