Previous 11 - 20 Next
To have freedom of my religious views I must have freedom from yours. They are two sides of the same coin, which anyone with two brain cells to rub together ought to be able to understand.
Ooooh, can I play? How about your religion of NFL football, free marketism, and Dittoheadism? Calling things religion which clearly aren't doesn't make them so. It's obviously an attempt to win cheap debating points in lieu of actual argument.
Ah, another Coulterite ignorant half-argument. Weak.
The key element there was dictatorship, not secularism. You may have noticed that religious dictatorships fare no better.
None of which, even if true, which I doubt, has any effect on modern evolutionary theory. You guys ironically, are dinosaurs, raising tired old dusty arguments that have been debunked time and time again. You can't see us pointing, but rest assured, we are laughing at you.
The question itself shows how ignorant you are (evolution works on already existing living things), but then what should we expect from someone who gets their science from partisan political blogs? The simple fact is that evolution does work, and that's why its taught in schools. There are thousands of scientific papers every year published in the journals dealing with one aspect or another of evolution. Your objections are about as relevant as a blind man sitting in a functioning airport denying the possibility of heavier-than-air flight based on some calculations he did in his head. The rest of us are getting on the planes.
By that standard most of you are atheists, which glorious as that would be, isn't the case. You simply want to deny the label of "believer" to anyone who doesn't believe as you do. "Pompous" doesn't begin to describe that position.
By now its clear that you and most of the posters here either don't know what "religion" means, or have such a weak argument that you have to redefine the term to make it.
Right, that's why there are...wait for it...ZERO public atheists among elected Democrats. It would be really amusing to see the level of freakout you people would experience if that number were 100 given how excited you get over the mere possibility.
Typical Coulterish half-argument, all hints and snarks, no substance.
Pffft, practically every statement in it is untrue, particularly the conclusion. I WISH the Democratic party was going full atheist, but sadly they are nearly as blinkered by religious idiocy as the GOP is, they are just more quiet about it, and (mostly) don't allow it to override science like the GOP does with evolution. Here's a radical notion - let's see some actual evidence to back the assertions made in the article. He who asserts must prove, not he who doubts.
Previous 11 - 20 Next