Re: Creation or Evolution? You Decide :)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Susan S. Chin: "Re: Neanderthals' Noses Blow Scientists Away"
• Previous message: Phil Hunt: "Re: Current Signals of Increases in Testosterone"

jlt wrote:
>
> In <32504D18.115B@OVPR.UGA.EDU> "RICHARD J. LOGAN" <RJL@OVPR.UGA.EDU> writes:
> >
> >I have a degree in physics. I find it interesting that creationists are
> >now attacking not just the origin of species but also the origin of the
> >universe. I don't know what to do about this creeping ignorance but it's
> >amazing that a technological superpower like the United States can't do a
> >better job educating its children. To paraphrase Ben Franklin, we must
> >all hang together or we will all hang seperately.
> >
> >--
> >___________________________________
> >Richard J. Logan, Ph.D.
> >University of Georgia Research Foundation, Inc.
>
> First, learn how to spell (start with sep a rate).
>
> Second, understand that the basics of religion are that followers must
> faithfully espouse all that they are taught concerning that religion
> and refute all that is not within that religion's teaching. Therefore,
> there is no such logical proof that can dispel one's religion-based
> knowledge. Hence, even if you could conclusively prove that evolution
> is fact, religionists will then only admit that it wasn't evolution,
> but god's will. A never ending circle.
>
> On the other hand, what ever happened to the idea of separation of
> church and state? The more the government gets away from religion, the
> closer it really gets to religion, case in point: abortion. The
> entire issue of abortion revolves ONLY on the premise of of ones
> religion. If one is religious, one MUST believe that abortion is
> detestable. So, then, why is the government even concerning itself
> with the issue?
>
> If there is truly to be a separation of church and state, why, then,
> are states, such as New Mexico teaching that which is solely religious
> teaching, i.e., creationism?
>
> Separation of church and state is EXACTLY that, separation of church
> and state.
> You can't have it BOTH ways, folks.

Repeating once again that this is a sci ng, not talks.origin or some alt
ng devoted to pointless arguments about church and state. Please move
your inane arguments about government and abortion to a more appropriate
ng.

Al Zeller

• Next message: Susan S. Chin: "Re: Neanderthals' Noses Blow Scientists Away"
• Previous message: Phil Hunt: "Re: Current Signals of Increases in Testosterone"