modern education (christian replies only... no atheists)

I find it highly amusing that weightlifting and fencing are banned (noone ever gets seriously hurt or killed doing this) but American football, which kills or cabbages kids EVERY YEAR is tolerated.

 

Because it was your forefathers who decided separation of church and state would be best for the US. Right?

Because everyone who plays football is a Jesus Freak.

I guess I missed the 'Learn to fuck and masturbate' class my school had to offer....pity.

I got mine with the 'Fucking and masturbating and you....The how-to's' pamphlet my principle handed out when I was in 2nd grade.

IT'S CALLED SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, YOU 'TARD.
Around here in the 'Fuck and Masturbate' schools of Kentucky, test scores are rising. We neither learn about Evolution or Prayer. We're just pimps. *Pops Collar*

Live and let die, live and let die.

 

Nah....no one EVER gets hurt in weightlifting.

 

same thing with alcohol.

 

That picture was doctor . nice job it almost looks real.

 

Firstly, my congratulations to "pagan" Molly the Hippy (check out her profile) for starting a discussion that lasted 7 pages.

That being said...
I think it's better for children to know about sex and masturbation than to experiment with sex and end up with not-so-nice consquences.

I also think it's good that they hand out condoms at school. I'm sure many young people risk getting pregnant because they're too embarassed/lazy to buy condoms. If they're at hand, it may encourage them to have sex, but it may also encourage the ones already having sex to be safe. If they "deal with the consequences" of not using condoms, we'll end up with a world full of more single teenage parents and children who deserve better. That's not to say that all single teenage parents are hopeless, because there must be some who make good guardians for their children.

Insisting that atheists don't respond is narrow-minded and completely defeats the purpose of the "free speech forum".

 

Okay. I am glad that you are open-minded enough to look at Creationist Websites. I never said that I was a creationist though.

Thank you for the explanation, though it is a little off of my reply. I did not mention micro-evolution. You mentioned speciation and then listed your examples. I was pointing out that your list does not support your speciation comment. Micro-evolution may or may not happen. We have certainly observed adaptation, though. Whether that adaptation deals with random mutation and natural selection is a bigger intellectual gap than simply saying "we have observed it." A theory requires more than simple observation (even cellular and micro-evolution). If observation is enough, then I have to ask if you agree with the Phlogiston Theory of combustion?

Again, it takes more than observation to change a theory into a law. And no scientific theory should ever be called FACT. That is bad science and bad reasoning.

And here I thought you were open-minded . Is there a reason you need to hurl insults and make sweeping generalizations against those who have a different view than you do? Furthermore, does them being "far-right nutjobs" prevent them from making true statements or following scientific theories?
So they question accepted dating theories and observations. So they ask "is it possible that the scientific community is wrong about this"? So they look for different explanations that fit into their belief structure? Is there something wrong with this? Don't we all do the same? If someone came forward today with a repeatable test that proved evolution (in any form) could not be true, would you accept it, or would you doubt, not because their science was bad, but because their findings do not fit into your belief structure?

By the way, before you begin attacking me, keep in mind that you attacked them (through insult and condescension) nor have I ever implied that I agreed with them. I am simply trying to find out why you would resort to insult without explanation as to why they are worthy of ridicule.

Is the statement somehow erroneous? Is their something wrong with the clarification? Would you prefer "survival of the fittest to survive" or perhaps "survival of those that, if survival is possible, will survive"? Do you see the problem. No matter how we define survival, if the definition of "survivor" (or the fittest to survive) remains the same ("one who survives"), the statement "the fittest to survive will survive" or "survival of the fittest" will always be true. See the problem?

 

then you are calling god a moron as well for i am none other than representing him... have fun being a genius in hell getting fucked up the ass by lucifer

 

i've tried to resist saying anything but i think i have to, YOU are representing God? i'm sorry the God that Christians believe in as a God of love, who at least will attempt to love all and forgive others. I know I know you are not a Christian or a least a real one, and you are just hear to provoke a reaction and that is exactely what i am giving you i know , can you stop using the idea of lucifer fucking everybody in the ass, its not a pleasent image and it doesn't persuade people to convert, it just scares people off and make them think of hypocrisy again,
peace and love michael x

 

representing god and too, someone just called me a moron so i told him to go get fucked up the ass

 

i do realise you were called a moran and thats not nice, but it isn't the first time you have used the idea, i may be wrong but i thought that to get to heaven you don't just have to beleive, you could possible try and live a good life and love God and your neigbours not threaten them, i personally don't think God would be too happy if Jesus had told everyone that didn't follow him that they would get fucked up the ass, he didn't he talked of loving all even your enermy.
peace and love michael x

 

ok, thanks michael, i'll try to be a nicer person

 

no problem, glad to hear it, i'm sure you are a sweet person, but bring it out more on here as life is about love, x

 

god is love

 

I dont normally jump to calling people morons, but i
tried to challenge her(?) intellectually, but still
the fucking up the ass kept coming.

I have no problem with christians,and its odd
that I am even trying to get one to not
misrepresent their faith that way. It makes
me pissed that either she is horribly misrepresenting
her faith, or intentionally doing it to misrepresent
anothers. Either way, its moronic.

 

weird, that's what i call it too...massive hemorhoid syndrome.

could our so very different minds finally be connecting with something as disturbing as this?

 

i think the problem is imaginary people on your computer screen making you pissed... anyways, if you really want to get pissed, maybe get pissed at the past 2000 years of misrepresenting christ's teachings that's resulted in crusades, inquistitions, witch burnings all the way to where it brings us to the current desimation of the environment that threatens the survival of life as we know it

if you think "god is going to fuck you up" is a misrepresentation of church history or the bible, may i suggest you inform yourself

 

Did i ever say that I wasnt pissed about the crusades, inquisititions and witch burnings? No I didnt.

That isnt the teaching of Christ either, and those people piss me off too.

But instead of allowing bitterness towards bad people rule my life,
I instead concentrate on finding the beauty in peoples faith in their god.

All the things that you mentioned were not individual Christians, but
instead a goverment of Christians.

IT wasnt christ, or the christian god doing those things, regardless
of whos name they were done in.

And you are right, Yahweh has been known to "fuck you up" if
you dont give him the worship, if you promised it to him. But
he doesnt go around "fucking up" everyone, just those who
took covenant with him and turned their backs on him.

Molly, you take what I said just now, and tell me to inform myself.
Have you not read the other posts I have made towards you,
the ones full of theology and theory? Have you complelty missed all
the things i said?

I inform myself daily, while you are here badgering peoples
faiths, and making some of the dumbest comments i have ever
heard, i am usually in a book, or doing research, or making
a personal relationship with my gods, and walking my path
with honor, honesty and love.

The same can't be said of you. Pagan, or Christian, you are
still an embarassment for both.

 

i am not exactly sure what the difference is between individual christians being so good and government of christians being so bad??? you seem to saying they are ok until they are given some power and then they just go nuts which seems to be true in what we are observing in the u.s. of a.

don't you think there might be something nuts about their guilt laden belief systems that leads to their depraped insanity of conquest and punishment when they finally get it together and have their own government?

as a gnostic christian, we have btw, non of these born in sin and christ suffering for our sins teachings present and as well we feel that having a theology based upon these understandings breeds a diseased mentality as we so often see in the conventional christian world

 

I completly agree that the sin-nature can be corruptive. Its a shame that
you cant feel good about what you are. There are reasons i am not
Christian you know.

But I respect them, they do good things. I didnt say Christians in goverment
were bad either, I said Christian Governments. There is a difference.

I never said I agree with the Christian religion, far from it, but I
will never tell a Christian, or any other faith that I dont follow,
that they have to not believe what they do.

I will debate with them, correct them if need be, and present
to them views outside their dogma, but I will never tell
them to believe like I do because they are "wrong"

I would take you more seriously if you told of your gnostic
Christianity with intellegent words, and spread that message
to people, rather than immediatly being thought of as a joke.

If you are what you say, then you have something good to talk about.

But still, i doubt your sincereity, based on you previous comments.