Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Quote:

I personally fail to see what responsibility has to do with it concerning the early-term abortions I am concentrating on.

aiden just buried that idea. She stamped on the grave too.

Quote:

But I also would never accept anyone telling me how I should think about the life I carried within me and when I could start considering it a life and regarding it with hope and potential.

And that's not a theologian. That's a Mum. With all her other unfortunate dispositions.

Hey--BREAKING NEWS.

ros knows what's going on.

Fill us in ros. I'm really curious.

I am really curious.

But you know what - farmerman you should just run the thread and talk about science. That's what it's about, right...that's what's going on - right?

Perhaps you think indignation is a form of argument, spendius?

Incidentally, do you have anything to say about ID? I'm might concentrate on killing this topic to make room for actual discussion about the thread's original topic.

The apparent limits of your empathy don't allow you to forego having to actually read what I write.

I have always stated that my stipulation has outside foundations and is not circular

The circularity of the idea I thought you were holding to is a particular one using a tautology where proper morality is defined as what is Christian and therefore anything nonChristian is by default immoral.

Now, when it comes to later-term abortions, I being to sympathize with arguments against them. I think there is a boundary in there where the moral status of the unborn child is asserted, and it is before birth. The trouble is: when?

Of course, it isn't even irrational, as protecting one's pregnancy certainly has its benefits to passing along a bit of oneself.

I know that it is primarily effective and that it is certainly financially irresponsible not to use contraception and then ethically irresponsible/abhorrent to get a late-term abortion when it is not medically necessary.

But I am...curious in the word's inquisitive meaning.

Can YOU tell me Joe?

Rebecca (Aidan) Eejit

edited to say: I can hang with sort of stuff - just don't get too scientific on me.

You have to wade through literally pages of his **** to get to any of the new and always interesting material which Wandel routinely posts.

Spendius wrote:
Quote:
I am really curious.


But you're not.

Joe(not in the word's inquisitive meaning, you're not.)Nation

You may appreciate spendis tortuous prose, I find it the unispired ramblings of a witless twit whose knowledge base goes no deeper than Google(he often gets his references quite incorrect ). However, hes certainly able to sit up and continue posting each day after he sobers up sufficiently. SO no one begrudges him his limited talents.

What's going on, Aidan, is the latest in the long series of attacks on science by those who would rather hold onto myth rather than face reality.

Wande started the thread to answer whether ID was a real science or an exercise in applied religion.

This thread was started before the recent Fed District case in PA wherein a Fed Judge ruled that ID, was, indeed religion. Moreover, in his opinion, he ruled that the practitioners of ID, in the limited scope of his trial, were guilty of " breathtaking inanity" and "me
an spirited dishonesty" and " gross manipulation of the operations of the schoolboard".

The Judge was pissed at the waste of the courts time especially by the dishonest methods used by the defendants.

where ID has been trying to insert its nose under the tent of decent science education.

Whats on the minds of dissenters is to try to recapture some credibility that ID had lost by its exposure to ridicule made obvious in the Pa Case.

Its a hard row for theIDers to hoe since what most of them have preached a theory based on universal "Beneficence and love that is within the Christian viewpoint,and(they add that) a world without such a viewpoint is hopeless". (Thats a paraphrase but its been pretty much been demonstrated by the few ID lovers on here)
The only thing wrong with that viewpoint is that the historical account of IDers nationwide has been anything but a movement infused with "Christian love". Theyve practised, instead, a "take no prisoners" and "use any means" to gain their advantage.
So, what theyve been preaching has been 180 counter to what theyve been doing . Theyve been stacking schoolboards by running stealth candidates. Theyve been subverting local authority and overriding policies. Theyve been lying and cheating. ALl this in a name of a Just deity who backs their scientific theory of origins.

Many are impressed with this as some sort of insight, many are not. Many see it as tedium disguised with misdirected scholarship. "One cannot run a particle accelerator with a paintbrush"-Greene.

You can't please all the people fm. And Mr Greene is evidently a genius of the highest order.

Saying that I'm similar to rl is nothing but a cheap smear. Your stuff is similar to that of a commisar. A low grade one too.

And saying that some people are "easily impressed" is a device to suggest that they are all gumpie groupies.

I'll pass on Dawkins. I've read enough to know what that is. It's a justification for having had three wives and being unable to keep his hands off easily impressed totty. How can he not attack the Church? As far as I know there's not a scientist in England who has any time for him. He's being talked up by you lot.

THE learned Bishop Hall, I mean
the famous Dr. Joseph Hall, who
was Bishop of Exeter in King James the
first's reign, tells us in one of his Decads,
at the end of his divine art of meditation,
imprinted at London, in the year 1610,
by John Beal, dwelling in Aldersgate-street, "That it is an abominable thing for a man to commend himself;'' -- and I real-
ly think it is so.

And yet, on the other hand, when a
thing is executed in a masterly kind of a
fashion, which thing is not likely to be
found out ; -- I think it is full as abomi-
nable, that a man should lose the ho-
nour of it, and go out of the world with
the conceit of it rotting in his head.

This is precisely my situation.

For in this long digression which I was
accidentally led into, as in all my digres-
sions (one only excepted) there is a
master-stroke of digressive skill, the me-
rit of which has all along, I fear, been
overlooked by my reader, -- not for want
of penetration in him, -- but because 'tis
an excellence seldom looked for, or ex-
pected indeed, in a digression ; -- and it
is this : That tho' my digressions are all
fair, as you observe, -- and that I fly off
from what I am about, as far and as of-
ten too as any writer in Great-Britain ;
yet I constantly take care to order affairs
so, that my main business does not stand
still in my absence.