Are Creationists shooting themselves in the foot?

This is a question I posed in another thread that can be found here http://EvC Forum: YEC without the bible, possible? -->EvC Forum: YEC without the bible, possible?I was discussing the side-effects of the Young Earth Creationist movement and decided it would make an interesting discussion in and of itself.So my question is as follows:Is Young Earth Creationism doing more harm to its own agenda than good? Two examples I can think of are:1. Turning potential converts away by making it appear that a rejection of scientific knowledge is a prerequisite2. Inflicting doubt among believers by claiming that the only way to interpret the Bible is from a Young Earth Perspective, forcing them to choose between their faith and scientific evidence.What good (for Christians) has the Creationist movement achieved since it started? And does it outweigh the cons?Please share real-life examples if you have any.

Good point. Given their current track record even a valid argument from them would probably be ignored. Feel free to add any more items to the list. I keep getting references to this book. Sounds like a real eye-opener. I'll have to check it out.

When you're saying Jesus was the second Adam, aren't you using a metaphor? ^^ Don't you realize how silly you sound when you use a metaphor to justify a literal interpretation?Having said that, let's please get back on topic. Most of us seem to be in agreement that creationism isn't proper science, let's not discuss that. Let's discuss the various ways in which creationists are screwing up their own agenda. Those of you who want to stand up for creationism, please tell us in what ways creationism has helped bring awareness of God (or an intelligent designer) to people, and provide actual numbers if you can. Everyone else, feel free to add to my list in the OP, or give accounts of how you see creationism is harming itself.This could be interesting.

I think you have it backwards. In Canada and many other secular countries (like Sweden, where I'm originally from) creationism is virtually extinct because evangelical Christians are a small minority. Not that evangelical Christians have to be creationists (I'm not) but creationism depends on a large demographic of fundamentalists.In the US, at least half of the population is Christian, so they have LOTS of political sway, and their "science" stands a lot better chance of getting recognized. They are sustaining creationism, not the other way around.That's just my humble opinion.Note: Not that I know much about Canadian demographics. I'm probably wrong to lump them in with a highly secular country like Sweden.Edited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.

Looks like the thread is starting to spiral off topic. Let's try to get back to creationists shooting themselves in their feet (the imagery never gets old )Another creationist side-effect I discovered (from a short but interesting article that can be found here: http://www.asa3.org/asa/pscf/2000/pscf6-00lahti.html) is that the fallacious arguments used by creationists to discredit evolution, can be just as easily used on Christianity.Take the Red Herring Fallacy, for instance.1. Richard Dawkins is an atheist who believes in no higher purpose.
2. Richard Dawkins is an evolutionist.3. Therefore evolution undermines any theistic point of view.Any creationist who thinks it is ok to use such arguments will have to allow for similar attacks on Christianity or Creationism. For instance:1. Hitler claimed to be a Christian
2. Hitler was a genocidal maniac.3. Therefore Christians are genocidal maniacs.*The article provides an example of such a Red Herring by John McIntyre: Teaching Christians to rely on fallacy instead of real arguments will only damage their own agenda in the long run.

Do please stay on topic. I'm not a mod, but I would rather not have to read through ten off-topic posts just to see where the thread is going. Thank you.

Made me laugh Excellent example of what a clueless person, reconciling known world-history with creationism, might say.At least we can derive some humor from the side-effects of creationism. That I suppose is one of their biggest contributions to societyEdited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.