I’m saying that if we do teach creationism, it’s from standpoint of historical context, not as an actual scientific theory, not because it’s controversial, but because it’s not scientific. That wouldn’t be begging the question, that’s stating the obvious. There is no scientific basis behind creationism besides what the Bible (a 2,000 year old book with little evidence it was actually written by the instruction of a god) states, and that is not a basis for a scientific model. Evolution on the other hand has been researched for centuries, and has basis, as shown by Charles Darwin and his experimentation with the animals on the Galápagos Islands. If one biases the entire scientific process in America towards a theory with no proof but an old book, then we lose a lot of scientific credibility, not to mention, that religion wasn’t supposed to conflict with the development of scientific ideals in the first place.
For gay marriage, I am saying that the majority of the population would disapprove of that idea, and that regardless, it affects no one negatively to let consenting people above 18 marry. Who does it hurt? How is it a crime? Why does a singular religion get to decide the fate of those who don’t believe it? Even if sodomy isn’t necessarily moral, it is a victimless “crime” and should still be allowed to happen, as the choices consenting individuals make (as long as hand is not done) are of no concern to me, you, or anyone else
@Patriot-#1776Constitution4mos4MO
Ironically, in trying to prove you did NOT beg the question you have again begged it by claiming creationism is "not scientific" and your worldview is, which has been established by any logic in this discussion. I won't bother to critique the rest of the paragraph because it really falls apart from the very first line.
For "gay marriage" it is not an issue of liberty vs control, as marriage, by definition, comes with legal recognition, societal respect & praise, and tax benefits. When the LGBTQ cultists ask to "legalise" "marriage" between two… Read more
@9CJ6CB64mos4MO
Dear lord you act surprised when being called a bigot and then spout this utter bull. Let’s start from the beginning, you assume the intent of gay people as if you understand them in the slightest, but in this conversation alone, you have called them delusional, “cultists”, “abominable” (their “practices” at the very least), and as far as calling their legalization propaganda. I am LGBTQ myself, I have talked to THOUSANDS of that population, and they’re just want to live happily, that’s all they really want. The reason pride parades happen… Read more
@Patriot-#1776Constitution4mos4MO
That's a mouthful of fallacies. Let's examine them. "spout this utter bull." That's begging the question because the notion that it is utter bull has not yet been logically established, indeed that's the very point in question. "You assume the intention gay people as if you understand them in the slightest." Well, you're also kind of assuming the intention of conservatives by smearing them as bigots motivated by prejudice, when, in fact, they are realists motivated by a desire for the truth to be known and virtue to be encouraged. So appealing to… Read more
@6avin3mos3MO
I liked the sentiment "...they are realists motivated by a desire for the truth...", but then you said their stated intent is to come after your children. Hetero pedophiles could just as well come after your children, so I'm not sure how you're making a distinction it's a gay issue. If you have credible proof of said statements, I would love to see them
