It's Me Preaching Again

[vash_the_s]

Here's a mini-sermon

Comments

[asl_phoenix]

I've always preferred logic to hellfire, myself. QED indeed.

Of course, the last time I heard "quo erad demonstratum" in context was the Babel fish argument for the nonexistance of God. "Well, that was easy," says man, and for an encore goes to prove that black is white and gets killed at the next pedestrian crossing. Now, most theologians regard this argument as a load of dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid from making a bundle when he used it as the central theme for his book "Well, That About Wraps It Up For God."

[safetydance]

People regard christians as closed minded bigots because they have the power to impose their beliefs on those that do not share them, and choose to do so

[safetydance]

Addendum: I completely neglected to mention that not being married is not the same as not being committed enough.

[vash_the_s]

So if one is committed enough to ones partner to:
1. Be faithful to one another/not sleep around
2. Share the (possible) financial responsibility of raising children
3. Be informed about whether that partner has any sexual problems or STD's
(All of which are commitments necessary to a stable relationship)

What reason would there be not to get married?

[safetydance]

Well, For once I can lead by example. I just turned 18, making it legal, and I Fully intend to marry Kim in an undetermined amount of time. However, I know how it would appear to both of our families if we ran out and got married right away, and I sympathise with the idea that it is bad to rush into marriage. Basically, I'm going through the motions. If someone jumps the gun and appears in a uterus too early, I guess the process would be sped up by a while.

[vash_the_s]

Wow. With all due respect, your logic is less than paper thin in places. Let's take a look.

People regard christians as closed minded bigots because they have the power to impose their beliefs on those that do not share them, and choose to do so.
Fair enough. Though I think the problem of imposition of beliefs is more political issue, and personally I think there's a lot of things that people make government regulate which shouldn't be regulated. For example--by forcibly removing all mention of God and practice of theistic religions (ie prayer) from public places, the government is in fact establishing a religion--Atheism. Establishment of any religion as state supported, even if it is a religion based on the belief that there is no God, violates the first amendment of the constitution

[chris_kun]

Basically speaking, the government doesn't want gay marraige because that means less future taxpayers.

[safetydance]

As I said before, the problem with evolution arguments is semantics. Evolution is a word not attached to genetics, but rather to a changing system over time. Natural selection is how it occurs in genetics. What you argued against is the theory of common descent: That all life descends originally from a single species

[safetydance]

and as for my theory of dumb design, I made it up on the spot. It required very little thought, and yet is on par, scientifically, with intelligent design. I don't advance this theory, I only am making the point that it's ridiculous to teach it just because it agrees with your religion and for no other reason. The big bang theory is not taught as fact. In fact, I rarely hear the words "big bang" without "theory." It's just the most widely accepted scientific explanation (although, when god creates the universe, he's gotta have some method of doing it, or it'll be a big mess

[vash_the_s]

I reiterate my view that the government makes legal recognition of marriage only between man and woman because heterosexual marriage is (in the collective opiniion of those who make the laws) the best environment from which to raise a family. I frankly don't see what state recognition of other kinds of marriage is supposed to accomplish.

[vash_the_s]

"The possibility that over time, said brown rabbit species will become so different from the original rabbit that they are no longer the same species is irrefutable

[ross_kun]

whoa easy there Ty

[safetydance]

The point I was making... originally.. Was that Christians in the government throw their weight around without knowing what they're talking about. They do it because they can. America has a bad reputation for being a place with no respect for evidence based knowlege, and it ain't the liberals fault.

So the people who are having faith based initiatives shoved on them resent it.
I dunno why I spent so much time trying to support evolution, really. I don't object to creationism, but I do object to intelligent design because it completely denies even the /possibility/ that evolution occurs. Creationism and Evolutionism are not mutually exclusive, and it's the job of the parent, or God forbid, the student, to mesh them comfortably.

[ross_kun]

Yea, that's one problem with America... we try to pay attention to everyone .... even the idiots

Please take this as a brotherly rebuke

[vash_the_s]

I'd like to point out for the purpose of this discussion that, as a Christian, it is not your place to look down on anybody, even if their viewpoint seems rediculous and utterly screwy to you. They are made of the same stuff and by the same hand. Please don't refer to people as morons (no matter how many perfectly good reasons you have to believe that they are). That's the kind of attidude I had in mind when I posted the original thread. Except for God's grace which I allow to work in my life, in the end I would be no more righteous than a drug dealer or a rapist (Romans 3:23). We all fall short. By how much is irrelevant.

So if you see a problem with ignorance, respectfully question it. Explain respectfully why (as you see it) things are the way they are. Calling names gets you nowhere.

And for God's sake (pun not intended, but I'll take it) please use the spell checker! (Sorry it's a pet peeve of mine) *smiles sheepisly*

it's "millenia" and "liar". ;-)