Originally posted by: Fausto
"Oh no, the judge ruled against us. He must hate God!!11one!!!"Originally posted by: TravisT
It is apparent how the judge believes. Am I the only Christian here that is not suprised by this?
You said it, I didn't.
Originally posted by: Fausto
"Oh no, the judge ruled against us. He must hate God!!11one!!!"Originally posted by: TravisT
It is apparent how the judge believes. Am I the only Christian here that is not suprised by this?
Yes you did, I just paraphrased.Originally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: Fausto
"Oh no, the judge ruled against us. He must hate God!!11one!!!"Originally posted by: TravisT
It is apparent how the judge believes. Am I the only Christian here that is not suprised by this?
You said it, I didn't.
Originally posted by: Fausto
Yes you did, I just paraphrased.Originally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: Fausto
"Oh no, the judge ruled against us. He must hate God!!11one!!!"Originally posted by: TravisT
It is apparent how the judge believes. Am I the only Christian here that is not suprised by this?
You said it, I didn't.
To paraphrase again: THE JUDGE WON, GET OVER IT.
Ah, I see. So he ruled against God and therefore must be liberal.Originally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: Fausto
Yes you did, I just paraphrased.Originally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: Fausto
"Oh no, the judge ruled against us. He must hate God!!11one!!!"Originally posted by: TravisT
It is apparent how the judge believes. Am I the only Christian here that is not suprised by this?
You said it, I didn't.
To paraphrase again: THE JUDGE WON, GET OVER IT.
That was not even what I was suggesting. Way to read my statement in the wrong manner. Sounds like you are the one that needs to get over it if you ask me. I was actually suggesting that the Judge likely believes in evolution and that I wasn't suprised that a liberal judge would rule in such a way. YOU were the one who suggested I was trying to force a stereotypical label on his spirtuality. Go back to your hole, thanks.
Are you sure that he's a Liberal and believes in evolution?Originally posted by: TravisT
I was actually suggesting that the Judge likely believes in evolution and that I wasn't suprised that a liberal judge would rule in such a way.
I find him moderately amusing. He's like this angry little Hate Bot programmed to post whenever the words "gay", "abortion", "religion", or "evolution" appear in a thread title.Originally posted by: BroeBo
Looking at TravisT's sig makes me wonder why anyone is even paying attention to his drivel.
Never said you did. Sounds like you are the one who is confused.Originally posted by: TravisT
I never once made a comment about spirituality
Originally posted by: SagaLore
This is rediculuous:
U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper ruled that labeling evolution a "theory" played on the popular definition of the word as a "hunch" and could confuse students.
Evolution is a theory. A very scientific and useful theory, which has a lot of supporting facts like natural selection and mutation, but still very much a theory. If it were a fact, it wouldn't be as flexible as it is. The theory changes and grows based on new evidences. That's how a theory works. The Judge is a moron.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Never said you did. Sounds like you are the one who is confused.Originally posted by: TravisT
I never once made a comment about spirituality
Originally posted by: JDub02
evolution is as much a part of religion as creationism.
atheism is a religion and its theory on the origins of the universe is evolution
christianity is a religion and its theory is creation
there is absolutely no (read ZERO) scientific evidence to support evolution. anyone trying to pass it off as fact has an agenda.
I believe in having an open mind about things and I think it should be taught along with the theory of Creation in the classroom.
and for the record ... THERE IS NO CONSTITUTIONAL SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. That is an opinion of a judge. There is a separation of state from church, but not church from state (i.e. the state can not establish an official religion).
/end P&N rant.
edit: and by "evolution", I mean macro, we came from goo type evolution, not micro in which a species will change over time aka survival of the fittest.
All then when you said "you guys" we should have known that you just meant Fausto. Got it:roll:Originally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Never said you did. Sounds like you are the one who is confused.Originally posted by: TravisT
I never once made a comment about spirituality
I was referring to Fausto's comment.
Originally posted by: BroeBo
Looking at TravisT's sig makes me wonder why anyone is even paying attention to his drivel.
Originally posted by: BroeBo
Guys don't you know that this is how it goes:
Belief in evolution = Liberal = Atheist = hates god/jesus = voted for Kerry = terrorist = going to hell
Originally posted by: JDub02
Would someone care to explain to me what makes creation any less valid than evolution?
Originally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: BroeBo
Guys don't you know that this is how it goes:
Belief in evolution = Liberal = Atheist = hates god/jesus = voted for Kerry = terrorist = going to hell
I don't necessarily believe one equals the other, I just happen to think that if you associate with any one of the seven, you're nuts.
Well you prove that believing in any of those aren't a prerequisiteOriginally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: BroeBo
Guys don't you know that this is how it goes:
Belief in evolution = Liberal = Atheist = hates god/jesus = voted for Kerry = terrorist = going to hell
I don't necessarily believe one equals the other, I just happen to think that if you associate with any one of the seven, you're nuts.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well you prove that believing in any of those aren't a prerequisiteOriginally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: BroeBo
Guys don't you know that this is how it goes:
Belief in evolution = Liberal = Atheist = hates god/jesus = voted for Kerry = terrorist = going to hell
I don't necessarily believe one equals the other, I just happen to think that if you associate with any one of the seven, you're nuts.
Originally posted by: JDub02
Would someone care to explain to me what makes creation any less valid than evolution?
I'm not arguing religious semantics. I'm saying some unnamed higher power creating us as opposed to billions of years of random chance turning mud into people.
Yeah, still doesn't nullify what I said.Originally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well you prove that believing in any of those aren't a prerequisiteOriginally posted by: TravisT
Originally posted by: BroeBo
Guys don't you know that this is how it goes:
Belief in evolution = Liberal = Atheist = hates god/jesus = voted for Kerry = terrorist = going to hell
I don't necessarily believe one equals the other, I just happen to think that if you associate with any one of the seven, you're nuts.
lol, I guess you totally overlooked the sarcasm in that post. Thats why I went with "nuts", rather than "idiot" or "stupid". I felt that was to strong for sarcasm.
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
pi = 3 is so much easier to teach, let's use it!Originally posted by: FoBoT
the school should be run the way the local parents want it to be run, not by a judge
education is a local matter for each community to decide