Hello all.

You can't really believe that, can you? Surely a Christian scientist (you know what I mean) doing science does so for the glory of God, right? If there is a God, even your God, and he did make the universe, than surely examining the universe simply leads to a deeper understanding and appreciation of his work?Why would you say that there can't be God in science? There doesn't have to be, and when it's being presented to people who may not share your faith, there shouldn't be. But that doesn't mean that science can't lead you to a deeper appreciation of your God, if God's your thing.

You were making fun of my beliefs, trying to make them look ridiculous, obviously. I'm just asking you to stop.... again.(how many imes is that? at least three.)------------------
-chris

Lame, dude. Yup. You have to look at the failure rate. Among people who practice abstinence as birth control, some of them fail - they have sex. Among those who do, very few of them use any kind of birth control, because they don't have any at hand - they didn't expect to have sex, after all. Thus they tend to wind up in a lot worse straits than people who have been presented with birth control. And it's pretty clear that messages of abstinence don't actually encourage abstinence in teens. Why would it? When was the last time you did something because your school told you to? Isn't it a little more likely that you or a whole bunch of people would do the exact opposite, just because the school told you to? Good for him/her. Ah, but what you're forgetting is that, while they did believe in God, they believed in something else more: That just because a bunch of people believed in God, that didn't mean everybody had to believe in God. That was so important that they put in in the Constitution.Our heritage is not Christian. It's a heritage of Free Exercise of religion. It's a heritage of government being blind to religion. A heritage of a separation between Church and State. If you see that as a Christian doctrine, you'll have to show me in the Bible where it talks about the free exercise of religion for other people.

quote:

---

I thought not having sex at all would be totally fool-proof... Guess I'm wrong. Also, I'm not taught that in health class. The teacher says "forget about abstinence, were only human."

---

Of course abstinence is a fool-proof way to avoid STDs and pregnancy. But people are made to have sex, people want to have sex, people enjoy sex tremendously, and - bottom line - people will have sex, no matter what their teacher tells them. Therefore, refusing to educate them about what happens after that (and how to reduce the risks of what they choose to do) is unconscionable.

quote:

---

The majority of Americans since America, have believed in God, so that would show our heritage as a God believing nation would it not?

---

Let's look at it this way, messenjaH. How do you feel about your religious faith being co-opted for political purposes? Don't you feel that it cheapens the value of what you believe, knowing that self-seeking and cynical politicians have put the name of your god on a coin just to provoke another country?Just offering another perspective. You seemed to ignore the point about "In God We Trust" being added for political reasons late in our country's history, long after the founding fathers. I think it is worthwhile to at least stop and acknowledge it, because all of the above are natural consequences of that fact.

Not a majority, it seems that the percentage of scientists who are some sort of believer has been steady at about 40% for almost a century.http://solon.cma.univie.ac.at/...m/sciandf/contrib/clari.txt

No, where there is no organized religion there seems to be a bunch of irrational "new age" beliefs not rational science.What I read into what you post is a hostility to "science". It is also clear that you read a hostility to religion in what we post.Here is how I preceive things to actually be. I don't care about your religion at all. I have no inherent hositility toward it. I fully support all separation of church and state so that your beliefs are protected from the majority (which isn't your views). I don't see science finding any evidence for your beliefs but I also don't see science finding any evidence to disprove the beliefs of mainstream Christians. So there is no problem there.What I am hostile toward is anyone who wants to break down the separation of church and state. I am opposed to anyone who through ignorance or deliberate falsehoods attempts to attack the findings of careful observation and logic on religious or political grounds.Any appartent hostiility towards your beliefs is directed at the areas where there is an attempt to step outside of the legitimate expression of religious beliefs into things clearly at odds with what we observe.

Ok, since I have yet to see two "creationists" believe the same thing perhaps you can specify which things you need evidence for?If you are not OEC but are a YEC then I guess we can start with the age of the earth. Go to threads on the topic and reopen them if you need.If you are OEC but somehow think that the life forms of the planet have always been just as they are then open a thread to that effect.If you are OEC and agree that evolution has taken place then you are ID (I guess) and there are a couple of current threads for that.

I fail to see how my last post, or the one before it, had anything to do with you. It wasn't addressed to you. It wasn't in reference to you. It was in reference to "creation science", in a message to Schraf. If you see "creation science" as a sacred cow, what are you doing on this forum?And are you going to explain how you've managed to be on this board for this long without noticing anyone posting a challenge to creationism?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

You don't have to pay homage to anything. Noone's making you do that anywhere.

---

Yeah, that's true. Because we don't teach creationism in science class.

quote:

---

Science is the number #1 place where there is no religion.

---

Must make religion kind of difficult to swallow. I know it does for me.

They why did you say you do? Stop contradicting yourself!!!!!------------------
-chris

Well, since abstinence means no sex then if they have sex they are not practicing abstinence, (who cares about this abstinence discussion anyway).

quote:

---

Our heritage is not Christian. It's a heritage of Free Exercise of religion. It's a heritage of government being blind to religion. A heritage of a separation between Church and State. If you see that as a Christian doctrine, you'll have to show me in the Bible where it talks about the free exercise of religion for other people.

---

I said we have a God believing heritage. All religions believe in God, for the most part. All the ones coming to America too of course. So you misread what I wrote because I said nothing about the christian heritage. I simply said a God believing heritage. Which is true, as you agree.------------------
-chris

Thanks for getting me in this mess Nosy. lol

quote:

---

They why did you say you do? Stop contradicting yourself!!!!!

---

You might want to check the difference in meaning between "do" and "would have had to."I thought it was clear that I was speaking in hypotheticals. If I should make things simpler for you in the future, let me know.For now, try this revised, simpler version of the statement:"The idea that an atheist student should be forced to study creationism in science class is just as ludicrous as the idea of a Jewish student being forced to stand during the Lord's Prayer."Straightforward enough?

Did I get you in a mess? How?

Hi Chris,A bit off-topic, but can you let us know if you intend to pick a date for the Exodus, the entire Bible archaeology thread is on hold waiting for you?If you wish to withdraw fron the discussion that's ok, just let us know so we can get onto another subject.CheersBrian