NumberUnknown, thanks for your thorough (and quick) reply. Keep posting.

I disagree with you. Religion can be flexible enough to accommodate scientific discovery. It hasn't always been, but it has always been able to.

Also, I don't think creationism and evolution necesarily have to oppose each other. Evolution is clearly the mechanism, but there is always room for faith to define the driving force. God could be pulling the strings or god could have set everything in motion to achieve a desired end result.

I think it is unfortunate that religious leaders have not found room to accommodate scientific thought, but it is equally unfortunate that people are quick to suggest that science discredits religious thought.

I really think it would be better for everyone if secularist and religious thought could find room to coexists. There is no need for conflict.

Just like the Catholics accomodated Galileo.

I never said they did. Evolutionary theory does negate a direct visible force of God guiding evolution of beings.

God "could be", where did you come up with that? Why are you trying so hard to adhere to fantasy?

Well, because it does. There was no Flood, there was no Exodus, there was no Creation, etc etc.

How can secular thought which rejects fantasy coexist with religious thought which is totalitarian in nature?

Big difference between Christianity and Islam. Christianity's founder never advocated Jihad. What Roman Catholicism did in the name of Jesus was antithetical to the teachings of Jesus. The Roman Catholic church outlawed the reading of the Bible and killed an untold number of Christians who would not bow down to her.


No it hasn't. The existence of God is outside the realm of testable science.


The USA was founded by monotheists and is not totalitarian. Christianity does not teach totalitarianism.

I suppose it can't if you represent secular thought. I like to believe that people who share my beliefs could represent secular thought.

Using that logic, atheists have a long history of murder and killing as well and it's safe to say nothing they have done outweighs the good. See Pol Pot, Lenin, Stalin, etc. You could paint liberals with the same brush (eco terrorism, pro drug, anti-crime punishment, and a general lack of values). It would be ignorant, but I could do it just as you did. Christians have far outweighed the good versus the bad in modern society (Boy Scouts, Red Cross, YMCA, Catholic Charities, etc etc) are just a few organizations that have done far more good than any atheist based organization has done.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

The problem with the "Islam is evil" meme is that the most atavistic expressions of Islam exist in ... gasp... the most primitive tribal societies. There are millions of Western Muslims, for instance, that neither desire medieval sharia law nor feel compelled to wage war against the universe.

Islam had a more militant origin than Christianity, but in the scheme of things it can be used and abused no more or less easily. Both Christianity and Islam have been interpreted in bloody and peaceful ways through the centuries.

While I wholeheartedly support condemning such obvious miscarriages of justice, I would recommend condemning Pakistan's backward tribal culture and atavistic brand of Islam rather than Islam as a whole.

__________________
Man up.

To amend my previous statement, I did not mean to imply that we can't use science to observe the fingerprint of God, such as observing and studying the phenomena of irreducible complexity. However if a scientist was able to successfully mutate a fruit-fly in the laboratory into another species (which they have tried and failed to do), this would in no way "discredit" the existence of God.

Islamic terrorists are only able to play Islam because they have us to focus on as an infidel threat. They're also only able to play Islam because we have created them in many cases. We made Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein into what they later became.

The U.S. has supported repressive regimes like the Shah of Iran and the Saudis.

If we will leave the region and stop giving any of the governments over there money, we will no longer be a terrorist target.

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

Not according to them. Go to http://www.godhatesfags.com operated by the Westboro Baptist Church and you'll find they provide reasoning from the Bible to support hatred. I even had an email correspondence with a Westboran before they banned me for asking questions.

Wasn't just Catholicism. On a smaller scale, Lutheranism implemented its own Germanic Inquisitions. The Church in Russia and Byzantium persecuted people. Even the Puritans were (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s.

Of course it is. So are pink invisible dragons which live in my garage. They're outside the realm of testable science. Since I have faith they exist, they obviously exist. It's funny how people cling to fantasy and rejection of reality.

Well if you consider Freemasonry a monotheistic religion, and some of the Founding Fathers' atheism to be monotheistic, you must be right!

Oh really? Don't even get me started. Cult of personality, punishment of thoughtcrime, intolerance for other ideologies, intolerance for dissent, an authoritarian God, obliteration of the ego, rejection of science and fact and reality in favor of fantasy and mythology and fairy-tales. Shall I continue?