Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 221490 comments on the Best of New Orleans story from Jan 6, 2011, titled Evolution vs. Creation. In it, Best of New Orleans reports that:

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Best of New Orleans.

FREE SERVANT
#69856 Jan 4, 2013
Mat 27:32 and Mark 15:21 and Luke 23:26 tells us that a Cyrenian by the name of Simon followed Jesus and helped bear the cross. Cyrene was a Greek city near modern day Banghazi Libya on the Mediterranean Sea coast and men from that area may have been asscociated with the navy or marines who wore green and the tunica was common clohing or the Greek chiton which had a large waist cloth belt.
FREE SERVANT
#69857 Jan 4, 2013
JUST SAYIN
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69858 Jan 4, 2013
anonymous wrote:
Now you're being simple. Blacks and women are not being denied marriage nor do they have any interest in hitting on me. Blacks and women are what they are by genetics. What is the recognition and what is the religious interference that you talk about? It sounds rhetorical, not real.
Blacks and women aren't being denied marriage. Gays are. Religious interference comes from religious people dictating their religious beliefs as a basis for law. Churches have the right to deny anyone they like getting married, but the law should not. Gay people should still be allowed to legally get married by the state. And that is what should be recognised - equal rights.
anonymous wrote:
If gays want the government to dictate to churches, that's wrong. They can always make their own church. The recognition isn't morality, it's a legal prejudice. It's recognition with a money angle, as all politics is. I'm not lifting a finger to help them blockade my political agendas or harass me with legal vigilantism.
You don't have to do anything. As long as they are legally allowed to marry subject to the same legal benefits as everyone else.
anonymous wrote:
I suppose you haven't ever worked in government and seen how people abuse discrimination laws either. Social engineering is a sloppy, last-chance effort to prevent riots at best. At worst, it buries the problems until they blow up in everyone's face.
Discrimination by individuals or groups is NOT an argument against equal rights for all. People will break laws, that does not mean we should not have them. Just because people rob banks doesn't mean we should get rid of laws that make it illegal.
anonymous wrote:
I have a sister who ran on and on about how bad ol' business didn't hire minorities. We were at a scientist convention of hers and I asked her why no minorities (OK, mostly Blacks, and in Washington DC, 80% or so Black!) were in attendance. She blamed it on bad ol' business and wasn't even slightly interested in the fact that these were all university eggheads who probably never punched a clock off-campus in their entire lives!
The social problems are EVERYONE'S problems. You can't cherry pick the ones that fit your political pose and toss out the rest. Get rid of the tax breaks for married people and the inheritance breaks.
My only "political pose" here is equal rights. I'm not arguing for or against any other subjects or alleged problems, whatever they may be. I'm simply focussing on one subject because abortion, healthcare and world poverty aren't directly related to this one, though each may all be valid concerns for everyone.
anonymous wrote:
See if anyone cares about recognition when you've eliminated the prejudicial treatment that married people get in their favor.
Hey I'm all for geting rid of the tax breaks if they aren't fair. But that has no bearing on the fact that gays should be allowed to get married. And if they are they should get the same legal benefits and problems that go with it, whatever they may be.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69859 Jan 4, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, yes. Animals have diseases just like people do! Will you accept "recognition" of a mentally handicapped status?
Didn't think so. Politics!
Actually we do. That's why in our country they will get benefits. Don't know the particulars meself tho.
FREE SERVANT
#69860 Jan 4, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Blacks and women aren't being denied marriage. Gays are. Religious interference comes from religious people dictating their religious beliefs as a basis for law. Churches have the right to deny anyone they like getting married, but the law should not. Gay people should still be allowed to legally get married by the state. And that is what should be recognised - equal rights.
<quoted text>
You don't have to do anything. As long as they are legally allowed to marry subject to the same legal benefits as everyone else.
<quoted text>
Discrimination by individuals or groups is NOT an argument against equal rights for all. People will break laws, that does not mean we should not have them. Just because people rob banks doesn't mean we should get rid of laws that make it illegal.
<quoted text>
My only "political pose" here is equal rights. I'm not arguing for or against any other subjects or alleged problems, whatever they may be. I'm simply focussing on one subject because abortion, healthcare and world poverty aren't directly related to this one, though each may all be valid concerns for everyone.
<quoted text>
Hey I'm all for geting rid of the tax breaks if they aren't fair. But that has no bearing on the fact that gays should be allowed to get married. And if they are they should get the same legal benefits and problems that go with it, whatever they may be.
It is a felony to have more than one wife and people can be imprisoned for that, so what makes it a worse perversion?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69861 Jan 4, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
You were speculating on what is normal. I gave you a realistic answer. This isn't a "rights" issue because nobody has taken anyone's rights away.
If gays don't have the right to legally marry then they were never given the rights they should have been which were guaranteed by the Constitution.

Why not just cut the BS and just say you don't like gays therefore you don't think they should be allowed to get married? Or if you do think they should have that right then you can stop bothering to argue.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#69862 Jan 4, 2013
Knightmare wrote:
<quoted text>
God exists ...
Provide evidence that this assertion is correct, then you can make more based on it.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69863 Jan 4, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>It is a felony to have more than one wife and people can be imprisoned for that, so what makes it a worse perversion?
I got no problem with polygamy if that's what others are into, but I didn't make up the law. Marriages with multiple husbands and wives have been allowed in other countries. It's like the death penalty, legal in some states not in others. Why? Because people disagree over what's right.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#69864 Jan 4, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>It is a felony to have more than one wife and people can be imprisoned for that, so what makes it a worse perversion?
Actually, lots of people have more than one wife and husband, just no legal contracts with the others. The law is to have only one with the contract that is legal marriage, there is no law stating that they cannot have more than one "in spirit."
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69865 Jan 4, 2013
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
Your avatar just looky like a "trekky".
It's the shirt. It does look like Captain Kirk's old uniform.

And according to Mikey, Noah may have worn one just like it.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69866 Jan 4, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually if the Observer Effect is true, then the Observer would not exist within the confines of space time...so the Observer would not be subject to birth and death...but would be infinite in nature.
and if you understand anything about relativity, then you know that you cannot have a finite without a infinite...
...and so Edison's remark about a "infinite intelligence" would stand to reason.
Ah, good old philosophy! Let us know when you're talking science.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#69867 Jan 4, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
don't ya mean which God?...
that's usually the standard reply...you need to get some index cards to read off of, like the others...lol
Before "which" can be asked, one must first provide evidence that one exists. This has not been done, so "what" is more appropriate.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69868 Jan 4, 2013
Time and Space wrote:
And contrary to what most Anti-Christian Athiest think...not everyone needs the bible, or the bibles stories or morality, to confirm or deny the existance of 'other worldy beings'...
Nope, they don't need it at all. All they need is scientifically verifiable objective evidence.

So far the only evidence we have is that life exists on Earth.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69869 Jan 4, 2013
Makesure100 wrote:
<quoted text>
Where do you come from Freak? You make no sense. Perhaps in some corner of darkness you can communicate..........I don't understand you....thus, you are a Freak.
Your ignorance doth not make your baseless opinions valid.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69870 Jan 4, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
in fact, anything preceding the big bang would have to be within the confines of time...by the very nature that it preceded...(came before)...so time would have to exist for this scenario to happen...
But it does not have to be within the concepts of OUR time. In fact that claim may not even make sense. But it is possible that our universe was born from the death-throes of of a previous universe. Hence cause and effect (if valid) would not be violated.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69871 Jan 4, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
besides, isn't the Universe speeding up...which would negate the big crunch theory?
But not the Big Rip. That's the universe reaching a point stretching so far and so fast that the fabric of the universe rips itself apart, which also (may) cause another Big Bang.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69872 Jan 4, 2013
bohart wrote:
KK! glad to see you've re-emerged from the foul pit. The assertion that God dun it is opposite of your assertion that the goo dun it.
No it isn't. God is not limited by your petty imaginations.
bohart wrote:
Now your assertion complicates a lot, because with "goo dun it" you have to explain your goo, provide even more evidence to support the goo, and then explain why all the evidence does not support the goo dun it assertion....that's a lot of explaining.
Actually all the evidence we have thus far supports abiogenesis, even though it's only a hypothesis and not a theory. Of course we have been through it all with you a thousand times before.

However none of this has any bearing on the validity of evolution.
FREE SERVANT
#69873 Jan 4, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
It's the shirt. It does look like Captain Kirk's old uniform.
And according to Mikey, Noah may have worn one just like it.
NO,It looked gray when he was standing with his arms up in the air letting the bird fly out of the round wimdow.:)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69874 Jan 4, 2013
bohart wrote:
So mankind murders millions in wars, aborts the unborn , starves his fellow man to death for profit , rapes, steals, burns and it's Gods fault? Why?
Because he allegedly created it all. If only he didn't make that evil talking lizard...
bohart wrote:
because he doesn't intervene to stop man from doing what he wants?
Free will is an illusion under omnipotent omniscience.
bohart wrote:
And if he did intervene ,and put an end to all evil and violence and left man alone again ,he'd be doing the same evil again in less than a couple generations.
You mean god? Yes he would.
bohart wrote:
It is what we are that is the problem.
So you're saying your god is incapable of preventing us from being bad?

What a wuss.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#69875 Jan 4, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
<quoted text>
Would I take an interest in the lives of gnats? Seriously?
But I have no reason to believe such a higher intelligence exists so not a deist. Besides if a higher intelligence did create the universe I would define it not as God but as something that had evolved in a prior universe.
On the other hand evolution is not random. There is intelligent design. Those birds blown to remote islands did not evolve randomly but instead changed to fill particular niches... just as brown bears on the arctic ice sheet evolved into polar bears. Unlike some Darwinists I see nothing happenstance about it.
Natural selection is neither random nor intelligent. "Intelligence" is NOT the opposite of random.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 16 min Silverwing 218,951
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 1 hr Bittersweet Goodbyes 4,308
A Five Letter Word (Jan '12) 1 hr Bittersweet Goodbyes 2,675
News Serena to McEnroe: Leave me out of it 1 hr Rick Perry s Closet 2
A six word game (Dec '08) 2 hr Trouser Cough 21,067
What turns you on ? (Aug '11) 2 hr Bad Bex 2,745
BAN(N) the P0STER Above you !!! (Feb '14) 2 hr Brandiiiiiiii 5,807
What Turns You Off? 4 hr twowheelsforever 646
More from around the web