Atheists Seek Investigation Into Christian’s ‘Presence’ in Debate Class to Speak on Critical Thinking

HovindLAGRANGE, Ga. — An atheist group has requested an investigation into the presence of a recognized biblical creation leader and debater at a Georgia high school, where he recently spoke to students about critical thinking.

In late March, Eric Hovind, the president of the Florida-based ministry Creation Today, addressed a debate class at Troup County Comprehensive High School in LaGrange. Hovind says that his talk did not include mention of his faith or creation, but was rather a general discussion on critical thinking.

But as Hovind had engaged in a debate with a local humanist two days prior and had posted a photo of the event on social media, and since he is a born-again Christian who is known to speak against evolution, atheists became upset with school officials for allowing Hovind to address students.

The Madison, Wisc.-based Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF) soon sent a letter to the superintendent of the Troup County School System requesting an investigation into Hovind’s appearance.

“It is unconstitutional and completely inappropriate for TCCHS to host a fundamentalist Christian speaker whose sole purpose and goal is the promotion of biblical creationism,” the letter, written by staff attorney Elizabeth Cavill, read.

“It is difficult for us to understand how this presentation could have been approved,” she wrote. “Your community undoubtedly includes many people who have professional experience … to discuss ‘critical thinking’ with students interested in debate, and whose presence would not violate clear constitutional dictates.”

Cavill then remarked that it takes the promotion of religion in schools “very seriously,” noting as a threat that it had recently sued a school district in the state.

  • Connect with Christian News

“FFRF respectfully requests that you commence an immediate investigation into these allegations and take appropriate action to avoid First Amendment violations from within your district,” she wrote.

But when the Memphis, Tenn.-based Center for Religious Expression learned of FFRF’s correspondence to the district, it likewise sent a letter to officials—to urge them not to listen to the atheist organization.

“The gist of FFRF’s argument is that Mr. Hovind cannot be allowed to speak in a public school because he holds religious views,” the letter, written by attorney Nate Kellum, read. “The suggestion that Mr. Hovind’s presence in a public school violates the establishment clause because he is a Christian is untenable.”

It reiterated that Hovind did not speak about his faith or evolution during his visit.

“FFRF’s claim that Mr. Hovind’s presentation amounts to ‘religious instruction’ is downright silly,” Kellum wrote. “His presentation did not even mention anything religious. … Indisputably, your school invited Mr. Hovind to speak on the secular topic of critical thinking, and in this context it was only appropriate for him to teach this topic referencing his own personal experiences, just like any other speaker would do in the same capacity.”

“These considerations evidence a clearly secular, and indeed laudable, purpose and not a religious one,” he continued. “In the setting of a high school debate class, allowing Mr. Hovind to discuss critical thinking was in no way a violation of the establishment clause.”

Kellum further noted opined in a press release that he found it astounding that FFRF asserted that people of faith should be “disqualified” from speaking in public schools out of assumptions about the content of their speech.

“Just like anyone else, Christians have a place in society,” he stated. “Christians cannot be banished from participation in public affairs due to their personal beliefs. ”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Paul Hiett

    If Hovind didn’t bring up religion at all, and held to the curriculum, I am not seeing the issue in this. FFRF would be on the wrong side of this one indeed.

    • Crono478

      FFRF is obviously wrong on this one. The question is, why did FFRF want the school district to investigate into his appearance?

      • Paul Hiett

        Hovind is already controversial in his religious views, so when they see he was speaking to a group of students at a public school, I can only assume it threw up red flags. I think someone should have been more diligent in researching themselves before launching this investigation.

        • Crono478

          So anyone who demonstrates steadfast Christian faith such as Ken Ham, Hovind and so on would automatically trigger red flag for FFRF if they spoke at public schools?

          • Paul Hiett

            Absolutely. How would you feel if the situation were reversed, and it was Christopher Hitchens speaking at the public school? Even if you found out later that he didn’t mention religion at all, you’re saying it wouldn’t have concerned you at all?

          • Crono478

            I would be concerned about him because his bias is based on atheism. He is not only one. There are many teachers who teaches humanism, evolution, and so on. Many schools allow Planned Parenthood to provide sex education. A lot of students learn how to practice “safe sex” by using contraceptives. That does not stop some female students from becoming pregnant and most of them would go to have an abortion. Guess what? Planned Parenthood owns many of these abortion clinics in urban areas.

            Also, a lot of parents give up their responsibility to teach & discipline their kids. They allow schools to teach students to do this instead.

            Christopher Hitchens would never trigger red flag from FFRF and they are not likely going to listen to Christian organizations.

          • Paul Hiett

            That is correct, Hitchens speaking as Hovind did would not raise any flags with the FFRF just as Hovind speaking did not raise any red flags with any Christian groups. Both sides are obviously biased in this, but make no mistake, you and I both know very well that if it was Hitchens, Christians would be investigating what was said as well.

          • Crono478

            They would, but schools will ignore that. I pointed out few of many problems in my previous reply that is going on in school. It’s just going to get worse.

            Are you in low 40s? I am 30 years old. If so, that is almost a generation apart between us. There are at least 2 generations younger than us. Have you noticed anything in younger generations that shock you?

          • Paul Hiett

            I’m 44…I wouldn’t say anything about them “shocks” me. I know more and more of them are turning away from organized religion. That might shock Christian parents, but when I look at the amount of information at my fingertips in the 80’s vs what kids have today, it’s an exponential difference.

            I do disagree with your opinion that schools would not investigate a Hitchens appearance if they do so with Hovind. In fact, nothing in the article above suggests that the school has actually done anything.

          • Crono478

            A lot of Christians, especially, parents are in denial that a lot of their children are turning away from Christianity. Answers in Genesis did this research (You can read “Already Gone” which can be read online on their site) and said that 9 in 10 students already abandoned Christian faith by time they graduate from their high schools.

            I remember in 6th grade that my family just got dial-up Internet connection on our desktop computer. Both middle & high schools and Internet was what lead me to abandon my Christian faith.

            Information we can access on Internet today is nothing compared to what we could find back in late 1990s. They could easily access porn sites via google search. Some five years old kids already know a list of profanities that they can say. They replace proper words with that when they speak.

            There are even more web sites that focuses on assisting people to abandon their religions. The number of web sites that provide Christian apologetic grew as well.

          • Paul Hiett

            That is correct. They are turning away from religion because of a higher education. It’s no secret that education and religion tend to be at odds with one another. There are graphs and maps online, easily view-able, showing that in areas where education suffers, religion is predominate. We see the opposite in areas where education is higher.

          • Crono478

            Are you referring to states like Oklahoma, Alabama and Mississippi where there are higher number of Christians and lower level of education?

            Have you ever met a dumb atheist as well as a well educated Christian? Do you believe that I’m just dumb and uneducated for having a steadfast faith in Bible?

          • Paul Hiett

            Not at all, in fact, you seem to be one of the more articulate people on this board, atheists included.

            However, the statistics do suggest a correlation, do they not?

          • Crono478

            It depends on what statistics include. For higher education, what do you exactly mean? Do you mean the number of students who graduate from HS and attend college?

          • George T

            Crono478: What’s the point of your hypothetical scenario? Atheists do not hold a majority position or leadership of this country. There are quite a few Christian groups that are actively looking for opportunities, similar to the one described in your scenario, just to play the martyr for publicity. If you’d like an accounting of them, several show up on Fox networks any time religion is mentioned.

            When Christians violate the church/state boundary there’s only The FFRF and a handful of other organizations prepared to uphold constitutional law in court, with probably hundreds of unreported violations happening every week.

            I have seen the FFRF defend theists who have been oppressed by other religions. The cases where a theist turns to these groups are very rare. You probably wouldn’t hear about these situations as they wouldn’t fit the narrative of this website.

            The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is probably more in line with what you’re looking for. Most of their clients are Christians who’s denomination or level of religious devotion rubs a superior officer the wrong way.

          • Crono478

            “There are quite a few Christian groups that are actively looking for opportunities, similar to the one described in your scenario, just to play the martyr for publicity.”

            I would not support any of these groups that looks for these opportunities just to bolster their publicity. I don’t care if what kind of religion (or lack of) that they claim to. What I care is anyone have freedom to exercise their religion. That is provided in 1st Amendment.

            “I have seen the FFRF defend theists who have been oppressed by other religions.”

            Can you provide me the source on this one? It seems that FFRF’s mission is to eliminate people’s right to exercise their religion from any public place. That is opposite of what 1st Amendment is intended for.

          • George T

            Crono478: Not right now. I’m getting ready for bed. Will look that up later.

            Oddly, I agree with you that people should have the freedom to exercise their religion. We seem to disagree on the details. Just like a person isn’t allowed the freedom of speech to yell “fire” in a crowded theater, there are restrictions on religion and government to keep them from influencing each other. Those restrictions must be exercised on each individual or group trying to bridge that divide.

            Related to FFRF, they call out people who try to violate this constitutional amendment. For example, a creche is perfectly fine on your lawn or a church lawn. It’s not okay on the lawn of any government property as that can be easily construed as endorsing (giving special privilege or status) to that one religion. So put up a billboard in a public place with some message from god. Just don’t use my tax dollars to pay for it.

          • Crono478

            Oh, it’s morning for me. Go ahead and have a good sleep.

            Yes, because we have 1st Amendment does not mean we have license to say “fighting words” or do anything we want to do to break any of laws in U.S. The example you gave us is not legal at all.

            What U.S. laws can’t do is to cause people to violate their right to exercise their religion. For example, the law should not be constitutional if it causes the person to do what is against their conscience / will.

          • George T

            Crono478: Exactly. It’s not legal to exclusively put a creche on government property without representing the religions of every tax paying citizen. Government funded and operated parks, court house lawns, and schools are all paid for by people of many faiths and no faith. If, for example, an Islamic crescent moon were erected on a court house lawn then Christians would probably be demanding that it be taken down or a cross be erected nearby. Why should Christians be the only ones to have these special privileges in our secular nation? To play fair, it’s just easier to put nothing out on the lawns of government buildings.

          • George T

            Crono478: Do a search for “ffdf plaintiffs chino california” and you should find information about a case. Unfortunately there are many cases where The FFRF’s clients remain anonymous as a protective measure. It happens all too often that a person, Christian or not, is threatened by members of the local Christian community when a church/state court case goes public. I can try to find more cases later if needed.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            If Christopher Hitchens were speaking at a public school, it would prove the Resurrection. 🙂

  • bowie1

    These atheist critics are beginning to sound like Iranian clergymen except they want to indoctrinate with the atheist doctrine under the rubrick of secularism instead.

    • Bill

      because you people keep butting in where you don’t belong

      • The Last Trump

        Like an LGBT troll on a Christian website.

        • Bill

          someone has to keep you in your place

          • The Last Trump

            Oh is THAT what you do here?
            I thought you were the entertainment!
            Hate on, brother!

        • weasel1886

          If you disagree with a poster he is a troll. If you agree he is just practicing free speech

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            I disagree with you, but you have free speech. There is a point to be made. Many people hover at the Christian News Network, just to argue with people that are Christians. Clearly you can see that from the comments. I don’t mind that, but then the arguments get personal, instead of sticking to the article, and there is no reasonable attempt to discuss the article any longer or to come to a conclusion. Thus it becomes a circular argument going round and round with nothing to gain from the discussion. That is illogical by all accounts.

      • softengine

        We all participate in society in some way or another. That occurs by default – we exist. To expect Christians to exclude discourses on religion from speaking engagements at schools is one thing. It is quite another to expect Christians to be excluded from participation in society based solely on the fact that they are Christian. Bill, it sounds like you need a lesson or two in critical thinking. I would suggest any literature by Ayn Rand (since you have an aversion to Christians). While she was undoubtedly NOT a Christian, she would call you to the carpet on your logic.

        • Bill

          you can participate all you want but keep your religion private

          • softengine

            Well, no Bill. We will not keep it private. Freedom of speech rights extend to Christians as well as non-Christians. Expounding on religion in public schools may not be within scope of those rights, but that is not what is being discussed here. The core issue, which seems to have eluded you, is that the FFRF wants the speaker (and any who hold his Christian convictions) to be prohibited from speaking based NOT on what they are saying or what they might say, but on their beliefs. That’s a problem. Indeed, it is an anathema to the core philosophy behind the founding of this nation. Looking at your comments on this particular thread though, its obvious that I am attempting to reason with someone who is not capable of reasoned thought. I’m sorry.

          • Bill

            and how am I not rational? a creationist is incapable of critical thought. all he will do is make fallacy after fallacy to justify his stupidity

          • George T

            softengine: The Hovind has been deceptively teaching Christianity in many guises over the years. This is one of those cases. The material is all but Creationism in name and had little to no “critical thinking” information to provide.

            Christians speak all the time at schools without ever mentioning religion, and I support them. This is not one of those cases.

          • softengine

            I did not realize that. Thank you for the input and sane response. Anymore these days I almost don’t want to engage in debate on forums like this as 9 times out of 10, you get nothing but utter bizarreness in response.

          • George T

            softengine: Not a problem! Have a nice day (^_^)

        • James Von Borcke

          Let me try to put this as clearly as possible…

          If I attend a lecture on 14th Century Poetry, the only thing I expect from the speaker is a knowledge of 14th Century Poetry. It does not matter one iota if the speaker is a Creationist, a Catholic, or an Atheist; their knowledge of the topic is all that really matters.

          By the same token, if I attend a lecture on Critical Thinking, then I expect the speaker to be likewise knowledgeable about Critical Thinking. Having personally ‘crossed swords’ with Eric Hovind in several online discussions, I can say with certainty that he ~does not~ have the requisite skills to be giving a lecture on this topic. At best, his intentions were to undermine the topic and the education of the children he spoke to.

          Thus, the issue of whether or not his presence was a problem would rely ~entirely~ on how he addressed the topic, and if he mishandled said topic, was his mishandling it the consequence intended by the school.

      • bowie1

        If they pay education taxes they belong.

        • bill2

          that’s not how it works

      • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

        You must be speaking about the FFRF lol.

    • The Last Trump

      “It is unconstitutional and completely inappropriate for TCCHS to host a fundamentalist Christian speaker”!? Say what now?

      “he found it astounding that FFRF asserted that people of faith should be “disqualified” from speaking in public schools out of assumptions about the content of their speech.” !! Did the Naz! Liberals abolish the Constitution already?
      Yeah, sounds more and more like the kind of discrimination and intolerance one would find in Iran, doesn’t it? And for the same reason.
      Atheists and Muslims loathe Christianity with a passion and will desperately attempt anything and everything to silence it. BECAUSE IT’S THE TRUTH.
      And Satan hates the truth above all else. It’s all out war against Christianity but everything else is fine. Go figure.

      • Bill

        separation of church and state. no religion has any place in public schools

        • Josey

          Then that would exclude a lot of history, not to mention evolution which is clearly taught, are you for real?

          • The Last Trump

            Just another LGBT troll. Short on facts and big on hate.
            Dime a dozen around here.

          • Bill

            evolution is a science and there’s a difference between history and theology

          • Paul Hiett

            Bill, you will find that Trump will not actually discuss issues, and won’t address any points you make. He will simply insult you.

          • The Last Trump

            “Grrrrrr…..Christians!……..grrrrrrrr…..Trump!”

          • Paul Hiett

            Need I say more, folks?

          • Mike Laborde

            That’s a coy ploy. But you don’t address any issues or discuss either. Trying to discus issues with atheist is like running in an endless circle. Their critical thinking has been ambushed by lies, and false material/information/facts/evidence.

          • Duane K. Barrick

            Evolution is NOT science and takes as much or more faith to believe in than creation. The statistics of this all happening by chance are astronomical. May God bless you Bill.

            We never had any school shootings before atheist took God out of the classroom and made abortion on demand w/o parental consent. Somethings to think about.

          • Bill

            you are incredibly stupid. evolution is a science and life didn’t arise by chance and unless you can prove otherwise school shoot have no connection to secular education

          • J-Rock

            Evolution relies that life did arise by chance. Stating otherwise means that there was an outside force. For someone who wantonly slings the term incredibly stupid, you surely have evidence to back up your claim correct?

          • Ed Words

            No scientist claims it happened BY CHANCE!

          • J-Rock

            My link was not allowed by the admin and was deleted. Research David Deamer and the peer reviewed and replicated experiment by Bartel and Szostak. Good luck on your journey for truth Ed.

          • Ed Words

            He’s not stupid, he’s willfully ignorant.

            No IQ too high for religion to destroy.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            PSEUDOSCIENCE!

          • James Von Borcke

            “We never had any school shootings before atheist took God out of the classroom…”

            Markdale School, 1884.
            Altona Schoolhouse, 1902.
            Ross Sheppard High School, 1959.

            Shall I go on?

          • Ed Words

            Fanatics aren’t interested in facts.

          • Sava Toufexis

            So you mention THREE shootings within 75 years of each other? How many have there been in the last 75 months? Markdale had ONE death and it was in Canada. Altona was three adults and their 3 children, also in Canada. R Shepherd HS killed one and wounded six. Check out the body count from 1980 to 2015

          • Starcitygal

            Yes, please do? Three shootings in 75 years? You lose the debate bud.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            “Evolution is NOT science and takes as much or more faith to believe in than creation. The statistics of this all happening by chance are astronomical.”

            You couldn’t be more correct. I’ve been saying that for years.

          • Justin Russell

            LMAO Ignoring facts and evidence does not negate them. You are a special kind of stupid

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Coming from a moron, I consider that a special kind of complement. Mixing a few facts with fiction and guesswork isn’t truth my boy. Consider yourself schooled, Sport!

          • Justin Russell

            I would LOVE to compare IQ’s but sadly, I feel your massive “$1” would only make me feel pity for you. Look at how much of a pussy you are… hiding behind a fake name and a private profile. Nothing but a keyboard warrior secretly downloading kiddie porn. I feel sad for you little man… I hope you get laid one day, but PLEASE… don’t molest another child

          • Justin Russell

            When evidence is there (You can say it all you want and remain willfully ignorant) and you DO realize that the building blocks for life are found all over the universe. What will you change you “message” to if they find microbial life on Mars or Titan?

            And you sir… are a fucking moron. School shootings happen at religious schools dipshit and on top of that, most school shootings have been done by people that identify as “Conservative Christians.”

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            I find your foul language offensive, Justin. That’s usually the sign of low intelligence or the owner of a small penis with atrophied testicles. Grow up boy, your ineptitude is showing!

          • Justin Russell

            LMAO Got the comment removed like the little bitch you are lol

            You all suck Christ’s cock cause we all know he was gay for his 12 apostles (Even if it is nothing more than a fairy tale… odd the word “Fairy” firs it perfectly).

            Go fuck another choir boy you pedophile pee pee puffers.

          • Justin Russell

            Oh and btw, I insult people of lower intelligence because willful ignorance desrerves NO RESPECT.

            You commenting about the size of my dick is funny. Must mean you are just jealous lol It’s ok. I am used to it being of above-average size as well as above-average intellect.

            Look assclowns, just because YOU can’t understand science, doesn’t mean it’s wrong… it just means you are stupid. A fact is a fact. The evidence is there. Just because YOU refuse to accept a fact does NOT change the fact… well that it is a fact. Your Bible is bullshit. It has fucking talking snakes, donkeys and cloud people. It has all salt-water breathing fish surviving a”a rain (fresh-water dipshits) that covered the earth in water (Fresh water of that magnitude would have DESTROYED the salt-water, killing EVERY SPECIES of ocean life)” You people are funny as fuck defending that bullshit. It takes a feeble mind to believe in a fairy tale, so I see why you all do lol

            I am not mad at any of you… In fact I feel nothing but pity for you, much as I would a child with a traumatic brain injury that can’t understand anything.

          • Angel Triumphant

            Evolution is a THEORY… With still, as yet, NO PROOF.

          • Paul Hiett

            You clearly don’t know what a theory is. Please, seriously, educate yourself before making that kind of a statement.

          • Mike Laborde

            You must have gone to upside down school with Bill Clinton changing the meaning of theory.

          • Angel Triumphant

          • Viking Knight

            there is at least six different “String Theories” contradictory to each other so mathematically at least 5 are wrong !
            so what your point, because all 6 might be wrong !?

          • Chel216

            From the definition of “Theory” with the example:

            “a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.” “Darwin’s theory of evolution”

          • Bill

            A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation and you’re a moron

          • Mike Laborde

            Tested with the thumb on the scale.

          • bill2

            that would be creationism. evolution actually has to follow the scientific protocols

          • namelessghost

            So you must not believe in atomic theory, germ theory, the theory of general relativity or any other scientific theory. You know, because they’re just THEORIES.

          • Angel Triumphant

            “Must” I?
            Macro evolution is a theory, that isn’t proven, nor will it ever be proven… it can’t be, simply because it isn’t true.

          • namelessghost

            Yes, you must. Because if “it’s only a theory” is a valid reason to dismiss
            the theory of evolution, it’s an equally valid reason to dismiss all of science.

          • George T

            Angel Triumphant: You were right up to the first comma. It has been proven. If you’re not willing to learn about that proof, is it our fault or yours?

          • Paul Hiett

            “A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.”

          • MisterPine

            God, I hope Oboehner is reading this.

          • J-Rock

            Which is what Evolution is Paul, a theory. You can’t observe a organism change over millions of years. So please explain how the scientific method applies to the observation of eons.

          • Mike Laborde

            Well-substantiated? Ha , you’re joking , right.

          • Steve Hanson

            Ok, so what experiment have done that shows that life can arise from life? Eukaryotes from Prokaryotes?

          • lajaw

            Wrong. It’s a hypothesis. But not a scientific hypothesis. It’s a religious hypothesis.

            For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it.

          • bill2

            and the scientific method has been applied, that’s why evolution is called a theory

          • Ed Words

            Then why does the ‘atheistic’ Catholic Church teach it in
            their schools?

          • Angel Triumphant

            All atheistic schools teach it – catholics, in case you aren’t aware, are not Christian; but back to the point, were you ever taught things in school as fact, that when you grew up, found wasn’t the truth? LOL

          • George T

            “catholics, in case you aren’t aware, are not Christian”

            Um… which Christian denomination are you?

          • Angel Triumphant

            I’m a follower of Christ… not a “denomination”…

          • George T

            Okay… which denomination do your beliefs best match? There is no non-denominational category or “true Christian” denomination. Your beliefs regarding the trinity, Jesus’ level of divinity, and various other key questions would show which denomination your beliefs match.

          • Angel Triumphant

            For the short time I went to church, about 2 months, as a young girl – it was a Baptist church. When I married at 17, I went to a Pentacostal Church. When I got Saved, and HEALED, it was Pentacostal…
            After my marriage failed, I strayed from my Lord… when He, in His Mercy&Grace, called me back to Himself in 2012, and showed me the “lateness of the hour”, He led me to an online church which is non-denominational… God did Not make denominations, man did –
            I believe Jesus, The Word, the Only Begotten Son of The Living God, Yeshua.
            There is God – God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
            The hour is late; if you don’t KNOW Him, as your personal Lord, Savior, God and soon Returning King, I would, with all my heart, soul and being, ask you to Please Seek Him while He may be found. Things are changing, Rapidly….
            this year is the (started in September) Shmitah year, and next year is Jubilee.. if you do not know or understand the significance of this, I would suggest you find out, quickly.
            If you want to know the lateness of the hour, I would recommend checking out brother Matthew, aka, “codesearcher dotnet” on YouTube.
            God bless you, in Jesus name

          • George T

            Sooooo… I gather that you believe in the triune, a concept devised at the Council of Nicea but never mentioned in the bible.

            Every interpretation of the bible, including those that believe in the triune, is a denomination. At this point it’s impossible to come up with a new non-denominational interpretation of the bible. By claiming to be non-denominational, you’re just being a Christian version of a hipster that refuses to accept the title of “hipster”. Way to go! That makes you WAY cooler than all of those intellectually honest people that claim a denomination. You’re a rebel for Jesus!!!

          • Angel Triumphant

            Well there ya go…

          • Justin Russell

            There is proof dumbass. A “Theory” has proof. You are thinking of the word “Hypothesis” which is an untested and unverified thought, so until evidence is available, it can not be a “Theory.” If you don’t buy that… It’s called the “Theory of Gravity.” Go to the top of a skyscraper and step over the edge. Since gravity is just a “Theory” you might not plummet to the earth and die. If you are not willing to do that, admit you are a dumbass that doesn’t understand what a theory is and never bring that into an argument again

          • Angel Triumphant

            Simple Definition of theory
            (from Websters…)
            : an idea or set of ideas that is intended to explain facts or events
            : AN IDEA THAT IS SUGGESTED OR PRESENTED AS POSSIBLY TRUE BUT THAT IS NOT KNOWN OR PROVEN TO BE TRUE.

            Again, it is a Theory. . That will never be proven, because it is a lie.
            I hope you find The Truth before you stand Him before at The Judgement.
            Peace🐑🐑🐑💖

          • namelessghost

            Well that explains it then… you only understand one definition of the word “theory,” and of course, it’s the simple definition.

            Now this might be a really radical suggestion, but don’t you think that you might benefit from expanding your horizons just a teeny bit? For example, you could try more than one resource when looking up the definition of an unfamiliar word. You know, nothing can be more impressive than a well-rounded vocabulary with an apt word for every situation 😉

            Theory
            noun, plural theories.

            1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena:
            Einstein’s theory of relativity.
            Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine

          • Justin Russell

            Do you understand in science there are theories and hypothesis….

            Secondly, all scientific “Theories” have FACTS supporting them and have withstood the scientific method which requires the same tests being done repeatedly and ALWAYS getting the same result.

            Now will you be willing to accept he challenge I stated above to prove that scientific theories aren’t true and step off the side of a sky scraper? If not, shut your hole because you will be admitting you believe in “Theories” as “Facts.” So waiting to hear where and what building you will choose, otherwise stick with Timothy 2:12 and do not speak above a man…. Or are you a hypocrite there as well?

          • Justin Russell

            BTW… Prove it is a lie… let’s see the “proof” that you have that shows evolution isn’t the truth. Scientists have offered OVERWHELMING evidence, yet religion offers not even one tiny iota to “prove” anything.

            Remember dipshit, religion RELIES on faith… Belief without proof.on ce proof is given, faith is DESTROYED. So technically you know not only can you NOT give viable, testable evidence of your deity for the simple reason it doesn’t exist, you can’t because your religion won’t allow you to, even if you could.

            Critical thinking biatch….

            Keep smoking that shit… It’s working wonders on your brain activity lol

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Exactly, the THEORY of evolution is PSEUDOSCIENCE. If it were solid science then it wouldn’t be considered a theory, now would it?!? You can’t reason with “STUPID” so why even try?

          • Jackson N Ashley McCoy

            Then let’s stop teaching science then to! Hey math and English is all that’s left.
            Oh wait there religion in English to. So let’s just teach math let’s see how that works!

          • Bill

            why would we do that?

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Yes, but we cannot mention Newton or Leibnitz in Calculus class because they were Christians. 🙂 FFRF has really lost their sanity on this one.

          • James Von Borcke

            “Hey math and English…”

            Numbers Theory is just a theory. 😉

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Simple math isn’t a theory, contrary to
            mistaken belief. You’re comparing apples to oranges.

          • James Von Borcke

            Numbers Theory is a theory. That’s the way theories work.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            You’re just trying to argue for arguments sake.

          • Josey

            Evolution is not a proven science at all, it is nothing more than a absurd theory.

          • Paul Hiett

            I suggest you learn what a theory is, in science, as what you just said is entirely incorrect.

            “A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.”

          • John_33

            Scientific theories can become obsolete or superseded. For example, flat earth theory, spontaneous generation, and alchemy.

            http://en.wikipedia (dot) org/wiki/Superseded_scientific_theories

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            The theory of evolution in relation to the human race does not meet those standards!

          • pastoredsmith

            Hello Paul. Trolling again today, I see. Are you assigned to this website or do you just hate it enough to spend your life insulting it?
            Atheists like you are angry, hate-filled people who wish nothing less than ridding America of the Christian influence. Period. You hate God, you hate His people and you ridicule those who are not well learned in its truth in an attempt to bring the entire truth of God down to your pond scum-evolving level. It won’t work. You can attack people, but you cannot destroy the truth with your wild imagination by calling it “science.”
            True science discovers and reports it accurately, with no agenda to prove. Yet, today, every piece of newly scientific discovery I read about is shrouded in evolutionary theory and big bang nonsense rather than a simple discovery. The agenda of proving the imaginary wild-eyed ramblings of a disgruntled preacher who set out to discredit God and ended up recanting his imaginary theories on his death bed have become “fact.”
            Atheism has become a cult and a false religion in this world and is nothing but a disease among mankind.
            I suggest you accept Christ and give up trying to destroy the truth. Only the truth that you try to destroy will set you free of your anger and hate for God and His people.

          • Justin Russell

            Personally, I couldn’t care less what deity you believe in. However trying to force your religion on people by playing the victim will NOT be tolerated.

            I’ll tell you my story:

            I grew up deep in religion. I paid my own way through summer Bible camp. I went to service, Sunday school and teen groups.

            The I actually went BEYOND listening to what others said and READ the Bible… It was all bullshit. It can be denounced EASILY in the first 21 lines of Genesis alone.

            Atheists hate “God” as much as we hate Harry Potter lol They are both fictional. What we “hate” is pompous religious assholes like yourself that think you have all the answers, provide ZERO evidence for your cockamamie ideas and ignore facts and evidence. Let’s look at the word “Faith.” It is defined as “Proof without evidence.” Plain and simple, if you claim you “Know because you have evidence,” you are telling people you have “No faith” and therefor are a fake Christian as Christianity requires “Faith.”

            I suggest you take a remedial science class because it is clear you are just too stupid to understand basic science.

          • Britt

            Lol this is amazing. So a magical being poofing everything into existence is less absurd to you?

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            A hundred years ago much of what we do today would be considered magic.

          • Steve Hanson

            We prefer the term “procedurally generated”. The end result of a “program” with purposeful design contraints. All designed by a masterful “programmer”. It’s quite obvious that we, with our intellect were purposefully designed, and design can only come from an intelligent mind. Why you would call this “magic poofing” is beyond me. This worn out phrase is overused by atheists to try and cast Christians as simple minded.

          • Britt

            We don’t need special phrases to make you seem simple-minded because the mindless comments you make.

            “It’s quite obvious that we, with our intellect were purposefully designed, and design can only come from an intelligent”

            When something is obvious, it is easy to prove. You have proven nothing with your statement. You have simply regurgitated Christian rhetoric infused with elementary school “technical terms” to try and borrow from the credibility of science.

            If Christians weren’t such arrogant, unabashed assholes about the ADMITTED gaps in our scientific knowledge (i.e. – the comment I originally replied to) then they wouldn’t have their beliefs met with such vitriol.

          • Steve Hanson

            Why are atheists so angry? Speaking from experience, there may be anger due to some sense of persecution for having a minority view, enflamed by the certainty that one is intellectually superior to the masses that surround you. Oh, and we are the ones who are the arrgant, unabashed assholes? Perhaps we are just getting tired of those who restort to ridicule when we have a hard time believing what they believe. Their arguments and philosophies are anti-human which try to reduce humans to a mere pointless existence, which, by the way is probably why we should not listen to them. They themselves believe they are a pointless collection of atoms in a pointless universe. We don’t believe the human mind and the human experience is just something that the universe happened to cobble together. But since they clearly believe that, why should we listen to them? By the way, the technical terms and elaborate story telling evolutionists use are just a way to hide behind a facade of cluelessness. Explanations, which have never been demonstrated in a lab. Darwinians can stare falsification (like the Cambrian Explosion) in the face and still say, “It evolved.” They look at the complex operation of the cell and say “It evolved”. They describe the complex processes of the eye and the ear and yet they still say “It evolved”. They concoct elaborate, unprovable stories of how these complex systems came to be by chance. Sure, this proves everything about evolution. By the way, we aren’t trying to be arrogant. We are just quite sick and tired of those atheists who don’t look inward at their own faith, yet ridicule those of a different belief.

          • Britt

            Yes you poor, poor persecuted Christians never get anything your way, right? Always trampled over and never consulted on anything.

            The sad truth is that you are finally seeing your deathgrip on society loosen and it pisses you off. In your conquest to stay the dominant group you have lost every characteristic that makes you a Christian. But that’s Ok, because we’re all just a “pointless collection of atoms in a pointless universe”, right?

            Btw, you might want to look up the difference between atheism and nihilism so you don’t look like such an ignorant prick.

          • Justin Russell

            We seem angry, but in reality, we are jovial and laughing at how retarded you are

          • Justin Russell

            I just think you are pissed that people are coming out as atheists because they refuse to allow yahoos like you to keep them gagged and bound any more. Hell i bet your kids are atheists lol I hate to tell you this, but without indoctrination into religion… you would be an atheist as that is the original stance of humans until someone teaches religion.

          • Justin Russell

            The Bible itself says your deity magically created everything. Are you that stupid not to have caught onto that? Have you not read Genesis… Atheists have…

          • Justin Russell

            Explain the appendix, the tail bone, cancer, blindness, deafness and birth defects? If that’s all part of the “Master Plan,” your “Master” is an a-hole

          • Ed Words

            The Son of God dying for little ol’ you

            is not absurd?

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            So true, Josey, so very true!

          • Justin Russell

            Like gravity?

          • Mike Laborde

            No, evolution is yours and many others religion. Look up the meaning of religion.

          • bill2

            “The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods”

            and evolution is a scientific theory which means

            “a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.”

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            It’s not well established, especially in regards to the human race!

          • bill2

            that’s the dictionary definition, seems pretty established to me

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            I’ve said it before, a Scientific Theory attempts to explain something based on the Laws of Science. The “Theory of Evolution” is nothing more than a proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence. In other words, it is an unconfirmed hypothesis. It is pseudoScience at best! You can’t scientifically test a belief!

          • Nox

            evolution follows the laws of science exactly

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Wrong again, it is a belief based on bits and pieces of scientific investigations without any steady flow of evidence. JUNK SCIENCE LIKE GLOBAL WARMING! Truth hurts but you’ll get over it.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            More in line as a “CULT” with Darwin as it’s leader.

          • Angel Triumphant

            Darwin actually repented on his deathbed but “the world” doesn’t tell people that. .. go figure

          • George T

            Angel Triumphant: So? Doesn’t change the fact that his general theory, with several modifications and corrections over time, has been fairly accurate given evidence from several scientific disciplines.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Scientific Theory attempts to explain something based on the Laws of Science. The “Theory of Evolution” is nothing more than a proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence. In other words, it is an unconfirmed hypothesis. It is pseudoScience at best!

          • George T

            iLLuSioNaTi: Actually it’s a lot of information from several fields of study including paleontology, biogeography, embryology, comparative anatomy, and molecular biology. The theory has fit the evidence found across all of these fields of study, and vice versa. If you have a more stringent and rigorous standard that you think scientists should adhere to, then look into this field of study and employment. Ultimately it’s not my responsibility to prove anything to you. You don’t seem too receptive to new information or differing views and opinions anyway.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Actually it is a theory that has yet to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Until then it is just a belief system loosely woven together by bits and pieces of various disciplines of Science with many many gaps. You have no idea how open I am to new information or differing views and opinions, I just don’t believe in fantasies and I would caution others not to fall for “The Science Is Settled” concept! Science is NEVER settled, and close only counts in horseshoes and handgrenades. Angel Triumphant attempted to help you see the light but you don’t seem too receptive to the facts. I bet you are one of those misguided people like Obama and the Pope who believe the lies about man-made global warming/climate change. Most people who believe in the PseudoScience of Evolution are usually prone to flights of fancy and Junk Science.

          • George T

            The science is settled for now. The whole point of doing away with making scientific “laws” is never completely settling anything. Scientists love it when new, conflicting data is found to upset standard assumptions. But for the sake of function and time it’s required to assume that if it crawls like a crab and eats like a crab that we figure a horseshoe crab is a crab until we get more data that shows that it’s actually a closer relative of arachnids.

            You might be right that a better theory will supplant evolution or climate change. Do you expect scientists to just say “we’re not sure of anything” and close up all of their labs until then? I don’t. I expect them to continue operating with the current data set. Keep finding more data to add. Maybe they’ll find data that upsets the paradigm. Maybe they’ll find data that reinforces the paradigm. Just waiting for all knowledge to come to humanity holistically is a ridiculous proposition.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            The only thing settled in science is that it is never settled because science itself is imperfect since it cannot measure everything.

            Man-made Global Warming/Climate Change is a hoax based on lies, this has been proven. Also, the impact Humans have on the climate is negligible compared to Solar activity, along with volcanism on the surface of the Earth and below the sea, not to mention other natural forces. Humans definitely cause pollution, but Global Warming or Climate Change are absolutely not byproducts of Human activity. As stated, when considering Global Warming or Climate Change, pollution by Humans is negligible compared to natural forces, a drop in the bucket as it were.

            The Theory of Evolution is flawed based on wishful thinking by flawed Humans. I am not saying that there is no evolution, just not the way that it is taught. Some evolution by natural selection can be proven but the Theory of Evolution can’t be explained entirely by natural selection. If anyone tells you differently then they are lying to you. There are simply too many gaps in the evidence to account for all living things.

            JUNK SCIENCE ~ PURE AND SIMPLE!

          • George T

            So you assert that there’s no reason for us to try to understand anything using the scientific method because we’re not omniscient.

            Okay. Great. Gotcha.

            Congratulations. That’s the most absurd proposition I’ve heard this week.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            You have said it, George T, not I. As for myself, I stand by what I have said. Try not to put words in my mouth and we’ll get along just fine. 😉

          • George T

            How else do you expect scientists to satisfy your stated requirements? The evidence that has been found does reasonably match projections and models based on evolutionary theory and climate change related theories. If you’re not satisfied… well, I’m really trying to care about your opinion but I’m not seeing any evidence to show that it’s more valid.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            “The evidence that has been found does reasonably match projections and models based on evolutionary theory and climate change related theories.”

            Not true ~ the timeline for human development is absolutely too short for natural selection to account for the rapid advancement of modern Humans, both physiologically and otherwise. And then there’s that pesky missing link, that to this day, elludes everyone’s grasp.

            As for Climate Change, I believe that I, along with hundreds of other Scientist, have presented sound evidence that has proven that nature is the culprit, not Human activity. Humans are responsible for the bulk of pollution but nature is responsible for Climate Change. If you took away all the natural factors you would find that Human activity is negligible in regards to Climate Change. Now that’s a model that makes sense. The Man-made CO2 Climate Change hoax is nothing more than a way for Global Socialist to spread the wealth and for frauds like Al Gore to get rich!

          • George T

            I see no evidence showing why I should reconsider these topics that I’ve already read about. You’ve simply said that you think it’s something else and seem to want me to think that you’re opinion should outweigh the findings of the scientific community.

            Instead of making Devil’s advocate claims to oppose the scientific community in the comments section of a news article, why don’t you submit your theories for peer review?

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            It’s been done numerous times by many in the scientific community, but the mainstream academic types (so-called Professors) and other FOOLS with livelihoods that depend on unbending “Science” continue to ignore the FACTS that fly in the face of “Their Truth”! If you, and others here, had bothered to look for FACTS about Recurring Climate Change and normal Cycles of Nature instead of accepting the LIES you have been fed about CO2 by Al Gore and other MORONS then you wouldn’t be in the dark like the Pope. I think we’re done here, have a better one.

          • George T

            Sooooo…. no real evidence or information to show us. Gotcha

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            ummm…do your own homework, we’re done here…Gotcha

          • George T

            I have looked at the information and even if temperatures weren’t rising (which they are) it still shows numerous reasons for humans to cut down on CO^2 emissions.

            If you have different information I am completely willing to read and consider it.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            It is simply not true that temperatures have been rising, and as for CO2 emissions, there is absolutely no scientific reason to be concerned. Lay off the Kool Aid, it is obviously causing brain damage.

            As I said, we’re done here, I refuse to allow you to waste any more of my valuable time. Any response on your part will be a waste of yours!

          • George T

            iLLuSioNaTi: Saying the sky is green doesn’t make it a fact. Just like saying “temperatures haven’t been rising” doesn’t automatically make it a fact. Temperatures have been rising. The data from numerous sources shows this. If you have data that disproves that, please show us. I’m open to considering your claim.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            George T: The sky is not green, it’s not even blue. The false data of rising temperatures globally has already been exposed as a falsehood and Global Warming has proven to be a hoax, where have you been young man? If you have untainted proof to the contrary I would love to see it. Thus far it’s all been lies. Give up the Kool Aid before it causes irreversible brain damage! Contrary to popular belief mental illness is contagious.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Most people would agree that Climate Change is real (unless you never go outside). However, CO2 has nothing to do with Climate Change or the disproven activities in the United States is negligible compared to all the other countries of the world. In fact, the CO2 emissions caused by the entire Human Race is negligible compared to natural volcanic activity around the world, not to mention other natural factors. I reiterate, CO2 has NOTHING to do with Climate Change, and here’s why. Climate Change is a natural cyclic phenomenon produced by many factors of NATURE, one of which is our own Sun and the internal processes that produce cycles which it goes through. This has been well documented for many decades, before most of you who are reading this were born. Let’s get down to the facts here, President Obama, Al Gore and the LWNJ Crony Crapitalist in the environmental movement are counting on useful idiots like George T and Guzzman here to help push their agenda for alternative energy sources SO THEY CAN GET RICH! Follow the money people. Now there’s nothing wrong with trying to develop alternative energy sources, but to lie to everyone and further destroy our economy and jobs is not the way to do it. Let’s not confuse misidentified air pollution with the mechanics of Climate Change. CO2 is to plants as Oxygen is to humans and other animals. CO2 is carbon dioxide, not carbon monoxide (CO) which is toxic to all life. CO2=Good and CO=Bad ~ WAKE UP PEOPLE, STOP BEING SHEEPLE!

          • Angel Triumphant

            Please sir, show us the “evidence”

          • George T

            Angel Triumphant: Why? I hope you don’t take this as dismissive or rude but I’m not getting paid to teach you. I read about the scientific evidence over many years because I was curious about this subject. If you’re really interested I’d expect you to look into it yourself. Predisposition to believing something else would probably keep you from reading conflicting information. …but hey, prove me wrong. Do some reading and show me that you’re open to challenging your own convictions and beliefs.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Right, if it doesn’t fit their narrative the left ignores inconvenient facts.

          • Sweetpea

            Evolution is a theory & has never been proven, But the Bible has been proven over & over again.

          • bill2

            evolution has been proven through fossils, DNA testing and observing animals adapt to their environments, and your bible has never been proven

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Sorry Billy, evolution is ONLY a theory. It has not been proven; if it had been proven then it wouldn’t be a theory, little boy. YOU HAVE BEEN SCHOOLED!

          • bill2

            A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.

            you need to read more

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Son, let me tell you something. “Theory” does not equal “established fact”. If it did it wouldn’t be called a theory, now would it! In Science you have well established facts and then you have theories waiting to be proven or disproven. What about the scientific process do you not understand? Furthermore, the “THEORY” of Evolution regarding the Human Race is far from being proven. It is scientifically impossible for the Human Race to have developed by way of Evolution given the allotted time we have been in existence. YOU NEED TO LEARN COMMON SENSE!

          • bill2

            in science it does. as my definition show the scientific definition of the word theory is the layman definition of the word fact

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            A Scientific Theory attempts to explain something based on the Laws of Science. The “Theory of Evolution” is nothing more than a proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence. In other words, it is an unconfirmed hypothesis. It is pseudoScience at best!

          • Nox

            the evidence is overwhelming if you bother to look

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Overwhelming for miniscule minds I suppose. Would you like to buy some prime farmland in the middle of the desert? Perfect for growing juicy watermelons. Only $1 an acre. Better jump on it before it’s all gone!

          • namelessghost

            “In Science you have well established facts and then you have theories
            waiting to be proven or disproven.”

            lmfao! Do you honestly think that you understand anything at all about the scientific process?

            In science, a law (your “well established fact”) describes something and a theory explains it. Theories aren’t just guesses that are sitting around waiting to be proven so that they can be promoted to laws. Theories never become laws because laws and theories are two entirely different things.

          • iLLuSioNaTi
          • namelessghost

            “…a theory is only a postulation based on one’s belief for whatever reason.”

            You should know better than that. Or did you get your “Scientific belt” from a box of Cracker Jacks? lol

            “Theories are theories simply because they haven’t been proven to be indisputable facts yet. When they become “well established facts”, and not just “BELIEFS”, they are no longer “theories”.”

            There you go again with the whole ‘theories waiting to be proven so that they can become facts’ thing.

            Nothing in science is ever “proven” and scientific theories never become anything other than theories. Got it yet? It’s really not that complicated.

            “The “Theory of Evolution” is nothing more than a proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence. In other words, it is an unconfirmed hypothesis. It is pseudoScience at best!”

            Evolution is a fact. Natural selection is the theory that best explains evolution’s mechanisms. It’s not an unconfirmed hypothesis. It’s not pseudoScience. Evolution by natural selection is one of the best substantiated theories in the history of science, supported by observations and evidence throughout the fields of genetics, paleontology, geology, ecology, anatomy and developmental biology.

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Your lack of common sense astounds me. Prove that the Theory of Evolution is fact and I’ll stfu, otherwise you’re just Whistling Dixie. Thus far you have proven nothing but that you are a parrot repeating a bunch of academic hogwash. You say this and you say that but you still haven’t proven a thing or “connected the dots” as they say! The reason why you and others can’t is because there are far too many gaps (holes) in your theory. It brings to mind, you can’t get there from here! It’s just too subjective! Like Psychiatry and conspiracy theories, there’s simply nothing solid to hang your hat on. If it were a boat it would sink and if it were a spaceship you would suffocate. A lot of so-called Science is that way. Even people like Obama and the Pope are taken in with junk science with all the man-made global warming/climate change hype. It’s no different with the “Theory” of Evolution. Not all pieces make a whole no matter how hard you try to make them all fit together. As a once famous man said, “You can’t believe everything you see and hear, can you; now if you’ll excuse me I must be on my way.”

          • namelessghost

            “Your lack of common sense astounds me.”

            That’s quite amusing, considering the source.

            You lack a basic understanding of science. There’s a reason we have nearly universal acceptance among scientists for the theory of evolution. It’s because all the evidence thus far examined supports the theory — and none contradicts it. There are mountains of hard evidence that are freely available to anyone who doesn’t willfully choose to ignore it.

            I know, I know… it would be so much easier if evolution was wrong and living things didn’t evolve through random mutation. I mean, who wants to work at actually trying to learn something? (They don’t call it “cognitive dissonance” for nothing). But deliberate ignorance is inexcusable, and only those who deliberately avoid reading the science can possibly deny its truth.

          • lajaw

            Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. Nothing testable in historic evolution. It’s all an untestable hypothesis.

          • bill2

            have you even read any of the science on evolution? it isn’t untested.

          • lajaw

            You can’t test undocumented history.

          • bill2

            sure you can. you can see the genetic similarities between animal which proves a common ancestor, you can review transitional fossils and you can see animals adapting to their environments

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Your so-called “Theory” has too many holes in it, not unlike the disproven man-made Global Warming!

          • bill2

            you are and idiot. neither of those things have holes and the only one who thing they do are the inbred

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            And you are an illiterate moron, a sub-human if you will.

          • Nox

            piss off you worthless pig

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Byte me you sub-human POS!

          • Steve Hanson

            When you have organisms that are related genetically and look alike, that is homology and is claimed as evidence for evolution. So, if you have organisms that are not related genetically yet have the same functions/genes, etc., that should then be evidence against evolution. But that is not the case. Even when the evidence does not support common descent, it is still claimed as evidence for evolution. It’s the old “heads I win, tails you lose” scenario. Can you prove it was convergence? No, but that doesn’t matter. It has to be because there is no other option in your worldview so you have to stick by that answer. In other words, no matter what you find, evolution can explain it. When a person suffers from evolutiondidit syndrome, it’s very hard to distinguish fact from fiction. No matter how you slice it, evolution does not predict convergence and especially the almost innumerable examples of it. Are you really prepared to accept random mutation as the answer to that anomaly? The entire Darwinist narrative is like that. It’s all crap on the face of it.

          • Nox

            that’s how science works and you would know that if you actually understood evolution

          • Steve Hanson

            That’s usually the typical atheist reply. “You’re too stupid to understand evolution”. That is just one of Darwinist debating devices. As you wave your magic wand of millions of years over the empty table, wonderful things appear behind the curtain as you utter your magic words like “appear”, “arise”, “emerge”, “develop”, “evolve”, and “converge”. Evolutionists believe in magic too you see. They just are never able to reveal how the trick is done.

          • Nox

            you prove my point by describing evolution like that

          • Steve Hanson

            Nope. It’s actually the way is evolution is constantly being described by those who believe in it without ever demonstrating it. Believing in blind processes to account for all of the design in the universe without any scientific evidence to back it up is one thing, but to exclude every other nonmaterialistic theory is another thing. Atheists, naturalists, and materialists have always told us to be skeptical, and to be open-minded
            about all assertions. In the end, it’s funny how they never followed their own rules when it came to contradictory beliefs.

          • Nox

            Look up how evolution works idiot

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Try this on for size. A Scientific Theory attempts to explain something based on the Laws of Science. The “Theory of Evolution” is nothing more than a proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence. In other words, it is an unconfirmed hypothesis. It is pseudoScience at best, and I don’t care what your screwed up text books say!

          • Nox

            check the fossil record, check the genetic similarities between species and look at the examples of evolution that are occurring now

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Too many holes to be viable science. PSEUDOSCIENCE! Look it up genius! I bet you’re one of those morons that believe in man-made global warming/climate change. ROFLMAO

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            Pure Science is not guess work, Darwinism is.

          • Nox

            you are truly ignorant if you think evolution is guess work

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            FYI the “theory” of evolution is not empirical science, even Darwin voiced his doubts in his last days. More than 50% of it is assumptions based on wishful thinking!

          • iLLuSioNaTi

            evolution = pseudoscience

            Pseudoscience has no place in public schools.

          • Jackson N Ashley McCoy

            I agree with you on this! Let’s stop teaching history!

          • George Jungle

            The lack of basic logic in your argument is astounding. The concept here is that theists of all denominations are not allowed to PROMOTE religion in public schools as per the bill of rights and US constitution.

          • James Von Borcke

            “Then that would exclude a lot of history…”

            Not in the slightest. For instance, to say that “England’s Protestant rule and Spain’s Catholic rule was a major contributing factor during their colonial conflicts” would be stating an historical fact without any transgression over the 1st Amendment. On the other hand, if a teacher said, “England was a Protestant nation while Spain was ruled by dirty Catholics,” then the teacher would be crossing the line by teaching that one is better than the other. The position of a secular state is to express ~neutrality~ towards ~all~ religions and faiths without showing either preference or disdain for any.

            “…not to mention evolution which is clearly taught…”
            Which religion is Evolution supposedly a part of? I mean, yes, the vast majority of Atheists accept Evolution, but so do many Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Pagans, Druids, Wiccans, Pantheists, Deists, etc. Evolution doesn’t belong to any one religion, nor to Atheism alone, any more than kindness or compassion does. The assumption that Evolution is a religious tenant seems to stem completely from holding religious beliefs that reject Evolution, but the universal acceptance of Evolution by ~many~ faiths and non-faith alike disproves that assertion.

          • gager

            History is not religion…the history of religion is not religion. Please learn the difference.

          • Justin Russell

            Which oddly enough… Is a history based in fear torture and murder. hell I would think religious people would WANT that hidden lol

        • Albert Bricker Jr

          Evolution is taught by some Christian groups as doctrine so I guess that needs to be excluded from public schools. Separation of Church and State are you a atheist text book fanatic? It clearly says He taught nothing about Church or faith. Discrimination rings loud and clear.

          • Bill

            no christian group teaches evolution as doctrine. they just acknowledge that it’s a fact

          • Tomas Clough

            And you know this how?

          • Bill

            I actually read. can you prove that I’m wrong?

          • Tomas Clough

            It’s more common theology than you would think. And your partially correct, a lot of churches won’t actually preach it from the pulpit, but generally won’t argue with it. Change in thinking is hard and that goes for Christians as much as anyone. Try watching the movie God’s Not Dead. It may surprise you.

          • James Von Borcke

            “Try watching the movie God’s Not Dead. It may surprise you.”
            I did watch it, and it bothered me. It used the “Atheist is mad at God” cliche, and the arguments used by the protagonist could have been easily dismissed simply using the same rules of logic expected of high school debate teams, let alone by an ‘angry atheist professor’ who’s supposed to be well versed in the philosophies. This, of course, was because the target audience wouldn’t have understand the majority of the dialogue had it truly been a debate between an advanced philosophy student and his professor being held in front of other advanced philosophy students who would themselves understand.
            Plus for a theatrical release, it had all the production value of an ABC After School Special.
            And that’s the problem with movies like God’s Not Dead; it’s marched around with drums and trumpets and proclaimed to be a defense of my faith, but all it does is make my faith look childish and irrational to anyone already prone to disbelief. In fact, I’d say that having my faith ‘defended’ in such a foolish manner is actually an insult. Not that I would have cared, had it not been for the aforementioned drums and trumpets.

          • Tomas Clough

            Man, I’ve got to agree with you there. I mean any one who would get that angry and consume any amount of their personal time openly working against a God the believe not to exist couldn’t possible be a very good atheist and obviously not intelligent enough to be a college professor. Good call. 😉

          • James Von Borcke

            I’d say your intended snark failed due to your having not read my post through to the end… There’s a surprise in the last paragraph you seemed to have missed.

          • Tomas Clough

            Lol. Hey man. If you want to spend your time lashing out at good people, by all means. Whatever makes you feel smarter than the next guy. And I did read your post and you know what? You sound a lot like someone trying really hard to be smarter than the next guy. I don’t like pushy, overbearing christians. Please don’t invade my space or insult me because my lifestyle isn’t totally scriptural. I am a professional tattoo artist by trade. I get it. It’s annoying. But does their scorn change who I am? Not even a little bit. And honestly the majority of the Christians I know are pretty open minded. The church is becoming a lot more progressive, though not perfect. But then who am I to decide what perfect is. And that’s my point. You are the bad guy here. A teacher who just happens to be a christian, spoke to a Christian club about non Christian things and people like you get butthurt. You don’t have to be smarter than most to see the redundancy in that. Just kinda sad and lonely. I don’t pray much, but I just may for you. Too snarky?

          • James Von Borcke

            “I don’t like pushy, overbearing christians”
            I’m not… I’m simply a defender on knowledge and reason confronting the forces of ignorance and superstition.

            Your post does a lot of work attempting to dismiss me through your own personal assumptions (for instance, I could have easily been a patron of your shop, being rather well adorned with ink and piercings myself, but I’d guess you never considered such a possibility), but switching from dismissing me for being a non-believer (as you did previously) and now dismissing me for believing too much (after you were corrected) shows that you simply want to dismiss me and will do so for whatever reason you think works best in any given moment without any consideration for self-evident facts.

            But I tell you what, here’s something that I posted before, but I’m not going to expect you to be familiar with every post I’ve made: Having debated Eric Hovind ~myself~, I can attest honestly that he ~does not~ have the skills necessary to talk to a class about critical thinking except to do two things: Either (A) undermine the subject matter by falsely teaching the students uncritical thinking because it furthers his own political agenda, or (B) to serve as an example of uncritical thinking for the class to dismantle through their own debate skills (which any high school level debater should have no problem doing).

            So while this article is about a letter by an organization dedicated to maintaining our nation’s secular mandate, I’ll state clearly that I, as a ~believer~, also question his motives and the motivation of the teaching staff that hired him to speak. As such, the letter simply does one thing: Calls for his visit to be ~investigated~ to ensure that the 1st Amendment was ~not~ violated during that visit. And, of course, if their was a violation, for steps to be taken to prevent further violations.

            I’d gladly read the transcript (or watch the video) and see for myself if such were made available. It would certainly settle the issue simply by answering the question at hand.

            As an aside, I am rather curious about whether Hovind paid taxes on the speaker fee, or if he put it down as a donation. The Hovinds have been rather crafty in that department, after all; Though not crafty enough, being that Eric’s dad is in prison and there are audio recordings (made public) of Eric and his father discussing the hiding of financial assets.

          • Tomas Clough

            I guess the pentagram picture threw me off. 🙂 Rock on my man. Just play nice. And I’d love to tattoo you. Shame on you for assuming otherwise.

          • James Von Borcke

            Didn’t assume otherwise… Simply stated that I could have easily come through your shop. My tats and piercings have very much been a part of my spiritual journey (along with sweat lodges, hook suspensions, ritual caning, etc.). And I’m always up for new ink. 🙂

            The pentagram is actually the center of the flag for my Leather House (note the blue and black of Leather Pride), representing Humanity rather than anything sinister. We’re an eclectic bunch.

          • J-Rock

            Logical fallacy. You stated that Evolution is fact. Tomas has the burden of rejoinder, which he clearly stated. You have the burden of proof. So what is it Bill prove it or walk.

          • James Von Borcke

            “So what is it Bill prove it or walk.”
            The proof is in the ~thousands upon thousands~ of scientific papers compiling the evidence gathered from the Creation itself (and remember, Creationism ~is~ the proposition that God’s using his own Creation to lie to us but somehow a small band of desert barbarians, who thought whales were fish and that the world was flat, got it right). Modern medicine validates evolution, else it wouldn’t work. Psychiatry validates evolution, else it wouldn’t work. Our satellites have to account for time-dilation, validating General Relativity (which is how we ~know~ the universe is some 14ish billion years old), else they (and the computer you’re on and the internet you’re using) wouldn’t work. See, that’s the wonderful thing about science; you know you’re on the right track when ~everything~ begins to fit together better than it did before.
            On the other hand, you turn to people like the Hovinds, who ~claim~ to be scientific in their approach to proving Creation, and they have nothing. Seriously, I’ve asked them for copies of their papers and research, in order to see if I could duplicate their results. Do you know what that got me? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. They have no papers, and they’ve done no research. No experiments. And absolutely zero evidence.
            In other words, the Hovinds claim to be ‘doing science’ is a lie.
            But don’t let that get in the way of a good “We’re Being Persecuted!” story. Especially when you need to feel persecuted in order to obtain some measure of self-validation.

          • J-Rock

            You have to admit James that the first part is a self pleasing Tu Quoque. I asked for evidence of Evolution not fun facts about Creationism. Secondly there are tons of inferences drawn from circumstances in your post which presupposed to be evolution – essentially by decree, not by objective observation or replicable experiment preformed on hypothesis based in objective observation. Could you clarify your premise? The Hovinds failed at science, it is a “lie”. Therefore Evolution must be true? You seem like a well read fellow you know that logic doesn’t follow.

          • James Von Borcke

            Problem is that you are asking me to do things that ~thousands~ of scientists have already done and have continued doing to 150 years. In essence, you’re attempting to make me responsible for your lack of an education, and then will claim that I have failed simply because you have ~chosen~ to remain ignorant. Do you really think you’re the first Bible Worshiper I’ve chanced upon? Think your arguments are new and insightful or perhaps even witty? Or that your denialistic methodology is something new? No, it’s just the same worn-out nonsense rehashed again and again.

            It would also serve at this point to point out another facet of Creationist Occultism at play here: The utter terror induced by the belief that if you even ~consider~ that anything other than Creationism might be true for even a moment puts your soul at risk of never-ending torture cannot, in any manner, make you open minded regarding such alternatives.

            Put simply, the problem isn’t your lack of knowledge, but rather that you have been conditioned by a terrorist methodology to fear knowledge and hate those who possess it (even while enjoying a lifestyle that is completely dependent on it). Fixing that would require months, perhaps years, of psychiatric treatment which I am not able to provide. Of course, it could have been prevented had you learned the importance of critical thinking, which is why the question of what this Creationist leader was doing at a class discussing a topic which is the antithesis of his life’s mission?

            Except, of course, to serve as an example of uncritical thinking. That he and his father pull off just fine.

          • J-Rock

            Lots of assumptions James, again I am seeing the running theme of someone who fills in blanks to suit a narrative. The only thing I am holding you responsible for is the burden of proof. You made an axiomatic claim regarding Evolution. Quit dodging and weaving. I expect you to have empirical evidence. Let’s start small.

            Selection from within a set does not produce anything outside the set. The offspring of a human is always human. Yet Evolution says, no. Proof?

            Earlier I asked you to clarify your premise, have you given up on that? The faults in Creationism, somehow validate other theories? Proof?

            You have now introduced in paragraph 2 and 3 that I am need of psychiatric treatment. Proof?

          • James Von Borcke

            Again, your ignorance is not my responsibility. That, alone, is proof enough of your need to psychiatric advice and care. I’m not here to educate you; simply to point out that your arguments are fallacious, your methodology is cliche, and your ignorance is a choice.

            But I tell you what… Next time you need medical care, you be sure to tell the doctor you don’t want a doctor that accepts Evolution or Evolutionary Theory… See how far that gets you.

            In fact, remove ~everything~ from your life that came from ‘godless science’ rather than from biblical teaching alone. Not sure if the Amish take in newcomers, but you might give it a try.

          • J-Rock

            Another snarky baseless rejoinder fueled by emotionalism. You made several claims, I asked you to back them up. You have failed to do that on every count. Your condensation is unbecoming and is misdirected. You presume superior knowledge because you accept and indulge in Appeal to Authority. Fallacious logic and reason.

            James you have added more unsubstantiated claims. Now my arguments are fallacious? Care to back that up with a syllogism or hell even an explanation? You yourself said that was your purpose for being here. Please do not deny me your purpose.

            The doctor comment is hilarious. Please read that again and understand what you are asserting. Then again you already alluded that medical science is contingent upon Evolution (Proof? No?). Guess this is par.

            The last paragraph is the most odd. Do you think our dialog has anything to do with Christianity? Go one up further, does it have anything to do with subset of Theism? I reject all “science” which hypotheses cannot be replicated for potential falsification.

          • James Von Borcke

            “Where’s the evidence for Evolution?” is essentially synonymous with
            “How do you multiply and divide?” There’s no reason for anyone living in
            a developed country to not know this except ~by choice~ (especially since ~all~ of the information is a simple Google search away, so if you ~honestly~ wanted it, you wouldn’t need to ask me for it).
            And the word that describes that choice is ‘ignorance’.
            See, you say it’s baseless, but it’s not baseless… It’s based on the ~fact~ that there isn’t a Creation Cultists in the world that is capable of ~honestly~ discussing and debating the topic. Even the masters of this cult, the Ken Hams and Kent Hovinds, are nothing more than snake oil salesmen, con artists and tax dodgers. And this Eric Hovind clown is even worse; all he’s capable of doing is parroting his convict father, which is par for the course for a follower rather than a leader.
            Creationism has nothing to do with Christianity; it is a Neo-Confederate anti-intellectual political movement that belongs in the garbage pit of ignorant ideas (alongside slavery, segregation, the KKK, racial purity and superiority, state imposed religion, and everything else the Confederate traitors held dear), and I have no problem calling it out as such.
            Point in fact: All Evolution did was reinforce what astronomers and geologists had already known for over a ~century~ before Darwin published his work, he simply added Biology to the fields of study that proved that Genesis is nothing more than a camel herder myth adhered to by ignorant serfs and promoted by their aristocratic masters. Note, for instance, how your politicians teach you to sneer at a college education, but then they all ensure that ~their~ kids go to the very colleges you’ve been trained to zealously distrust in such a Pavlovian manner… There’s a word for that, y’know. And the political and religious leaders of the anti-American neo-Confederates (the religious right and the Republican Party which they’ve taken over via Nixon’s Southern Strategy) have a history of embodying that very concept (just as Randy Boehning, the latest example of Theocratic filth to show his true colors).
            You ask for proof, but there is no way in which to post ~the sum total of human knowledge~ onto this thread. Because that’s what you Creationists are up against: The sheer total weight of everything ~known~ to be true. That is, it’s not just Evolution & Biology that conflicts with biblical teachings, but Physics, Mathematics, Astronomy, Geology, History, Linguistics, etc. etc. etc. There is not a single realm of study that has supported the biblical account of creation. Not a one.
            But what do I know? After all, you folks have Ray Comfort and his banana; who can argue with that logic?

          • J-Rock

            False analogy right out the gate followed by yet another Tu Quoque. Math and Evolution aren’t synonymous on any level in terms of ,”settled science.”

            Here is a running list:
            You stated that Evolution is true. I asked you to prove the cornerstone of Evolution, that Sets are capable of producing a entirely new subset. If you have proof, post it.

            You infer that the flaws of Creationism somehow validate Evolution. I stated that is a logical fallacy (which it is). Yet you still keep posting about it. A being false does not logically make B true.

            You stated with sweeping judgement that people who believe in Creationism are crazy. Please provide your psychiatric testing and results which are peer reviewed. Else, you made up a factoid to suit a narrative.

            You state I know nothing about Evolution theory. Please state how you know this. Please site which books I have read or not read. Else, you made up a factoid to suit a narrative.

            You think I am a Creationist. You incorrectly filled in the blanks, I am not.

            You think I am religious. You incorrectly filled in the blanks, I am not.

            You stated I committed a logical fallacy, I asked you to please detail which. You have willfully defected from that responsibility. I state it as a responsibility as you claimed that was your purpose.

            Now on to today’s fiasco.

            Darwin? Charles Darwin? The man believed that imaginary projections was science. He proved nothing, and his theories have long since been rejected. Instead of google, try an actual book, by Massimo Pigliucci Evolution – Extended Synthesis. If you want to defend evolution with dogmatic vigor please catch up.

            You say that you can’t post the entire sum of human knowledge. Where did I ask that? I asked very succinct questions. James, you haven’t answered one them.

            I mean, how do you explain that in a geological blink of an eye there were new complicated and diverse genetics that built all the new phyla, both flora and fauna? Those genetics did not exist in the single cell life immediately prior to the Cambrian Explosion. Let’s have some intellectual honestly here. I have no idea how that happened. However, I am not the one making the claims. You are. So either you can back them up or you can’t.

            I wasn’t around at T=0, I have no idea what happened. However in search of the truth you can’t be close minded. Philosophical materialism along with scientism cant possible give us all the answers.

          • James Von Borcke

            No, it’s not a false analogy. My knowledge of Evolution came about as a matter of choice… I ~chose~ to learn about it, thus I did. The only explanation for you ~not~ to have learned about Evolution is that you likewise ~chose~ not to, all the while insisting you’re capable of discussing a subject you’ve chosen not to know anything about (and tossing out a random name of one author does not an expert make, more on this towards the end).

            In short, your ignorance of Evolution is the equivalent of not knowing how to solve 5×5=A.

            I’ve never stated that the flaws of Creationism prove Evolution; I’ve simply stated that the flaws of Creationism disprove Creationism. It doesn’t line of with ~any~ field of study. Not a single one. Your insistence that this is false is not a failing on my part, but the result of your own ignorance-and-fear based world view.

            As for your desire to debate the evidence for Evolution, I see no need. After all, as a Creationist, your entire position will be based on Arguments from Ignorance, Appeals to Popularity, Slippery Slopes, and God-of-the-Gaps. In addition, debating Evolution with Creationists merely gives the Creationist the false impression that their mythical worldview is on equal footing with facts, data, experimentation and analysis. It isn’t, and I refuse to lie to you like that.

            Though I’d point out that ‘crazy’ and ‘delusional’ are not the same thing. I said you needed services, not medication.

            At this point, it doesn’t matter to me what you are (what what you allude to pretending to be). All I see is you making the same arguments that the Creationists always make (“Cambrian! Cambrian! Cambrian!” has as much meaning now as Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!” does), which means you aren’t here to add anything to the discussion except the same tired old nonsense we’ve already heard.

          • James Von Borcke

            Odd… Thought I posted a reply, but it seems to have gone missing.

            Oh, well; I guess I’ll run through this mess again.

            To begin, there is ~nothing~ false about my analogy. A lack of basic knowledge and understanding is equivalent to a lack of basic knowledge and understanding. That ~you~ aren’t able to find the answers to the question you seek is a ~personal~ problem that stems from either (A) a lack of legitimate desire or (B) an inability to educate yourself. I’m not capable of determining which, of course; that would be a question you’d have to address yourself, assuming you can overcome enough of your shortcomings to do so.

            The flaws of Creationism do ~not~ validate Evolution; the flaws of Creation discredit Creationism, while the evidence for Evolution validates Evolution by merit of ~fitting in with every other field of study~.

            I do not believe that Creationists are crazy; merely that they’ve had ignorance promoted as a virtue while having the very ~idea~ of shedding that ignorance equivocated to eternal damnation (a form of emotional terrorism typically used by abusive spouses and parents as well as numerous cult leaders throughout the ages), which is delusion, not insanity. Counseling, not medication, is required, most likely from someone who specializes in cult deprogramming. Crazy people need medication; Creationists just need counseling.

            A lot, some of them.

            As for whether or not you’re a Creationist… Well, put simply, Creationists pretending that they’re not Creationists but, rather, just skeptical people, but who then fail to bring anything to the discussion that isn’t right out of the Creationist’s Handbook, became cliche years ago. On the other hand, on the ~slight~ chance that you aren’t a Creationist, then you should understand that if all you bring to the table is the same thing that a Creationist would bring to the table, then you are ~effectively~ a Creationist insofar as this discussion goes and can be dismissed just as readily.

            Here’s an idea: Bring something ~new~ to the discussion rather than beating the proverbial dead horses. All you’re doing is making a big, stinky mess.

            Now, you dismiss ‘scientism’ as something that can’t supply all the answers (a declarative statement based solely on wishful thinking since there is no way of knowing either way), but the ~fact~ is that in the ~thousands~ of years that magical belief dominated human thought, it has never produced even a single answer to ~any~ question, but rather made declarations by fiat and used terms like ‘heathen’, ‘apostate’, and ‘blasphemer’ to silence any who questioned.

            Did magical belief tell us that the Earth orbited the sun? No, it told us the sun orbited the Earth. Did magical belief tell us about germs and bacteria? No, it told us that disease was the result of sin. Did magical belief tell us about antibiotics, medicine and surgery? No, it told us to pray. Did magical belief tell us about the genetic cause of birth defects? No, it told us that “God” was punishing the sinful (who had yet to be born in order to sin, no less!). Did magical belief tell us the nature of the stars in the sky? No, they were just lights that (in at least one biblical prophecy) will one day come down to Earth. (It’s gonna be hot the day ~one~ of those drops in, let alone ~all~ of them.)

            And it was only through militant persuasion (such as inquisitions, witch trials, armed conquest and genocide, all of which are rightly viewed today as both tyranny and terrorism) that magical belief retained its power for as long as it has.

            Again, you focus on Darwin, but once again I point out: Genesis was already discarded long before Darwin by Astronomers, Physicists and Geologists alike, with Evolution as an hypothesis running alongside them; the anger over Darwin was because it was the one theory to which Genesis could ~not~ be reinterpreted to match the facts (such as was attempted via Old Earth Creationism) as well as made suggestions regarding the relationship between Europeans and Africans that the post-Confederate South found distasteful (for obvious reasons).

          • J-Rock

            James I am on a business trip and unable to address your entire post. Do you think that Evolution is science Law or theory? I personally think it is theory (science definition of theory), hence the false analogy. Math is settled, Evolution not so much.

            I didn’t clarify Scientism that is on me. Is science the only way to learn axiomatic truths?

            Not sure why you constantly bring up Creationism. Seriously James I know you are passionate about it, but honest to god I don’t believe in it. I believe in the Popper approach, empirical knowledge only comes from the testing falsifiable subjects.

            I am sorry you had to write the post multiple times.

          • James Von Borcke

            Third time posting this; I think our previous ‘thread’ has gone too many steps, or tiers, or whatever they’re called, so I’m replying to an earlier post of yours within the same thread.

            To begin, there is ~nothing~ false about my analogy. A lack of basic knowledge and understanding is equivalent to a lack of basic knowledge and understanding. That ~you~ aren’t able to find the answers to the question you seek is a ~personal~ problem that stems from either (A) a lack of legitimate desire or (B) an inability to educate yourself. I’m not capable of determining which, of course; that would be a question you’d have to address yourself, assuming you can overcome enough of your shortcomings to do so.

            The flaws of Creationism do ~not~ validate Evolution; the flaws of Creation discredit Creationism, while the evidence for Evolution validates Evolution by merit of ~fitting in with every other field of study~.

            I do not believe that Creationists are crazy; merely that they’ve had ignorance promoted as a virtue while having the very ~idea~ of shedding that ignorance equivocated to eternal damnation (a form of emotional terrorism typically used by abusive spouses and parents as well as numerous cult leaders throughout the ages), which is delusion, not insanity. Counseling, not medication, is required, most likely from someone who specializes in cult deprogramming.

            A lot, perhaps, for some.

            As for whether or not you’re a Creationist… Well, put simply, Creationists pretending that they’re not Creationists but, rather, just skeptical people, but who then fail to bring anything to the discussion that isn’t right out of the Creationist’s Handbook, became cliche years ago. On the other hand, on the ~slight~ chance that you aren’t a Creationist, then you should understand that if all you bring to the table is the same thing that a Creationist would bring to the table, then you are ~effectively~ a Creationist insofar as this discussion goes and can be dismissed just as readily.

            Here’s an idea: Bring something ~new~ to the discussion rather than beating the proverbial dead horses. All you’re doing is making a big, stinky mess.

            Now, you dismiss ‘scientism’ as something that can’t supply all the answers (a declarative statement based solely on wishful thinking since there is no way of knowing either way), but the ~fact~ is that in the ~thousands~ of years that magical belief dominated human thought, it has never produced even a single answer to ~any~ question, but rather made declarations by fiat and used terms like ‘heathen’, ‘apostate’, and ‘blasphemer’ to silence any who questioned.

            Did magical belief tell us that the Earth orbited the sun? No, it told us the sun orbited the Earth. Did magical belief tell us about germs and bacteria? No, it told us that disease was the result of sin. Did magical belief tell us about antibiotics, medicine and surgery? No, it told us to pray. Did magical belief tell us about the genetic cause of birth defects? No, it told us that “God” was punishing the sinful (who had yet to be born in order to sin, no less!). Did magical belief tell us the nature of the stars in the sky? No, they were just lights that (in at least one biblical prophecy) will one day come down to Earth. (It’s gonna be hot the day ~one~ of those drops in, let alone ~all~ of them.)

            And it was only through militant persuasion (such as inquisitions, witch trials, armed conquest and genocide, all of which are rightly viewed today as both tyranny and terrorism) that magical belief retained its power for as long as it has (and in under-developed countries, Islam and Christianity are ~both~ continuing these primitively barbaric practices, often encouraged and funded by Christians and Muslims from nations with more money).

            Again, you focus on Darwin, but once again I point out: Genesis was already discarded long before Darwin by Astronomers, Physicists and Geologists alike, with Evolution as an hypothesis (known at the time as Transmutation) running alongside them; the anger over Darwin was because it was the one theory to which Genesis could ~not~ be reinterpreted to match the facts (such as was attempted via Old Earth Creationism) as well as made suggestions regarding the relationship between Europeans and Africans that the post-Confederate South found distasteful (for obvious reasons).

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            That is a false statement. I in no way acknowledge that evolution is a fact, because it is not a fact. It is a Theory. Neo-darwinism has so many holes in it, that even flubber couldn’t fill them all.

          • Britt

            But “God created everything” is soundproof, yes?

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            I suppose that depends on your perspective. I believe that God is the creator and started all of the laws of nature and the Universe itself. I don’t know your perspective so I cannot answer that question for you. Only through constant study of the principles of Evolution, and Creation gave me the perspective that Creation seems to be the most logical choice. You may disagree with that, and that certainly is your right.

          • James Von Borcke

            “Only through constant study of the principles of Evolution, and Creation
            gave me the perspective that Creation seems to be the most logical
            choice. You may disagree with that, and that certainly is your right.”

            I don’t have to disagree; logic indicates that Creationism is ~not~ the logical choice regardless of my agreeing or disagreeing, and thus those who believe otherwise have failed as thinking beings (again, regardless of my agreeing or disagreeing).

            I’d also question your claim of “constant study”. For instance, in your “constant study”, have you noted that the rise of anti-intellectualism, Creationism, and Neo-Confederatism all march hand-in-hand? That’s because the Creationist movement began in order to reject the notion that Africans and Europeans were equal and was propagated not just by religious zealots (like the Hovinds), but also by the likes of the KKK and John Birch Society.

            Or to put it simply, Creationism was designed as an anti-American political movement embraced by anti-American traitors in order to take false claim to being the “moral ones” after loosing the War Against Southern Arrogance.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            I disagree with your first statement. If you were to read the book “Persecution” by David Limbaugh, clearly you would see how in the days of our Framers of the Constitution, the school system of that day used the Bible for instruction, reading skills, and how the world was Created. What changed is the atheistic viewpoint. So you can argue for the atheistic worldview. However, scientifically you’re discussing your perspective through the eyes of scientists. I enjoy the relationship between science and God. That is a perspective you cannot accept since you don’t believe in God. We could go on all day about these things but you and I know that at the end of the day, we will stay with our positions on the subject. It will become a circular discussion with no resolution, since science hasn’t resolved the origins of mankind, nor the origins of the Universe. There is still no concrete evidence of the origins. God isn’t based on irrelevant arguments, God is based on who, what, where, how, and when things became what they became, and how the natural laws were intelligently processed and still are processed in balance between all living things. We call that interconnectivity.

          • James Von Borcke

            “That is a perspective you cannot accept since you don’t believe in God.”
            I’m sorry; do you think I’m an Atheist just because I don’t share your Creationist views? Or is it that if I’m not a Creationist, then I’m effectively an Atheist? Do clarify.
            As for David Limbaugh, yes, I do know who he is. That you saw fit to put his writing out as some form of proof is actually rather sad. Who next? Lee Strobel? Kent Hovind? Some other hack who milks money off of those with persecution complexes that are really the result of their anti-social behaviors?
            The Bible was used for several reason. First, it was readily available. Second, the various churches were willing to teach their congregations (sparing the State the cost of building schools and hiring teachers). And third, because an educated populace resulted in more informed voters, and people that could read (and then ~did~ read) were more educated just from the act. And the more educated they were, the more they understood that biblical creation was just another myth.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            Another situation I’ve encountered. Not admitting you’re an atheist. If you’re not an atheist what worldview do you hold? Education has nothing to do with Biblical creation. There are plenty of very educated people that believe in Biblical creation.

          • James Von Borcke

            Deist, Spiritual/Gnostic Christian, Philosophical Satanist and Methodological Naturalist.

            As for “very educated people that believe in Biblical creation”, never fail to overlook the con-artist seeking to bilk the ignorant of their cash. And, also, never overlook a possible lack in intellectual integrity. Especially important, though, is to consider folks like Kent Hovind who claims to having a PhD, but never attended any university qualified to grant one (Here’s a hint: Contact Eric Hovind and ask him for a copy of his father’s dissertation.) in order to proclaim himself to be highly educated (he isn’t) and a scientist (which is a professional methodology, not a degree).

            Fact is, the further up you go on the intellectual scale, the less likely one will see Biblical Literalism while Deism, Pantheism and Atheism become ever more predominant.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            your opinion, certainly not one I subscribe to

          • James Von Borcke

            It’s not my opinion, nor is it’s factual basis subject to your subscribing to it or not.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            Of course it’s your opinion. I see nobody else claiming that it’s theirs

          • James Von Borcke

            Facts aren’t opinions, nor are they subject to opinions.

          • DreamTheaterIlluminationTheory

            Sir which facts are you referring to. To convince me of a fact, it would be rational to present facts that are a fact to all people, and not just an opinion. A perspective within reality, is that a fact, or a perspective. Is reality a fact? See how wide this argument can get. Here is another example: The fact that Christ exists in everyday life is a fact. (Is that a fact, because it is to me)

          • James Von Borcke

            “See how wide this argument can get.”

            Wide enough that, as is expect from those who subscribe to Creationism, any rational and reasonable fact can be denied without rational or reasonable reason.

            “Is that a fact, because it is to me”

            It is faith because there is no tangible means of expressing that reality to another person who has not experienced it.

            But this does raise an interesting question: Do you believe that your faith in Christ is completely dependent on adherence to biblical literalism? That is, if you stopped believing the OT, but still believed in Christ, would you be damned regardless?

          • DreamTheaterIlluminationTheory

            Faith comes about through study. To say that you have to have tangible means to express a fact would mean that logically we cannot believe there is Dark matter, can’t believe there is a Higgs, can’t even believe in our origins. I don’t think that can be a logical conclusion.
            The same could be true of rational reasoning which is without explanation, but could be a fact.
            I believe that the New Testament is the new covenant of Christ. I believe he fulfilled the law spoken of in Isaiah, and we are not adherent to the old law, that Christ is the law, the Savior, and is the Word which existed before the creation. I believe that the Holy Spirit is within those that follow Christ, and we are filled with the joy and peace that Christ explained as the comforter. I don’t believe the Bible is literal in every context, however there are literal things in the Bible. Does that answer your question?

          • James Von Borcke

            “Faith comes about through study.”

            Faith happens in an instant; understanding comes about through study ; indoctrination comes about through study without critical analysis.

            “To say that you have to have tangible means to express a fact would mean that logically we cannot believe there is Dark matter…”

            We know that there is ~something~ which is asserting gravity in the same manner as matter, but is not directly detectable yet through any means we currently have to measure by. Thus, ‘Dark Matter’ is simply a label applied to the unknown quality that is asserting gravity. Indeed, Dark Matter may not even be matter; it needs merely to be something that is capable of asserting gravity.

            This is not the same as ‘believing’ in Dark Matter.

            “I don’t think that can be a logical conclusion.”

            That’s because you spiraled into absurdities.

            “Does that answer your question?”

            Yes, but no… That is, the Bible can be used to justify hate or love. Nothing you’ve said takes a position, but is a blanket statement that can describe most Christians regardless of their behavior towards their neighbors. If your behavior towards your neighbor is cruel, then what difference does it make if you are a Christian or a Muslim or an Atheist?

            The question I would ask then is, do you follow Christ’s teachings about not casting the first stone? Or about loving your neighbor as you love yourself? Or about doing unto others as you’d have done to you?

            What worth is believing in Jesus if one doesn’t follow his teachings? What is he saving you from? His own ministry? That makes no sense at all.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            Are you an atheist?

          • James Von Borcke

            Nope. I very much believe in the Creator and the spiritual reality of Christ.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            So what is going on here?

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            I believe exactly the same thing. What are the differences?

          • James Von Borcke

            Well, for one, I don’t believe in the Jewish god. Second, when I want to learn about the Creator, I’ll pick up a book on Physics or Biology; the Torah, nor the revisionist versions known as the Old Testament and Quran, don’t hold anything of value outside of the context of the barbaric cultures that produced them.

            Nor do I buy into the “They’re persecuting us!” narrative that is so popular with Christian Conservatives… I can assure you, Christian Liberals are ~not~ being persecuted, and we are living our lives, and practicing our faith, without any difficulties at all.

            Of course, unlike Christian Conservatives (which includes Creationism), we’re not trying to use Jewish mythology to justify a social and political agenda that has a 1600 year long history of failure.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            So if we eliminate “the jewish God” but you believe in Christ, was he a Jew? Would you agree that Christians are being tortured right now and killed because they are Christians? I can see that you believe in Evolution, even the Pope stated he believed certain aspects of Evolution. If Evolution is standing in the way of you and I believing that Christ is our Savior that is fine with me. I actually think that God is the ultimate scientist. The thing is that Christians around the world are being tortured and killed, that is my point. We are lucky in the U.S. right now to live here. Would you prefer there were no more Christians? If you see the trends it’s a possibility that Muslims will become the dominate religion in the U.S. May I ask which “God” you believe in, since you made the statement you believe in Christ? I’m just curious about these things from your perspective

          • James Von Borcke

            “So if we eliminate “the jewish God” but you believe in Christ, was he a Jew?”

            Of course… If we eliminate the Greek Gods, was Alexander still Greek?

            “Would you agree that Christians are being tortured right now and killed because they are Christians?”

            Would you agree that Christians have killed other Christians for not being the right sort of Christian?

            “I can see that you believe in Evolution, even the Pope stated he believed certain aspects of Evolution.”

            What previous Popes have believed is that Evolution produced Humanity as an intended result of God; what I ~think~ Pope Francis believes is that it was the ~thinking mind~ that was the intended result and that our forms were inconsequential… That is, if we are fashioned in God’s image, then God has a form, and if he has a form, he is not limitless and immaterial. Therefore, it is in ~thought~ that we are like God, not form. In this, we could have easily evolved as felines rather than primates.

            “If Evolution is standing in the way of you and I believing that Christ is our Savior that is fine with me. I actually think that God is the ultimate scientist.”

            Except Evolution isn’t standing in the way of my faith in Christ. Where we differ (I think) is that you believe (as most Christians do) that Jesus died on the cross as a sacrifice and carried the burden of our sins when he did, thus granting you grace from your failings…

            Where as I believe that Jesus taught us the path to God through his ministry, was then murdered by a jealous priesthood that coveted their position in Jewish society, and that we are all responsible for our own actions (after all, how can we stand repentant on the day of judgment if we’ve shrugged off all blame for our deeds?).

            “The thing is that Christians around the world are being tortured and killed, that is my point.”

            Yes, there are Christians being persecuted. There are also Muslims being persecuted. And Hindus. And Jews. And Atheists. And Agnostics. And this is being done ~by~ Christians, and Muslims, and Hindus, and Atheists, and Agnostics.

            Here’s the truth about every one that follows these ideologies: No matter what faith they follow, or even if they have no faith at all, they will choose the religion or philosophy that best fits their own personal values. Hateful people will find one that justifies their hate, while loving people will find one that affirms their love. And the hateful ones have always persecuted those who love, even if proclaiming the same beliefs (is this not, after all, exactly what happened to Jesus?).

            So I don’t care what a person believes, or what ideology they wave as a flag, or how scientific and rational they are. I don’t care what color their skin, or how beautiful or rich, or if they’re gay or straight or whatever. What I care about is how they treat people.

            That will show if they’ve chosen hate or love.

            Read the Parable of The Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37); it’s right there.

            “We are lucky in the U.S. right now to live here. Would you prefer there were no more Christians?”

            The reason you are lucky to live here is because our Forefathers saw fit to establish this nation on secular values. Secular is not the same as Atheism; rather, secularism is ~neutrality~ regarding religion. It does not promote or deny a single one. Under the eyes of the law, my religion is equal to yours, even if I am but the only follower of mine while yours has millions.

            Yet despite your admitting that you are lucky to have this protection, it is your side of the political aisle that is continuously seeking to undermine that very principle. In fact, the Religious Right has put so much effort into convincing themselves that there is no secular mandate that they’ve gone about writing laws that forbid Sharia from being implemented in the United States even though the First Amendment already protects us from it.

            (And how funny it was that one of those, can’t remember which at the moment, was worded in such a way that it forbid biblical law as well, and none of them noticed until after it was passed because they were in the midst of Sharia Panic.)

          • DreamTheaterIlluminationTheory

            Of all things you have said this hit exactly on what I believe: “Where as I believe that Jesus taught us the path to God through his ministry, was then murdered by a jealous priesthood that coveted their position in Jewish society, and that we are all responsible for our own actions (after all, how can we stand repentant on the day of judgment if we’ve shrugged off all blame for our deeds?).”
            I can agree with you on most of what you say. I believe you’re right in many areas and I Thank you for the explanation. If we disagree in certain areas, it certainly is not that far off, at least to me.

          • James Von Borcke

            “If we disagree in certain areas, it certainly is not that far off, at least to me.”

            Agreed. Glad to have met you. Insomuch as this is meeting someone.

          • Britt

            There is nothing wrong with having differing beliefs, but we have to be realistic about them. To say that evolution has more holes in it than creationism is just willful ignorance to justify a belief.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            Than I must say I’m ignorant. I believe that God is the creator, I believe that Jesus Christ is my Savior. Call me what you will, it doesn’t change a thing. I believe what I believe because of who I believe in.

          • J-Rock

            Tu Quoque, you have nothing to provide to defend your stance so you attack someone else’s. You can either provide empirical, non falsifiable, peer reviewed, repeatable test results or you can’t.

          • Britt

            This is even more laughable then the comment I replied to. If you could try not to be so willfully ignorant, you would see that I was not attacking him for his religious belief. I was pointing out the hypocrisy of saying the theory of evolution is filled with holes when he holds beliefs that are far less substantiated. Your ignorance or inability to understand science does not make me a hypocrite.

          • J-Rock

            This is even more laughable then the comment I replied to.

            Unfortunately the only thing laughable is your reading comprehension and or lack of logic. She made a claim and instead of providing evidence which proved her wrong you invoked a logical fallacy. Tu Quoque to be exact.

            Your ignorance or inability to understand science does not make me a hypocrite.

            Never called you an hypocrite, again reading comprehension. I stated you were illogical. Considering you have no access to my school records or studies your conclusion regarding understanding of science theory and law is a product of your own design. Your bias and bigotry fills in the gaps to produce a desired result.

          • James Von Borcke

            “That is a false statement. I in no way acknowledge that the world is round, because it is not round.”
            That’s what you sound like, just so you know.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            What? Trying to put words in my mouth doesn’t work. I said the Bible shows that the earth was round.
            Proverbs 8:27 also suggests a round earth by use of the word circle(e.g., New King James Bible and New American Standard Bible). If you are overlooking the ocean, the horizon appears as a circle. This circle on the horizon is described in Job 26:10. The circle on the face of the waters is one of the proofs that the Greeks used for a spherical earth. Yet here it is recorded in Job, ages before the Greeks discovered it. J_b 26:10 indicates that where light terminates, darkness begins. This suggests day and night on a spherical globe. The Hebrew record is the oldest, because Job is one of the oldest books in the Bible. Historians generally [wrongly] credit the Greeks with being the first to suggest a spherical earth. In the sixth century B.C., Pythagoras suggested a spherical earth. [JSM]

            Eratosthene of Alexandria (circa 276 to 194 or 192 B.C.) calcuated the circumference of the earth “within 50 miles of the present estimate.”

          • James Von Borcke

            I didn’t ‘put words in your mouth’… I simply paraphrased your ignorant statement to illustrate its ignorance.
            And I see no reason to debate biblical re-interpretation… There are honest scholars who have done a much better job at it than you have.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            I agree, scholars are smarter than me. I encourage you to visit the Biblehub. There you will see entirely how the scholars have desiphered the Bible, in 26 different languages, including Aramaic, Greek, and Hebrew. Should be an interesting study for you. As for ignorance, that is circular as well, since you didn’t understand at all what I was saying, and interpreted the message wrong. Could that be called ignorance on your part?

          • James Von Borcke

            Except I didn’t interpret your statement wrong; I simply illustrated through analogy how wrong your statement was. Excuse me for thinking you’d have the reading comprehension required to correctly understand simple English.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            You’re excused

          • James Von Borcke

            “Evolution is taught by some Christian groups as doctrine…”

            That some Christians are able to cope with modern reality doesn’t transform reality into magic and myth.

          • James Von Borcke

            “It clearly says He taught nothing about Church or faith.”

            The question I’d ask is what can a man who makes his money off of gullibility, ignorance and fear teach children about critical thinking? If everyone were capable of such thinking, the Hovinds of this world would be working at Burger King.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            WHAT? in this instance, who is gullible, who is scared, what did the man explain concerning critical thinking, and how would you know anything about him? Also I’d like to correct a bit of your quote: “It reiterated that Hovind did not speak about his faith or evolution during his visit.”

          • James Von Borcke

            But as a Creationist, his views on ‘Critical Thinking’ are easily shown to be in ~opposition~ of the concept. That is, the entirety of his income is derived by speaking to people who are incapable of critical thought and thus gobble up his father’s insane theories like candy (his father’s theories, I should point out, are so bad, even Answers in Genesis has dismissed the Hovinds as fruitcakes, which should say a lot but you’ll probably miss it).

            As for “how would [I] know anything about him”, I’ve personally debated the intellectual midget online numerous times. He’s an idiot, and so too are the faith-based educators that hired him to speak to a group of impressionable students who are ~trying~ to learn how to debate logically.

            On the other hand, if Hovind was hired for the sake of introducing the students to nearly ~every~ form of logical fallacy in a single lecture, then Hovind was indeed the right man for the job and the school chose correctly. After all, in my debates with him, such falacious arguments are all he proved capable of bringing to the discussion.

            (Well, that and a bunch of wild conspiracy theories…. Ask him about Obama’s Weather Machine! Go on, ask him! It’s a real knee-slapper!)

            In conclusion, the Hovinds are con artists, snake oil preachers, tax evaders and criminals. The only lesson they can provide to our youth is how ~not~ to be, as they commit more damage to faith just by being themselves than they will ever be capable of doing to scientific inquiry via purposeful intent (aside, of course, from conditioning innocent youth forcefully subjected to his blathering nonsense when they’re too young to know better into fearing logic, reason and facts).

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            If you know him personally, you can say what you like about him. I do not. All I do know from the article, is he has the right to speak about critical thinking, even though the article is explicit that he did not speak of religion or evolution. If you know what he spoke about please post it as I would be curious to see it.

          • James Von Borcke

            “…even though the article is explicit that he did not speak of religion or evolution.”
            The article lies… That is, while he did not ~discuss~ Creation, all of his slides representing what he perceives as critical thought were attacks on evolution and arguments for Creationism. So he not only presented material which violated the 1st Amendment, but he also failed to represent the topic for which his was hired to speak (wasting not only tax dollars, but also the time of students attempting to educate themselves).
            Google “Eric Hovind critical thinking” and one of the first links is an article on Patheos that includes several of the slides. And consider that this has ~always~ been the level of honesty I’ve come to expect from him by way of my ~personal experience~ of dealing with him and his flock; and he’s never let me down.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            How do you know that? You don’t know that. I want a transcript of what he talked about as the article explains. Can you provide that?

          • James Von Borcke

            Already said where to get the info. Go back a post and follow the directions.

          • weasel1886

            Yes he did

        • softengine

          He did not speak about religion. He spoke about critical thinking in a debate scenario.

          • Bill

            I doubt that. you peoepl can never keep you bullshit to yourself

          • weasel1886

            No he did not. This article leaves that out

          • James Von Borcke

            “He did not speak about religion. He spoke about critical thinking in a debate scenario.”
            He used slides that displayed arguments for Creationism and attacking Evolution as ‘examples’ of critical thought.

          • softengine

            The article did not state that. Did you obtain that information from another source?

          • James Von Borcke

            The article is at Patheos-dot-com. Google “Eric Hovind critical thought”, and it’ll be one of the top links.

        • Angel Triumphant

          Remove the religion of atheism

          • Bill

            atheism isn’t taught in school

          • Angel Triumphant

            Evolution is atheism, so, you are incorrect sir.

          • bill2

            evolution is a science one that many religious people also accept so it isn’t atheist

          • Angel Triumphant

            “Religion” isn’t a Relationship with the 1 True God, or His Son… my answer stands sir.

          • bill2

            no it doesn’t.

          • Angel Triumphant

            If it is Not the 1 True God, it is False, whether it be evolutionists, islamists, catholics, buddhists, satanists, …, …, so, to me, yes – it does…
            Repent and seek the 1 True Living God while He may still be found, in Jesus name

          • bill2

            more insane gibberish

          • James Von Borcke

            Secularism is ~neutral~ regarding religion. If schools taught Atheism, that would violate the secular mandate. Consequently, teaching Evolution isn’t teaching Atheism; only those who fear knowledge believe that it is.

          • Angel Triumphant

            When you teach evolution, you teach atheism… again, it is another false religion.

          • James Von Borcke

            “When you teach evolution, you teach atheism…”
            I am not an Atheist yet I accept Evolution; that fact alone disproves your assertion.

          • Taussig

            not a religion but the absence of belief in any gods

          • Titan000

            Then why are atheists acting like the inquisition?

          • Paul Hiett

            Maybe because Christians keep telling everyone else how to live?

          • Titan000

            And how does the fact that Christians have private property rights in Christian schools factor into this?

          • Paul Hiett

            What “Christian school” are you referring to? This occurred at a PUBLIC school.

          • Titan000

            Sorry wrong article. But then again if he isn’t mentioning Christianity what’s the problem?

          • Paul Hiett

            He did. His whole presentation was a discussion on Creation. Google it. This site obviously skews the information…it leaves out important facts. I posted above, should be the first post on here, about it.

          • J-Rock

            Atheism holds all the same tenets of a religion. Which I can prove at length.

          • George T

            J-Rock: Explain, please. The basic principal of atheism is not believing in a god. There’s no religious ceremony or additional concepts that anybody has to believe. No afterlife. No hierarchy or formal structure. No active belief in anything.

          • J-Rock

            We agree on the first tenet, you would be amazed at how many Atheists I speak with that disagree with that sentiment. Atheists do not believe that God or gods exist. We agree correct? Then to make sure I understand your points. Religion has ceremonies, and concepts which are required, also has an a concept of an afterlife, and finally requires some sort of hierarchy. So if I was to give examples of these and more would you agree that Atheism holds the same tenets of religion correct?

          • George T

            J-Rock: Why would I agree with you before I could assess the validity of your information and claims? I agree that I’ll consider what you have to say.

          • J-Rock

            Sorry George, what I was getting at is we have to agree to the definition of Religion. I was using your comment to verify that we are on the same page before going forward.

            Let me clear it up with a logical syllogism. IF P1 and P2 are true then C1 must also be true if it embraces the concepts introduced in P1 and P2.

            P1. Religion requires a origin story, statements of faith, as well hierarchy.

            P2. Atheism contains an origin story, statements of faith, and hierarchy.

            C1. Atheism is a religion by definition because it shares the same tenets of religion.

            Origin Story – Evolution is the Origin Story of Atheism. It is the Atheist’s ABSOLUTE Truth, unassailable, unquestionable cant; dogma. It is manipulated into forms for explaining not only the cosmos, life, and human origins, but also the origin of morality, and anything else that had an origin. Before I continue to the other key points do you agree that is an Origin Story? I would have to say it fits the definition.

          • George T

            J-Rock: P2 is not a valid assertion. Your argument fails right there. The concept of not believing in a god (atheism) makes no claims about how life, the universe, and everything began. Many atheists have differing opinions on that subject, but the definition of atheism makes no assertion about how we got to this moment. It is simply an assertion that we reached this moment without a god being involved.

          • J-Rock

            Atheists in general hold beliefs regarding life, the universe, and how everything began. I have had discussions with them in length regarding that topic. I would go as far to say many Atheists that I speak with regularly have the same beliefs George. The concept of not believing in a god does not bar one from having beliefs, nor is it contingent.

            Evolution theory does contain first life claims. Please check for yourself. Google Evolution and first life and the science community is alive with responses.

          • George T

            J-Rock: Did you actually read what I said or just skimmed over it?

            Atheists individually hold beliefs regarding life, the universe, and how everything began. Atheists do not have one general assumption about the origin of the universe. Many might hold a similar theory on the origin of the universe, but atheists hold varying opinions on many subjects. For example, there are Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, and Green Party atheists. There are also pro life and pro choice atheists. Nothing about atheism dictates that a person must side with any of these issues in a particular way.

            So making the claim “there is no god” does not automatically mean that I have to make any decision about a universal origin. The only thing you should infer from the title atheist is “no theism”, meaning the person doesn’t think or believe there is a god. Anything else is unrelated to the title of atheist.

          • J-Rock

            No I read what you wrote, it’s important to me. I however, totally disagree. The point you are trying to make is that the label of Atheist isn’t contingent regarding any view except lack of belief in God or gods. I get that. Atheists however, in general believe in Evolution, so much to the point *it is* a general assumption. Go to ask the athiests .com (no link as it usually get the post deleted) and see the responses.

            I am a Christian however, I don’t believe in Creationism. However it doesn’t mean I can make that claim for the majority, nor state that Christianity isn’t a religion.

            Just answer this simple question: Do a majority of Atheists believe in Evolution. Yes or No. If you want studies which back up figures as high as 87% I can provide.

            I am not talking about the definition of Atheism, I am talking about the tenets they hold. The mindset of a group of people. That is the focus.

          • George T

            J-Rock: Yes, a majority do believe that Evolution is the process of chance in living organisms. That is different from it being a *tenet* of atheism. Evolution is not a foundational concept of atheism. It’s a compatible scientific theory but not a requirement for not believing in a god.

            Anything else?

          • J-Rock

            George that is exactly what a tenet is; by definition, majority belief of a group which holds importance to their world view . If we are going to have to debate etymology as well as religion fundamentals you will never accept what I have come to know. Atheism is a religion, so much that the courts of law have stated as such.

          • George T

            J-Rock: Sorry, but you’re wrong. A tenet is a foundational belief of a religion or philosophy. Evolution is not a foundational belief of atheism. It is a compatible or sympathetic fact.

            About court precedent, to consider a case fairly in some situations atheism is elevated to a kind of religion. In reality it’s a lack or absence of belief. If atheism were a hobby it would be not collecting comic books. If it were a television station it would be “OFF”. If it were a hair style it would be bald.

          • Angel Triumphant

            I disagree. They’ve made a god of their religion of “there is no God”, now including “churches” “summer camps” for children… o yeah, it is a religion… another false religion. Choose Life, choose Jesus

        • Evangelina Vigilantee

          He wasn’t talking about religion. By the way, separation of church and state was to keep the atheists in check, not the religious people. No one is allowed to infringe upon the rights to exercise religion. Let’s get the laws straight.
          Amen Last Trump!
          ( :

          • Bill

            it was created to keep religion and government separate it’s right there in the name and I doubt a creationist has the common sense to keep religion out of his speech

          • Britt

            “separation of church and state was to keep the atheists in check, not the religious people”

            All it takes if a brief Google search to disprove how utterly full of shit you are.

          • J-Rock

            Separation of church and state isn’t a law. It was a blurb in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to inform the church that the government would not meddle or attempt to manage religion.

        • Freethinker02

          Including the quasi-religions of humanism and atheism.

        • Julie Kasenow

          No religion was in public school the article said the man spoke about critical thinking in debate. It specifically said the man did not discuss religion.

          • bill2

            according to Paul Hovrind idea of “critical thinking” was just presenting creationism slides.

          • George T

            Julie Kasenow: bill2 is correct. Further investigation of this situation found that Hovind was teaching Creationist material but calling it “critical thinking”. How deceitful and crafty. Yet another liar for Jesus being dishonest in a public venue.

        • Mike Laborde

          Your and your atheist friends lies are getting old. Reread the first amendment of the constitution , then read it 100 times more.

          • bill2

            read the court cases. the supreme court has ruled numerous times that there is separation between church and state and that means no relgion in public schools

          • Mike Laborde

            Unelected atheist judges rendered that ruling, but the founders rendered them criminal and worthy of impeachment. Again, reread the first amendment to the constitution. Oh, and by the way read the historical papers of the writing of the constitution. You will be shocked to see that you are wrong.

          • bill2

            they weren’t atheist and they made their decision based on the founders writings

            “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State”

            Thomas Jefferson 1802 letter to Baptists from Danbury, Connecticut,

          • James Von Borcke

            “Your and your atheist friends lies are getting old.”

            Being a religious person, I agree with the Atheists regarding the 1st Amendment… And so did Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison, as well as Abraham Lincoln, John F Kennedy and Ronald Reagen. Heck, even during the last presidential election, Romney had to agree to it openly because his Mormonism was troubling to the party’s voting base.

            James Madison once said, “Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects?”
            If Christianity made itself the ‘law of the land’, would we then begin fighting over ~which~ Christianity would be the basis of that law? History shows us clearly that the answer to the question is Yes (eg: Ireland), and that’s exactly what the 1st Amendment (as well as the No Religious Test Clause within Article VI) was intended to prevent since such sectarian violence would ultimately tear the nation apart.

        • Sweetpea

          Bill you don’t even know what separation of church and state even means do you. It was written in a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Ass. assuring them that the states hands were tied when it came to Church matters, in other words it was meant to keep the state out of the Church not the Church out of the state. See Bill I am not only a Christian I am also a history buff. So as Josey said below if you want to take religion out of the schools then you have to also remove history.

          • bill2

            it goes both ways. if the government cannot interfere with religion then religion cannot interfere with the government

          • James Von Borcke

            “in other words it was meant to keep the state out of the Church not the Church out of the state…”

            There isn’t just ~one~ church, but many churches. Some are liberal, some are conservative. Some preach equality, some preach racial superiority. Which of these churches should be making the rules and laws of our society? Should it be your church? How about my church? Catholics? Baptists? Methodists? How about Muslims? Shall an Islamic church make the rules? Or perhaps a Jewish synagog?

            Chance are, when you want religion ~in~ government, it’s ~your~ religion that you are talking about, and not that of anyone else.

            That’s what the 1st Amendment was designed to prevent.

            In the words of Supreme Court Justice Harry A Blackman (Lee v Weisman): “When the government puts its imprimatur on a particular religion it conveys a message of exclusion to all those who do not adhere to the favored beliefs. A government cannot be premised on the belief that all persons are created equal when it asserts that God prefers some.”

          • George T

            Sweetpea: Incorrect. That sword cuts both ways. No state in church, and no church in state.

        • Viking Knight

          secular humanism was ruled a religion by the SCOTUS
          Evolution is Doctrine the it as well as New Age, Satanism & other religions as Creation is Doctrine to several religions
          Science actually backs the Creation Model & the more science advances, the more problems are exposed w/ Evolution,
          of course if Creation science has been banned from you,
          that would explain your ignorance 🙁 lets not ban Truth from kids

        • Chel216

          Although that statement isn’t found in the constitution, and doesn’t even mean what you think it means, it has nothing to do with the matter at hand.

          Hovind wasn’t there to speak about his faith or biblical creation, but to speak on Critical Thinking. The fact that staff attorney Elizabeth Cavill called this “unconstitutional and inappropriate” shows that she is herself anti constitution in her goal to eliminate anyone who doesn’t believe as she thinks they should from speaking in a public school setting.

        • Brooks Burns

          No such thing in the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION as separation of church and state. Just because you people keep repeating the SAME OLD THING over and over and over again does NOT make it true.

        • Jesse

          Separation of state and church has nothing to do with what is taught in schools and everything to do with not allowing one to influence and corrupt the other (and that goes BOTH ways.)

          There is NO constitutional law that outright bans teaching anything religious in school let alone someone who is religious teaching (whether religious topic or not) in school. In fact constitution supports it.

          It’s tiring how unobjective and biased people get when it comes to evolution. I can teach it because it’s science! You can’t teach theology because it isn’t history!

          If you’re objective and unbiased (in your teachings) there’s really no reason you can’t teach both creationism and evolution. If evolution is so clearly the truth and creationism is so clearly false then teaching them both in the same class is not going to brainwash anyone into following creationism.

          Furthermore creationism does NOT have to be connected to any one religion (or any at all). You can simply be a deist and believe in creation, it would also not be all that unreasonable to believe that our own system was created or organized by a higher being that wouldn’t really be considered a deity/god.

          Not teaching creation or intelligent design just because you don’t want people “brainwashed” in school is not only closed minded, it contradictive to what you claim to believe. Again, if evolution is so very clearly the truth and creation is so very clearly false then it would harm NO ONE to be taught both! Rather it would benefit everyone!

      • Paul Hiett

        Actually, if you read the Bible, Satan LOVES the truth. Nothing Satan ever said in the Bible was a lie.

        • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

          What the heck are you talking about? Now you’re supporting Satan? Satan hates the truth, because Christ is the truth, the life, and the way. Why do people bring up Satan as if he isn’t an evil force that corrupts men (and women). You’re just trying to offend people with this remark. I didn’t think you would lower yourself to that! I can see you supporting your daughter, but this comment doesn’t sound like you at all. Even if you are an atheist, this statement is offensive.

          • George T

            I just think it’s funny that you believe in mythological characters. Was it the book of Oa that explains how Jesus received the Green Lantern ring? …or was that Hal Jordan?

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            Enjoy the laugh then. It doesn’t change anything.

          • George T

            Dream Theater Moment of Reason: Correct. There is no satan or god. There’s no heaven or hell. We bring joy or terror to those around us with our actions, intentional or thoughtless. Stop blaming mythological characters for the good or evil in your life.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, and I pray that others will really see that one day. We all have choices it’s true. I’m not blaming anyone. I just know what the Bible says and I believe it to be the truth. You don’t. So why would you be critical of anything I believe in. What you have to say to me is not true. It never will be. I love God and Christ as I believe Christ teaches love not some miscontrued love. Love for you, love for those that don’t wish to know God. What you state might be good for you, but not for me. I know that Jesus exists today as he did 2000+ years ago. To call God a myth is not unlike those that stated “God was dead” only some 25 years ago. I didn’t believe it then, and I don’t believe like the atheist. I pray for them. I don’t want you to be offended because of my faith in God, but at the same time I don’t want to mislead you into thinking that there is a way to alter my knowledge of Christ. I was a ministers son, my Grandfather was a minister, and my Great Grandfather was a minister. I have a basis for my understanding of the Bible. I’m not perfect but than again nobody is. Please understand that.

          • George T

            Dream Theater Moment of Reason: That’s all well and good. If Christianity is the AA program that helps you to be happy and function every day, go for it.

            I replied because you’re speaking of your beliefs and religious characters to a person that doesn’t believe in them. My post was an attempt to explain how that’s just not effective. About as effective as my saying “I believe in Superman. Don’t steal anything or Superman will catch you even if the police don’t”. You don’t believe in Superman, but imagine that I do have a strongly held belief in Superman and his ability to right the wrongs in society even if you don’t. That’s exactly how it sounds to a non-believer.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            I appreciate you explaining. I have a quote for you and would like your opinion. Do you agree with what this guy said? This was recently said by an atheist to a friend of mine:

            Make no mistake: all our dreams, loves, opinions, and desires are figments of our primordial imagination. They are fleeting electrical signals that fire across our synapses for a moment in time. They served some purpose in the past. They got us here. That’s it. All human achievement and plans for the future are the result of some ancient, evolved brain and accompanying chemical reactions that once served a survival purpose. Ex: I’ll marry and nurture children because my genes demand reproduction, I’ll create because creativity served a survival advantage to my ancient ape ancestors, I’ll build cities and laws because this allowed my ape grandfather time and peace to reproduce and protect his genes. My only directive is to obey my genes. Eat, sleep, reproduce, die. That is our bible.

            We deride the Theists for having created myths and holy books. We imagine ourselves superior. But we too imagine there are reasons to obey laws, be polite, protect the weak etc. Rubbish. We are nurturing a new religion, one where we imagine that such conventions have any basis in reality. Have they allowed life to exist? Absolutely. But who cares? Outside of my greedy little gene’s need to reproduce, there is nothing in my world that stops me from killing you and reproducing with your wife. Only the fear that I might be incarcerated and thus be deprived of the opportunity to do the same with the next guy’s wife stops me. Some of my Atheist friends have fooled themselves into acting like the general population. They live in suburban homes, drive Toyota Camrys, attend school plays. But underneath they know the truth. They are a bag of DNA whose only purpose is to make more of themselves. So be nice if you want. Be involved, have polite conversations, be a model citizen. Just be aware that while technically an Atheist, you are an inferior one. You’re just a little bit less evolved, that’s all. When you are ready to join me, let me know, I’ll be reproducing with your wife.

            I know it’s not PC to speak so bluntly about the ramifications of our beliefs, but in our discussions with Theists we sometimes tip toe around what we really know to be factual. Maybe it’s time we Atheists were a little more truthful and let the chips fall where they may. At least that’s what my genes are telling me to say.”

        • The Last Trump

          “Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, ‘Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?’ And the woman said unto the serpent, ‘We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.’ And the serpent said unto the woman, ‘YE SHALL NOT SURELY DIE.'” Genesis 3:1.

          “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is NO TRUTH IN HIM. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for HE IS A LIAR, and the FATHER OF LIES.” John 8:44.

          Hmmm…let’s see now. Paul “the atheist LGBT troll” Hiett or Jesus….
          Think I’ll stick with Jesus.

          (Now Paul, if you’re going to lie about the Bible please see above scripture regarding YOUR father 😉

          • George T

            Matthew 6:5-8

      • George Jungle

        Atheists don’t care for islam either. The word atheist means without theism. Islam is theism. (duh)

      • Ed Words

        Hitler was on a ‘mission from God’ and his soldiers

        had ‘God is with us’ on their belt buckles.

      • MisterPine

        QUOTE SUBMITTED TO FSTDT DOT COM!

    • Paul Hiett

      So all Christians like to blow up abortion clinics? Way to generalize.

      • bowie1

        Did I generalize? Besides, what’s a debate if there would only be on side to debate? There would be no real debate then.

    • George Jungle

      Its funny you say that. The FFRF’s letter was explicitly intended to stop the indoctrination of children in public schools. Did the FFRF send a speaker to the school to promote atheism? No they did not. How would you feel if they did?

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Atheists lack critical thinking because they don’t seek objective truth. They just godlessly desire to eliminate God and His people from their life.

    • Bill

      because god doesn’t exist

      • The Last Trump

        Tell HIM that.

        • Bill

          I can’t he’s not real

          • The Last Trump

            Oh. (!?) Okay then.
            I’ll tell Him for you.
            Right after He’s done restoring the state of Israel, setting the stage for Armageddon, and judging America like He said He would.
            Oh look at the time! I guess He’s done. 😉

          • Bill

            The UN were the ones who made Israel a country and i don’t see how that proves god existence

          • The Last Trump

            Uh huh. And NOTHING exploded and turned into us!
            All by itself! For no reason whatsoever!
            I’m sure you’ve got it all figured out there “Bill”.

            Say, that was mighty nice of the UN to do what God told them he wanted done, wasn’t it? Particularly since they can’t stand Israel!
            (And of course the fact that THEY didn’t really do it. Look it up 🙂
            And then there were those Arab/Israeli wars where Israel was vastly outnumbered but miraculously WON ANYWAY. Just historical facts, my little bigot. Nothing to concern yourself with.
            Back to sleep…

          • Bill

            they were doing what Jewish political groups asked and Israel received aid from other nation during there conflicts and again none of this proves god

          • Amanda Richards

            However Israel was created and saved, the fact of the matter is that it was all predicted thousands of years ago in the Bible. God can and does use whoever and whatever He wants to get things done. The fact that the Bible is inerrant and all prophesies contained therein (other than those involving the end times) have ALL been fulfilled does prove that God exists. Chalking down the fulfilment of hundreds of prophesies in the Bible to coincidence would take a huge amount of faith on its own.

          • Bill

            Vague “prophesies” prove nothing except how gullible you are

          • George T

            Amanda Richards: Think what you want, but Jesus himself claimed that the end of the world would occur before his disciples died. They’ve been dead for hundreds of years and the world is still spinning. Guess he was a false prophet.

            Even god spins several false prophecies, including when he claims that Adam will die if he eats from the tree of knowledge.

          • Amanda Richards

            George T. you are in error because you are taking Scripture out of context. In future, when making statements against the Bible and God HImself, please provide the Scripture reference you are referring to. In this case I’m going to presume that you’re referring to verses such as found in Matthew 24 – 25?

            Jesus did not say that the end of the world would occur before His disciples died, He said “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” The generation He was referring to was not the generation of His disciples. Jesus was talking about future events and the word “generation” refers to the people alive in the future when the events will occur.

            I’m a bit confused by your reference to Adam and God ‘spinning’ a false prophesy regarding him dying. Adam IS dead. God never said his death would be immediate, He just said he would die – and he did. Adam and Eve’s bodies were originally immortal, by eating the forbidden fruit they brought about death which comes through old age.

            I trust that this assists. God bless.

          • George T

            Amanda Richards: I appreciate that you took the time to reply, but to be perfectly honest I couldn’t care less. Your description of the issue sounds like an interpretation of the printed words to justify an error. Case in point, how can you confidently claim to know which generation Jesus was talking about? Were you there? Do you somehow know his intent beyond the mistranslated texts that we’re left with?

            If you’re willing to consider information that contradicts the truthiness and accuracy of your bible, try checking out The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible some day. It’s a good collection of failed predictions and contradictions in your holy book and others.

          • Jean Adams

            1 Corinthians 1:18 For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power God.

          • Bill

            that bullshit means nothing to me. why do you people think that quoting bible verses to an atheist will do anything except make them laugh at you?

          • James Von Borcke

            “For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing…”
            This is nothing more than propaganda to dehumanize those of other faiths; it’s the religious equivalent of a racial slur, convincing the believer that they are special and everyone else is dog feces.

    • George T

      Yet another strawman from a liar for Jesus. Go ahead. Do it in the name of heaven. You can justify it in the end.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        You guys should stop bullying the Christians. Questing for the truth and objective thinking is the fruit of the Christendom alone, having the Holy Bible. The USA is a Christian nation created by Christians for Christians to be happy. You atheists need to repent of your evil unbelief to get saved.

        • George T

          “Questing for the truth and objective thinking is the fruit of the Christendom alone”

          Wrong

          “The USA is a Christian nation created by Christians for Christians to be happy”

          AAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Oh, that’s ridiculous!!! And I really do mean that’s worthy of ridicule if you really believe that. If you’re a Poe, well done 😉

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            It’s true. You Westerners had been illiterate child-killing nature-worshiping barbarians like the rest of mankind before the Church made you civilized. The West lost Christianity and it’s returning to its original state of pre-christian barbaric condition.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: There was a time when religion held sway over nearly all of Europe. We call that period The Dark Ages for a reason. When people started considering things independent of religion, we call that The Enlightenment. Also, Islam was the center of learning and knowledge for centuries. Did you know the numbers on the top row of your keyboard are called Arabic Numerals? Did you know they came up with the concept of Zero for maths?

            All of this, and more, is why I say your assertion is wrong. But please, continue to show us your bias and blind religious arrogance.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are wrong. The Western civilization was incomparably superior only because of its possession and access to the Holy Bible and Christianity. Arabs provided numbers and China provided gunpowder, but that was it. The real strength of the people is the quality of conscience, depth of knowledge, and quest for the objective truth which were only possible in the Christendom. Other civilizations had far better stories than your Enlightnment porn stories. Schools in the Western civilization were established to study the Holy Bible, not your useless Western porn stories.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: I don’t really need to give you any reasons why you’re wrong as you seem to dismiss information and evidence that’s contrary to your opinions. It would be a waste of my time. Your broad swath cultural assertions show that your too judgmental to accept and interpret any new information, so I’ll leave you to revel and wallow in your confirmation bias and pride (deadly sin).

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You need to repent of your sin of atheism to get saved. Please read the Word of God, the Holy Bible, to find the vital eternal truth.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: No, I don’t. Who are you to pass judgment and tell people what they should and shouldn’t do? Your brash arrogance is oddly fascinating.

            I don’t believe there is any biblical sin because I see the bible as a work of fiction. Just like I believe there is no Santa Clause or Green Lantern. Saying I’m a sinner is as if you’re telling me I have cooties, or some other fake illness. Then you offer a cure for the illness that doesn’t exist. I don’t need your cure because I know the illness is another work of fiction.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Read Matthew 7:6 – 28:20. The Holy Bible is God’s eternal truth but your opinion is a falsehood because it contradicts the Word of God. Your life is the proof of your illness.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Exactly. Your mind is closed. There’s no point discussing anything with you.

            I’m glad you brought up the other parts of Matthew. I actually planned on that. I’d strongly suggest that you stop spreading these pearls of biblical knowledge before us swine. Please, keep these precious bits of information to yourself. They are completely wasted on me as I still see them as mistranslated works of fiction from Bronze Age charlatans.

            If believing this hokum makes you happy, then please continue. Enjoy your life however you want… as long as you’re not forcing your religion into government or foisting it on other peoples children.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are not swine yet, you are just a stupid atheist. You were raised in a wrong denomination. You never read the Holy Bible. Read it with a humble and honest heart. Atheists lack humility and honesty. Everyone needs Christianity for salvation, but no one needs atheism. Atheism kills babies and spreads only despair.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Oh, name calling is a mature and effective way to convince people. Another flaw in this post is your use of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy to claim that my families denomination was wrong. I’m sure my parents, and thousands of other devoted Episcopalians, would be surprised to know that they’ve been wasting their time studying and praying to the wrong Christian god. What other denominations are wrong? Which one is the correct denomination? Please don’t make that ridiculous “non-denominational” claim. It’s just silly.

            No one needs cooties either. Fortunately cooties don’t really exist. Just like the concept of salvation and sin. It’s a made up illness for Christianity to market itself as a cure for.

            BTW, about the baby killing thing, I’m starting to think you’re a Poe again. That’s pretty funny 🙂

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Name calling? You’ve been doing it since your first comment. You have set the tone, if you want to know. Episcopalians were not wrong first; they became Sodomic in America only in recent years. I recommend the Southern Baptist in the USA. No mainline, Christianity does not belong to any Sodomites. You Americans are naive; atheists only killed and destroyed everywhere they went. American liberals don’t study the world history; that’s why you remain in darkness. Whatever non-sense you insist, you need to repent to be right, because it’s a fact you’ve sinned. Admit your guilt.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: What name have I called you? You just called me stupid.

            There is no god. There is no sin. So I don’t need to make any claim of committing a crime that isn’t really a crime. Why don’t you admit that you’re afraid of a death with no afterlife? Admit that you’ve wasted so much of this life genuflecting to nothing? Admit that you feel a need to paint me with the Straw Man fallacy of calling me evil, stupid, and claiming that I am a killer when I’ve never done so (bearing false witness). Try admitting that it horrifies you that I might be a good person without needing some deity to scare me into doing good things.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You called me Poe; my name is not that. An atheist being stupid( a fool) and evil is recorded in the Holy Bible and the reality proves it. You are wrong, George. Because you want to continue doing your evil, you keep denying God in your life. You need to repent of your unbelief before it’s too late. Atheists are the #1 killer; it’s a fact. You always support abortion and manual population control. You have no idea how sinful you are because you are spiritually dead. Pray and ask for help.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Allow me to provide a quote defining Poe’s Law…

            “Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won’t mistake it for the genuine article.”

            It’s hard for me to tell if you’re really a strident fundamentalist Christian or an internet troll pretending to be a strident fundamentalist Christian.

            Again, stop telling people what they should and shouldn’t do.

            Again, I’m not denying any god because there is no god to deny. I hope you stop living in fear and learn to relax one of these days.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You need Christians telling you what to do as long as the Earth endures because you are doing evil in the sight of God. You are the one who should stop living in sin. Unbelief is the greatest sin one can commit. You should cherish your soul. Praying for you. Good-bye.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Here, let me make this easy for you. I renounce god. The holy spirit of god is truly and eternally Satan.

            There. Now you don’t have to waste time praying for me. My sin, which doesn’t really exist, is unforgivable in the eyes of your god. But it’s not a big issue because there is no god. There’s also no hell. So smile and enjoy today (^_^)

          • George T

            EPISCOPALIANS!!! I think all of you should know that Grace Kim Kwon is certain that your denomination is wrong. She apparently knows the mind of god regarding the accuracy of biblical interpretations.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Episcopalians endorse Sodomy which makes them aganist the entire Holy Bible and the entire Christian Church. They are of Sodom and nothing of the Kingdom of God. Read Leviticus ch. 18-20, Matthew ch. 5-7, Romans ch.1-8, I Corinthians ch. 6 and Revelation ch.2,3 and repent.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: If EPISCOPALIANS ARE COMPLETELY WRONG according to your interpretation of the bible, what’s your denomination? You never did answer that question.

            While your at it, what name(s) have I been calling you? That, or you could admit your sin of bearing false witness.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Episcopalians are completely wrong according to the plain text of the Holy Bible. The Word of God condemns homosexuality. If anyone upholds what God condemns, he does not belong to God. I’m independent Reformed Presbyterain, but I recommend you the Southern Baptist if you live in the USA, for now. Denominations can go wrong any time; Episcopalians are one proof. They were not bad from the beginning. You should read the Holy Bible instead keeping sinning. Today’s secular Western culture is detestable.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Ah! Leviticus. So I guess you don’t eat shellfish, pork, oysters, or wear mixed fabrics. What offerings do you regularly burn for your god and how do you slaughter your animals? To make sure you’ve atoned for any unknown transgressions, how often do you sacrifice a ram?

            Still want to know what name(s) I called you. You’re the one who called me stupid and accused me of starting the name calling.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Jesus fulfilled all the ethnic and ritual laws. Christians keep the moral laws of Moses and the spiritual aspects of ethnic and ritual laws. Sexual purity belongs to moral laws. Read the entire Bible. The New Testament Bible demands Christians to keep what the laws of Moses had commanded regarding morality. Today’s Episcopalians are apostates and cults. The Holy Bible calls you a fool which is eternal truth until you repent.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: I’m not going to let you hide behind your bible. You didn’t say the bible says I’m a fool. You, not your bible, called me stupid. Then you claimed that I was calling you names. You lied. Just admit it. You got caught up in the moment and called me a name assuming that I must’ve called you something in a past comment that would justify your slander. For once, be humble and admit that you made a mistake. Your pride is a sin and you are bearing false witness.

            So which part of the bible dismisses the ritual laws and says to keep moral laws? I remember Jesus saying he didn’t come to abolish the law, but to fulfill them. That sounds like he’d like people to continue dressing in garments of one material and not consuming certain ocean animals.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Read Psalm 14. It’s all about you. What I did to you has been telling the truth and is nothing comparing to your downright rudeness against me. Jesus fulfilled the ritual laws for us by His atoning work on the Cross. The Old Testament has over 600 commands and the New Testament has over 1,000 commands and they heavily overlap. Ethnic laws are kept spiritually. Homosexuality is explicitly and plainly condemned from Genesis to Revelation in both Testaments. Those who endorse homosexuality are denying the existence of sin altogether and are NOT Christian.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: I only know of one place, Leviticus, where it mentions an act that could be homosexual. However, some say there’s a different interpretation of that. Same for Sodom and Gomorrah. Some say the historical context actually implies that homosexual acts weren’t the reason that god was displeased.

            Anyway, what part of the NT makes a distinction between the kinds of laws in Leviticus? How do you justify dismissing some laws and keeping others? Quote chapter and verse. Overlap and contradiction don’t automatically justify eliminating OT laws that you don’t like and keeping others. Maybe you’re making god mad by eating lobster and oysters and you don’t even realize it. Perhaps you should sacrifice a ram to atone.

            And again, I am still waiting for you to admit that I did not call you any names. Admit that you called me stupid, unprovoked.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Read the Book of Jude; Sodom’s sin was homosexuality. When the Word of God talks about sexual immorality, it includes homosexuality. Get a study Bible and read from the beginning to the end: Genesis 1 – Revelation 22. For your name calling, read all the previous comments.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: I have ZERO interest in reading anything from your mythology book. I suggest that you look up The Skeptics Annotated Bible for a copy of the bible to see various contradictions and errors.

            Nope! Looks like I didn’t call you any names other than “Grace Kim Kwon”. Apparently you’re the only name caller in this case.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            There are no contradictions or errors in the Holy Bible. You didn’t read it, and that’s the reason you don’t understand.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: There are errors and contradictions. Your confirmation bias is not letting you see the truth. I grew up reading the bible. You’ve either lied or made another baseless assumption about me.

            Let’s try a different tactic. Why should I believe any of your assertions about Christian mythology? What makes it more true than Greek or Viking mythology?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            The Greek and Viking mythologies are useless junks whereas the Holy Bible is the life-giving vital truth, the eternal Word of God for all mankind. You don’t remember a thing in the Holy Bible; that’s why you rant stuff.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: You didn’t answer my question. You just asserted that I should without saying why.

            Here, I’ll assert that you should believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn. Only by her grace will you be able to reach Candy Mountain when you die. If you reject the existence of the IPU then you’ll have to eat raw broccoli and kale for all eternity in Grumbledor. My new religion is also true because I say it’s true and every other religion is false.

            Now why is your mythology any more valid than my IPU mythology?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Your mythology is stupid and meaningless and has no effects upon anyone. No one including yourself should believe it. The Holy Bible is true, deep, profound, utterly meaningful, intelligent, supernatural, and life-saving all over the world for thousands of years. Everyone must read it and get saved. Only villains willfully hate both life and truth.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: I don’t believe it. It’s a parody of Christianity. Did you even read what I wrote?

            Again, why is your mythology any more valid than the fake religion mentioned in my last post? What makes it true and not a matter of faith?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Christianity is good and provides truth, salvation, and eternal life. Atheism is evil and provides sin, death, and despair. It’s proven in all fields of knowledge by all people throughout the human history all over the world.That’s the difference.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Followers of Islam believe the same things about their religion and think you’re following an outdated prophet. Why is their religion false and your religion is true?

            …and you just bore false witness again. So your religion harbors liars like yourself?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are wrong. The Muslims respect Jesus and they believe He is returning to judge the world, though their knowledge is only partial. Religions sought the truth but failed; only Christianity provides the truth. Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. You need to repent of your sins to get saved.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Your knowledge is partial as Islamic followers see you. According to them Allah is the way, the truth, and the life.

            Anyway, I want you to prove that my Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn’t exist. Tell me why it isn’t true. Give me a reason to turn away from my blasphemous religion or I will never accept your religion of pride and lies.

            Stop just saying it’s true. Prove it! Show why anybody should believe in your imaginary god and not the beauty of Her Pinkness.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            The Muslims don’t have such definition. Don’t make things up. Your invisible pink unicorn does not exist because you are sinful. Your sinful life that has no salvation is the proof your unicorn is a falsehood.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: No, I’m not making things up. Your worship of a prophet named Jesus is ignoring the final prophets truth. They think you are following an incomplete book.

            But there is no sin, so I’m not sinful. I am not a sinner, because there is no sin, so I don’t need salvation to feel complete. I am happy and unafraid of your mythology.

            Again, tell me WHY your mythology is to be believed more than any other mythology. It’s a simple challenge that you haven’t begun to complete.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            No, the Muslims respect Jesus. All they need to do is to read the Gospels and trust in Jesus to get saved, as any human does. Denial regarding your sinful life’s reality proves nothing. Often criminals have no remourse until they get caught. You won’t be able to tell lies like that on the Judgment Day. The Holy Bible is the truth. Your premise is altogether false to start with.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You need to repent of your wickedness to get saved.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: You really need to stop telling people what to do.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You started to replying to my comment. No one needs atheism or hedonism, but everyone needs Christians telling them what to do in order to get saved from sin.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: I disagree. There are many people that atheism and hedonism would help to feel better. They might feel free and comfortable like I did when I stepped away from the fear of an imaginary sky daddy.

            Your pride and confirmation bias are showing again.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Your end is the Lake of Fire (Revelation ch.20). Anyone can sin all they want and perish. No thanks to the abyss of your willful hopelessness and meaninglessness. You need to repent to get saved from your own falsehood and its rightful consequences.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: No, there is no lake of fire or end times, just like there’s no Midgard Snake, or Valhalla, or Xenu, or Zeus on Mt. Olympus. It’s all works of fiction. I won’t repent as there’s nothing to repent to and nothing to repent for.

            Please stop wasting our time asking me to convert. What if I said I was a member of The Church of Satan? Would that stop this pointless quest you’re on? Would you return to the original subject if I joined the Satanic church?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            What the Holy Bible says is the truth. You started commenting on my original post; that’s why this conversation started. Christians have no other message for you; you need to repent of your evil sin to get saved. There is nothing under Heaven that the name of Jesus cannot deliver you from. But if you don’t repent, you will perish; stop being self-destructive.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: No. You THINK the words of the bible are true. There is no evidence of it being true. On the other hand there is a good bit of evidence and contradictory information going against it’s inerrancy.

            Beyond ad hominem statements of my need to be saved, do you have anything else to say? From now on I’m going to tell you to make up your bed or get the oil changed in your car whenever you tell me to do something without any reason. Those are things that should actually be done and have a verifiable effect. Getting saved is a placebo saving me from a crime that Christianity concocted to make people feel guilty. I feel no guilt about two made up characters in an old book.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            The Holy Bible has been proven to be true. Christianity alone is the evidential faith. There is no error in the Holy Bible. You only needed to read it instead of lying. Your conscience is dead and you are spiritually dead; that’s why you feel no guilt about doing evil. Christianity gave mankind the life-saving truth of God. Read the Holy Bible and repent.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: What proves the bible to be true? I have yet to see anything that verifies the myths in your holy book. Instead of saying it’s true, why don’t you provide some evidence?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Everything the Holy Bible says is true. What is not? It has about 1,200 chapters written in 1,600-years-span. You must read it to discover the truth.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: I have read the bible and I don’t believe it. So what’s next? What evidence do you have to prove anything in the bible? If I think the bible is fiction then why would you try to use the bible to prove anything to me?

            Do you know the term “circular reasoning” by any chance? Try looking up “napkin religion” if you need an example.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You didn’t read it; that’s why you don’t remember a thing.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: I did read it. It’s very tedious in some parts. Almost like The Silmarillion.

            It’s impossible for you to make any kind of assertion about my past. You don’t know anything about me beyond my statements here. One being that I have read the bible. Yet you assume that I haven’t because it doesn’t fit your image of me. You’re telling lies about me to make yourself feel better. You’re bearing false witness.

            EDIT: Okay. If you keep going back to the bible, I’ll give you a couple of direct questions regarding the conflicting crucifixion narratives. How many women were at Christ’s tomb? Who was at the tomb when the women arrived?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Your statement proved that either you have never read the Bible or have forgotten everything. The crucifiction narratives do not conflict but are the faithful records of the same incident from different eyewitnesses. There were at least 5 women who went to the tomb( Luke 24:10) Two angels were at the tomb.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Matthew says two women. Mark says three. Luke says three and “others”. John says only Mary Magdalene, one lady.

            There’s also disagreement about one angel, two angels, or a young man dressed in white depending on who you read.

            So, got any non-fiction proof for me yet? You keep referencing this book of myths and legends compiled from the writings of bronze age mystics trying to start a religion (which did ultimately succeed, I’ll admit).

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            The accounts are not exclusive. One needs to read all four Gospels to have the whole picture. The women went with different groups, but the total number is either 5 or exceeds it. Mary Magdalene sure acted alone, although she started out together. The one angel and the young man must have been the part of two angels. It’s up to the angels how much they’d choose to shine. Their times of appearance also differ; there were multiple appearances for the women. Ask multiple friends of yours who arrived and left in different timings about your last birthday celebration; you’ll have to call all of them liars if you use the same measure you use for the Biblical account. The Bible writers only gave the honest story, each giving the vital part and also contributing to the whole. Your intention against the Holy Bible is unfair and evil; that’s why you cannot understand a thing.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: My friends aren’t claiming to speak unerringly for god in that situation. Is the bible the inerrant word of god or the error prone words of men? Your last comment tells me that you believe it to be the words of men, not god.

            Got another one for you. How did Judas die?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            God wrote the Holy Bible, using honest faithful human eyewitnesses under His inspiration. Your honest friends would give you various different accounts – similarities and differences overlapping – that can be constructed into one seamless story if all of them tell the truth. It’s that simple. Judas hanged himself but his body fell headlong and got smashed. ( Matthew ch. 27, Acts ch.1) You need to repent of your sin if you don’t want to join Judas.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: So this omnipotent creator of the universe isn’t able to get 4 guys to tell a consistent story? This testimony was written down more than 40 years after the events by unknown people that clearly have a bias. When I apply Occam’s Razor to this, it just doesn’t stand up.

            I urge you to give up this silly notion of sin and live a life free of fear that an omnipotent demagogue will subject you to tortures for eternity. Maybe if you accept reality you’ll stop lying about people and ordering them around.

            BTW, who was Joseph’s father?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            God wants us to read and study His Word with an honest heart and diligence. The Holy Bible is not for lazy humans, although even just reading the text brings a profound blessing. The first written account of the Gospel is within 20 years from Jesus’ ascention. (I’m old but I remember important things that happened decades ago like it’s yesterday.) The Biblical writers’ memories were revived by the Holy Spirit. ( John ch. 13-16) Hell is the perfect justice for unrepentant sinners. No more, no less. Read Revelation ch.20. God is perfectly just and fair. And He is merciful. Justice is for every natural human. You need to repent. Matthew recorded Joseph’s biological father( Jesus is the Jewish Royal King) and Luke recorded his father-in-law ( Jesus is the Promised Messiah, the Son of Man). Get a study Bible yourself and start reading God’s Word.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Interesting. I’m constantly correcting my coworkers misquotes of movies they love. Scientists have found that people in many cases modify their own memories on a regular basis. Heck, recently there was a mass reporting of a police shooting where everybody honestly thought they had seen a man get shot but the incident never happened.

            I don’t need a study bible because it’s all a myth. In a certain way I do admire your unwavering faith in something fictitious, but it also makes me sad that you’re wasting your life on this.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Don’t mix deliberate lies of false agenda with a sincere truth. When life is at stake, man confesses the truth. Most of the eyewitnesses suffered the martyr’s death. Denying the truth one cannot do even if life must be lost. Christianity alone is the proven truth worthy of living for and dying for. You should seriously check into the most excellent thing people give up their life for. I would. And the Son of God having died for me to save me? Salvation from sin and its consequences? Absolutely I would check the content by all means to find out all details of the matter. Everything in the universe that I dream or desire sounds just like a mere junk comparing to the fact that the Son of God who sacrificially came for mankind’s atonement and redemption.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: How many times do I have to tell you that I have seriously checked the content of your book. Several decades ago. I still disagree with you.

            I do admire your faith, but your blind conviction is extremely disappointing in another way.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You haven’t done enough. And your hatred against Christianity is altogether unreasonable and unethical. George, look at your own life and think again. Nothing matters except your need of forgiveness of sins and being right with your Creator God. Choose truth and life. Please don’t perish.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Fortunately I don’t hang my success, failure, or accomplishments on your opinion.

            Also, I don’t hate Christianity. I oppose pushy, overbearing theists. If Christians didn’t force their religion on others or try to inject it into law then I wouldn’t be a contributing member of FFRF and several other atheist groups.

            Well, as I consider my life I realize that I’m rather impressed with my accomplishments without any thought given to some fake illness called sin. No need to cry or genuflect to an imaginary father figure.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Telling the truth is not forcing. Nations need Christianity in the laws because anything Non-christian produces massive number of innocent victims. Whatever fair thing you have is from solely Christianity; You Westerners took Christianity for granted for the longest time and that’s why you don’t realize anything. You feel threatened by Christianity alone because you know it is telling you to do what is right. Your accomplishment is your futile imagination. Everything will burn up.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: So slavery in the US justified using the bible is fair? The pillaging of other regions by crusaders was fair? The persecution of scientists who found evidence that contradicts the bible was fair?

            Christianity showing me examples of polygamy, rape, genocide, and torture aren’t what I would call right, fair, or ethical. My ability to empathize and consider another person’s perspective is what guides me. If you can’t do that for yourself, then please continue believing in a god.

            “futile imagination”

            Ah! I think I understand why you can’t seem to empathize. You lack or are unwilling to imagine anything outside of your chosen perspective. Again, if that’s the thing that keeps you from rape and murder…

            —–
            Edit: I was just listening to a podcast where the host gave a great example of the atheist perspective.

            Picture an ice cream shop where lots of good and kind hearted people, including your family and friends, go every Sunday. They go there to talk, sing, and have a good time with each other. The staff are good and kind people who are happy to help. The shop is designed well with lots of nice windows and various works of art.

            This place is great… except for one problem. There’s no ice cream. This doesn’t make your friends or family bad or stupid. It’s just odd that they tip the staff for not having ice cream every week.

            (If you haven’t figured it out, the staff are clergy and the nonexistent ice cream is god)

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Slavery was a normal practice of the entire mankind everywhere until the British Christians and American Christians made fuss about it and abolished it from the planet. Crusades happened because the pagans attacked the innocent defenseless pilgrims. Crusaders and their readiness rescued Europe from falling into illiterate barbaric paganisms of others. They made Europe remain intact. Modern natural science started and flourished only in the Christiendom, nowhere else. All pioneer scientists were Christian. Bible-less civilizations had not much to think about or read. The false leadership in the church persecuted the Bible-reading true Christians most severely, not career scientists of any kind. Christianity taught mankind that polygamy, rape, genocide, and torture are all wrong from the Holy Bible though those were normal practices among all mankind. Christianity is the only working conscience and the only outstanding excellent thing in the Western Civilization thus of the entire world. Christians gave you ice cream but you are being woefully ungrateful.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: I’m done conversing with you. I see that you’re incapable of making rational assessments or considering any information from sources beyond your beliefs. You’re obviously preparing to justify slavery and rewriting history to make yourself fell better about the crimes and atrocities perpetrated by your religion of choice. I leave you with a quote from Sam Harris that you just brought to mind…

            “If someone doesn’t value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?”

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            ? You are the one who started conversation. You unbelieving Westerners are too ignorant on the real world and the world history. Your racist slave-owning forefathers were 1 million times better than you in everything because they did not massacre millions of human babies like today’s generations are doing. You guys have no rights to slander slave-owners. Today, it’s the Church again that fights against slavery all over the world. You Westerners have civility of any kind only because the Christian Church had educated you to be civil. The whole world knows how evil atheism is. Only inexperienced Americans believe otherwise because you never have suffered, and the likes of Sam Harris makes the absurdity of non-believers worse. Sam Harris is evil and he only proved how evil and illogical today’s Western secularism is, and it is your sin to listen to him. Evidences for Christianity are everywhere and logic says believing is the right thing to do; it is your willful sinful choice not to see the evidences. Read the life-giving Holy Bible instead, since you don’t remember a thing from God’s Word.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Just because you refuse to see the errors and contradictions doesn’t mean they aren’t there. It’s called confirmation bias.

            I grew up reading the bible. Are you making up lies about me or assumptions?

            Let’s try something different. Why should I believe that your Christian mythology is any more valid than Greek or Viking?

            …or we could get back to the original article about a man lying about his presentation to a bunch of innocent children.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You don’t remember a thing about the Holy Bible. It’s same as never having to read it. The Greeks and Vikings had nothing worth much just like the rest of mankind; it’s the reason they converted into Christianity. The Western Civilization, like the rest of mankind, has nothing really worthy besides Christianity. That’s why the anti-christian West is becoming like Sodom today. You guys need a fix quickly by the Church as always, before you commit more barbaric atrocities such as killing the unborn babies.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            God’s Word declares you are a sinner set for eternal damnation if you don’t repent; you need to listen if you have any honesty in you because you know how sinful you are. Read Matthew 7:6-28:20, too. Your beliefs and your opinions have nothing to do with the truth or objective facts. Truth exists outside of your preference but it is coming to you in due time.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: No, I don’t need to repent. I reject your assertion that sin is a thing at all. A god would need to exist for there to be sin. Fortunately there is no god (^_^)

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Yes, you do. There is God, and you are a sinner. Your lies will be exposed and you will face eternal justice on the Judgment Day. Ungrateful parasites get jailed when the Owner returns. Atheists lack thanksgiving; that’s your another deadly sin.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: No, I’m not a sinner. Lack of thanksgiving isn’t one of the seven deadly sins. Even if there were such a thing as sin, which there isn’t, because there is no god, I wouldn’t have to worry about “my another deadly sin” as you entertainingly phrased it.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You’ve got a false theology. Unbelief is the only unpardonable sin. All you need is to admit your own sin, confess it, and ask for forgiveness.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: No, I don’t need to do any of that (^_^)

            I renounce your holy book as a work of fiction and ardently affirm my unbelief.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            It’s the Word of Life. When you come to your sense, repent and return since you only have despair without the Truth.

          • George T

            Grace Kim Kwon: Again, you are wrong. I’m amazed and a little disappointed at the number of things you’re getting wrong, but ignorantly assume are correct.

            Please, stop embarrassing yourself. …and again, don’t waste any time praying for me. I considered the validity of your religion years ago and laughed myself silly when I realized it was all hokum and flummery. Instead, I’d urge you to spend your time reading a science book to get some facts and knowledge instead of blindly trusting some “truth” spun from a book rife with contradictions and lies.

  • Plutodog

    Christian Babble at it again…

  • lee metzger

    More evidence of how damaged the mind of an atheist is, and how pathetically disconnected from reality they are.

    • Paul Hiett

      All of them, eh? So how many abortion doctors have you murdered, since you’re a Christian?

      • Gary Metzger

        LOL…..You just proved my point by making such a dumb statement. I wouldn’t think of murdering an abortion doctor. In a way, they’ve already murdered themselves. You cannot kill an innocent life without hardening your conscience, and manufacturing yourself into a cold-blooded killer.

        • Paul Hiett

          You completely missed the point. You lumped all atheists together. I merely did the same thing for Christians, and predictably, you couldn’t handle it.

          • lee metzger

            I’ve literally met just two atheists who weren’t complete jerks, so using the phrase atheists is quite accurate. Should I say MOST atheists to appease the two? No.

          • Paul Hiett

            You obviously don’t know many atheists.

            If you’re going to lump all atheists together, then logically we should lump all Christians together, right?

          • Gary Metzger

            It’s not a question of knowing many atheists, it’s that the ones I’ve known have been exactly as described; jerks. Further, when you read about the “Christians” in Africa purging Muslims because those Muslims had been attempting to wipe out the Christians, should one assumes that the word “Christians” speaks for the whole of Christendom? Of course not. It’s no different for me. However, atheists have much to prove, because all I’ve met except the two I mentioned were just what I said they were, so I feel very comfortable saying atheists, rather than “most atheists.”

          • James Von Borcke

            “Should I say MOST atheists to appease the two? No.”
            Well, it ~would~ be factually correct, but don’t let that interfere with a good bout of bigotry.

  • UmustBKiddinMe

    I cannot see any rationale for disqualifying a speaker simply because of the speaker’s personal religious beliefs.

    • mirele

      He shouldn’t be disqualified for his personal beliefs. However, Eric Hovind should have been disqualified because:

      1) He is not qualified to teach high schoolers anything based on educational accomplishment.

      2) His slideshow makes it clear he is using examples from his creationism ministry to teach “critical thinking.”

      3) Some of the slides contain creationist ideas such as that a river could not have carved the Grand Canyon. Suffice it to say, a river CAN do this over a long period of time, but Eric Hovind’s six-day / 24 hour creationism doesn’t permit a scientific explanation for this. (To be clear, the creation of the Grand Canyon is complex and also involves geological uplift as well.)

      The U.S. Supreme Court in Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) made it clear that differing scientific viewpoints could be taught in public school. However, the court went on to say that creationism was not science. The district court opinion in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005) also includes “intelligent design” as a religious belief, not a scientific theory, which is impermissible to teach in the public schools.

  • Skeptic NY

    Mr. Hovind should of been disqualified simply on the basis that a squash has a higher level of critical thinking. Nothing to do with Hovind’s superstitious beliefs.

  • Pepper Jones

    if an Atheist group can be at a debate or talk then why not a Christian ? are they so afraid of us that they are trying to shut us down everywhere cause they know and fear the truth ? seems to me if one group of people can be a lecture , debate or meeting , talk of any kind , gathering , then ANYONE INCLUDING Christians can be also .

  • Lorraine McMillion

    It’s the same story every time. I can say I don’t believe and it is ok. You can’t say you believe unless you do it where I say you can. Oh…here is another one…separation of church and state says it is illegal for Christians to have freedom of speech anywhere another person will hear it less they believe….therefore it is not against free speech to hinder the freedom of it. God forbid not Your truth from being heard, and forbid the destruction of the lives of those who trust in You! Time to stop picking on people because they believe in Jesus. FFRF is pushing issues that don’t exist just to push their belief of unbelief.

    • Paul Hiett

      You are 100% wrong, Lorraine. You can speak about your faith almost anywhere you want. On a street corner, in a park, from the rooftop of your car if you want. I’m currently in NYC, and every day,without fail, I see Christians AND Muslims speaking about their beliefs. What you can’t do, is speak about them in government buildings and public schools, and on private property if the owner declines you from doing so. I would recommend you learn what the laws are first.

      • Reasonable Quest

        Point of clarification. You can speak about your religion in a public building, as long as you are not representing the government, and every other person is given the same opportunity to use the government platform to promote their idea (either for or against) with equal force.

        • Paul Hiett

          Walk into a city hall meeting and start preaching. How long do you think you’ll last?

          • Machiavellian

            It is one thing to deliver a sermon to a group of people and another to engage them in debate about religious beliefs, which is what I think Reasonable Quest was implying.

      • Lorraine McMillion

        Sure. That is what is said, yet so many cases pro e this wrong. For example… we can see the cross so it is illegal.

        • Paul Hiett

          What are you talking about? What cross?

          • Lorraine McMillion

            I have seen a case of this sort in the past. The cross can be seen from school. It has to come down. Here we go again. A christian can be seen teaching. He has to be done away with. It does not matter about the law. The law is being used to push people around. This man did not talk of his faith. So which law did he break by being their? None. Sugar coat it however you please. He has done nothing illegal.

          • Paul Hiett

            Can you link to that case that shows a cross had to be taken down because it was visible from a school? I’ve never heard of that, nor do I believe that that happened.

            Also, I didn’t say he had done anything illegal. In fact, I agree that the FFRF probably overstepped and reacted way too fast if Hovind did, in fact, not speak about religion.

            However, that’s not what we were discussing. Your original post was discussing the legality of preaching religion in public.

          • Lark62

            Hovind was teaching creationism, which is a religious belief. The slides were blatant.

          • Lark62

            Citation please. Crosses erected on school property are illegal. Crosses on private property with the permission of the property owner are fine.

            You can’t spit in my town without seeing a cross and this bothers me not at all. Because these crosses are on private property where they belong. It is only when the authority of the government is used to promote one religious viewpoint that this is a problem.

  • haas

    Psalms 141:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”

    • Reasonable Quest

      Matthew 5:22 … “And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.”

    • LeftCoast

      That is why these fools get PHDs and advance education to cover up their foolishness.

  • Paula Coyle

    “whose sole purpose and goal is the promotion of biblical creationism,”

    His sole purpose and goal there at this class was to promote critical thinking. I can’t imagine atheists have a problem with wanting children to develop critical thinking skills…

    • Paul Hiett

      I wholeheartedly agree, even as an atheist myself. Assuming the article is correct and no religion was mentioned, it certainly appears someone jumped the gun.

    • LeftCoast

      Only if the kids are thinking critically for their team and not the other team.

    • James Von Borcke

      “I can’t imagine atheists have a problem with wanting children to develop critical thinking skills…”
      Being that his presentation consisted ~entirely~ of slides promoting Creationism and attacking Evolution, he wasn’t teaching critical thinking.

  • http://www.evolutionvsgod.com/ Rich

    What if an atheist is present with their bad news of nothingness and no point to life and striving to get people to turn from God and have eternal damnation? Would it also not be considered critical thinking since atheists don’t think, but assume we come from apes which denies science and our origins as humans?

    • Paul Hiett

      “No point to life”. That’s funny right there. FYI, we live our lives to the fullest and strive to be good, decent people here on earth, not because have a book that tells us to, but because we know it’s probably the only life we get.

      That being said, from what the article says, Hovind did not speak about religion. Ergo, had an atheist been invited to speak at a public school, would you not be a little concerned about the curriculum?

    • LeftCoast

      I would welcome an atheist into my kids’ classroom. I know my kids are solid in their belief in God. I think my kids would laugh at them for presenting nothing helpful and they come from the result of mutated, retarded, half breed monkey man. Now what sounds crazy? a spirit in the clouds or we come from retarded monkeys that mated with some weird looking human retard that when they die, nothing. LOL!!!!!

      • Paul Hiett

        Crono478, if you see this, I believe it highlights my point regarding education and religion.

        • cappiman

          I agree, even though I am a Christian I love learning what others believe and why. It helps me to understand a lot more of society and it’s religious aspects. However claiming a religion or someone’s lack of religion is stupid or questioning their mental facility is quite deplorable. We as Christians shouldn’t hate other religions or anything like that, but rather show love towards them.

      • James Von Borcke

        “…or we come from retarded monkeys…”
        Take a chill, Mr Garrison.

    • Skeptic NY

      “What if an atheist is present with their bad news of nothingness and no point to life” Ridiculous Strawman to make you feel better. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god or gods due to lack of evidence. Nothing more, nothing less. As atheists we have EVERYTHING to live for because the evidence suggests that after we die that’s it. As such, we love and care and cherish our lives, family, friemds and the future of humankind that much more. As opposed to theists – Christians – who can’t wait to die.

  • Angel Triumphant

    So, lemme see if I understand this correctly…
    The only 1’s who can discuss “critical thinking” are those who follow what YOU believe?
    Yeah, that’s sounds… Well, FOOLISH..

    • George T

      Angel Triumphant: Teaching Creationism is not teaching critical thinking. They are two separate things. Mr. Hovind was found to be teaching Creationism in this case without naming it so. He was being a sneaky little liar for Jesus, hoping to justify his dishonest actions later.

  • http://theobservatorium.blogspot.com/ Nate

    Amazing, the level of terror Christians instill in the hearts of militant atheists, even when said Christians aren’t even speaking about their faith.

    • Bill

      fear has nothing to do with it. religion simply has no place in public schools

  • Jackson N Ashley McCoy

    1st amendment freedom of speech! I am a Christian from this school and if Christians are not allowed to speak in school then nether are atheist or any other religion! So where’s that freedom of speech again?

    • Paul Hiett

      FYI, the FFRF, while I do feel they jumped the gun, are simply asking for an investigation into what Hovind was saying. I would expect Christians to be just as concerned had Christopher Hitchins been invited

      • WorldGoneCrazy

        Hitchens is dead, OK? We don’t need dead people (a-theists, in general) speaking in our schools. BTW, William Lane Craig cleaned his clock in their 2009 debate.

    • weasel1886

      Have other faiths been allowed to speak ?

    • Lark62

      The way it is supposed to work is that any kid can pray or not, read the bible or not, join a religious club or not. For this to happen, school employees must stay out of it and remain neutral.

    • George T

      Correct! No religious or non-religious indoctrination. Public schools are tasked with teaching facts and leave religious studies to each students parents. Mainly because public schools are an extension of the government, which is to remain impartial on matters of religion.

  • Jackson N Ashley McCoy

    Ask the students how they feel!

    • James Von Borcke

      Well, clearly one of the students complained to their parents, who then called the proper agency to deal with the situation.

    • Lark62

      A student in oklahoma told his mom how he felt when his 3rd grade teacher handed out bibles. He felt isolated and pressured to take one.

      His mom asked the school not to do that, since it is a little bit illegal and stuff.

      The family has sinced basked in christian love. Someone said they needed a housewarming and sent a photo of a house engulfed in flames. The 3rd grader -abt 8 years old -was bullied and taunted with the encouragement of the school so badly that he withdrew from school to be home schooled. The family is selling their home.

      There is a reason religion and government don’t mix.

      Yes. Ask the kids how they feel. But if they aren’t christians, nobody cares how they feel. And if they dont want some of that christian love, they had best say nothing at all.

    • George T

      It’s not up to the students. It’s not up to the parents or the school staff either. It’s a constitutional amendment.

  • Tracy Sands Waller

    I don’t see anyone from Troup County complaining… unless I’m missing something. I just wonder why a group from Wisconsin cares what us country hicks in Troup County Ga are doing.

    • weasel1886

      Someone did complain. They just don’t talk about it here

  • Mike King

    Keep your anti god crap up north

    • weasel1886

      Is that a Jesus quote ?

    • James Von Borcke

      “Keep your anti god crap up north”
      Glad to see ~someone~ is willing to admit that Creationism and Neo-Confederatism are joined at the hip.

  • Mike King

    Question? If Atheists dont believe….Why does religion bother them so much…Curious
    Could it be there full of hatred for others….Why is the Muslim faith alright but believe in God and all Hell break loose….I know I will keep my faith in God and pray for you lost people….Lord knows this country could use it…..If I offended any of you…Get past yourselves and get over it….May God bless you all

    • Paul Hiett

      Because it doesn’t belong in our public schools.

    • weasel1886

      Can I come into the school and talk about devil worship and how great it is ?

      • The Last Trump

        No.
        No “dogs” allowed.

        • weasel1886

          Little wonder people don’t take you serious

    • James Von Borcke

      “I know I will keep my faith in God and pray for you lost people…”
      Just out of curiosity… I’m not an Atheist but my faith is different than your own, can you shovel some of that feigned pity and ripe condescension my way? I’m feeling left out.

    • George T

      Mike King: When Muslims gain enough political power in The US to force their religion on others, then atheists will oppose them. Currently Christians are the majority that are trying to change laws and impose their religion on others. If Jerry Falwell, Jim Baker, and other Christian leaders hadn’t encouraged their followers to push their religion into a government that I pay for, you would’ve never heard from me. The only reason I became an active atheist is the Dominionist Christians that try to break our nations founding documents by changing this into a Christian nation.

  • Hallett Newman

    The atheist complaint, in my opinion, has nothing to do with the speakers religion or beliefs. The major problem is about students being exposed to the ideas of CRITICAL THINKING. How dare someone explain HOW to think, when the education system is teaching you WHAT to think.

    • Nullifidian

      So, Hallett, do Christians teach their children HOW to think or WHAT to think?

      • Hallett Newman

        Like I said, the complaint is not Religion Based. Responsible PARENTS will teach their children how to think if the school system fails at that task.

    • weasel1886

      You need to research this story from another source. A lot is missing here.

    • George T

      Hallett Newman: No, the complaint is about Creationism concepts being taught under the crafty, dishonest guise of critical thinking. Hovind was tricking the school administration to get access to innocent children, without their parents permission to teach them any religious concepts, in order to indoctrinate them. If there is a hell, Hovind is paving his way their with his deceitful good intentions.

  • Dianne Kinney Hoover

    God is Love and if you believe in Love you believe in God

    • George T

      Dianne Kinney Hoover: The concept of Love is independent of some god concept. I believe that people do feel love without god being involved at all.

  • Homer for God

    And when was the last time Christian organizations sent a letter telling athiest groups to stop with their activities? Oh yeah! Never! The reason? Because when we don’t like what activity is going on We choose not to participate. (Woodsboro Baptist doors not count as they are not Christian). If the FFRF would just practice that, there would
    wouldn’t be so much oppression.

    • Bill

      they are trying to maintain separation church and state moron

      • Homer for God

        Wow! And y’all say Christians are hateful. Glad know that I’m better then that comment. Anyway, I’m explaining that atheists are always having a problem with Christians and our freedom of religion and try to silence us and use the same amendment of freedom to hide behind if we even try to respond. And yet when atheists spout out so much hated through speech against God, Christians sit back and take a stance of tolerance and non interference. The reason is because we are taught not to judge, but to witness. If you see a commercial promoting a movie, you have been given a choice by the studio to spend your money to see it. If you don’t, it’s not an issue and that’s YOUR choice. You don’t need to prevent others from seeing it because you don’t. It’s the same way here. God (through his chosen witnesses) presents a option. It’s YOUR choice take that option. Just like it’s our CHOICE to accept your option. You don’t have that right to silence us as we can’t silence you, so why don’t you leave us alone?

        • weasel1886

          Christians don’t judge or hate ?? Hilarious !!

        • George T

          Homer for God: Speaking of choice, Christian groups are trying to take away CHOICE from pregnant women. That’s one thing that Christians are forcing on non-Christians.

          They’re also trying to get special status and privilege for holy displays and biblical references in government buildings without extending the same option to other groups.

          They are also using my tax dollars to manipulate the Middle East in a way that is supposed to bring about the end of days. I don’t believe that will happen, and it’s a huge waste of my tax dollars.

          • Homer for God

            George, there is no way the power of choice can be taken away. Your right when you say there are organizations trying to make abortion illegal, but nobody is going to stop a person from doing the deed if she is going to have it done. I never said that Christians force anything. We are ALL free to choose to do what we want to do, but have to suffer the consequences (good and/or bad) to that choice.
            Church’s have always had special status according to their religion (the examples are too many to list) but no church can prevent any group from getting anything. Again that choice falls on whatever local government is in charge. You talk down to Christians seeking to prevent other groups from seeking privileges but that is no different the FFRF (Atheist group) from seeking to stop a restaurant from giving discounts for church bulletins. What’s next? I cant get a police,military, student or doctor discount so I should send letters to every business seeking to stop them? Again choice is the key.(Before anyone argues that point. I’m not a cop or student true, So I shouldn’t care if they get discounts. Atheists should be the same way if the discount doesn’t apply to them)
            I am not one to tell anyone their wrong or will put you down for what you believe ( that is not what God taught me.), but I seriously do not believe Christians have anything to do with the middle east. Though I know some radical Islamic groups have a serious problem on how America is acting in general, but they choose to act in their own way to try to install fear in us (which is not working). I do believe that the prophecies of the bible are coming true as we get closer to the end including the persecution Christians will be force to endure at the end. I believe we are going to made choose between confessing the Lord and die or renounce the kingdom of God and live, but again it is a CHOICE.
            Bottom line is this: Choice is a human being right (not just Christians, Atheists, science, whatever group one belong to)
            Christians can’t make you pray anymore then Atheists make you abandon your christian beliefs. God bless you and I hope this helps

          • George T

            Homer for God: If you’re going to assert a “slippery slope” argument at least get it right. Police, military, and student discounts have nothing to do with religion invading and injecting itself into government. Why would a group dedicated to church/state separation care about any discount given to those groups?

            On the subject of abortion, if women are going to have abortions either way then why take away the safe and clinical avenue and leave only risky and potentially life threatening methods? That’s what’s happening in many states around the country. Christian groups are taking away choices.

            Finally, if you don’t know about our governments backing of Israel you should really learn more about our international relations. I don’t feel like playing history teacher on the internet.

          • Homer for God

            Again George. My point is on choice. There is ALWAYS going to be someone trying to take away other people’s choices. I’m saying that will never happen. Only you can not choose which is still a choice. Christianity gives you a choice follow in our teachings. We can’t make you be a follower. And btw, Israel was protected LONG before America was discovered. Every country has an influence whether good or bad. That’s not fair blame one group for it. I really hope that’s not why you want to argue the point. I’m a Christian who loves God to no end, and I’m a realist when it comes to choice and its power. Lastly if you don’t want to watch a movie , then don’t, but don’t blame protest a movie theater because of it. That’s the point about the bulletins. God bless

          • George T

            Again, Homer for God, my point is that those options for choice ARE being taken away by CHRISTIANS in political roles RIGHT NOW. You can plug your ears and sing songs in an attempt to ignore the truth, but that doesn’t make the problem go away.

            Seriously?!? Israel as we know it today didn’t exist before 1948. If you can’t even get that right… I’m just not going down this road.

            Lastly, have you ever seen the anti-US propaganda films from Vietnam? I have. I’ve visited that country several times. I felt very welcome there until I watched one of these films at the Chu-chi tunnels. It’s amazing how a single film can make somebody that’s not a member of your group or organization feel excluded, ostracized, and vilified. If it’s in the building where I have to register to vote, get a drivers license, or file official paperwork, how would you expect me to avoid seeing that “movie”?

          • Homer for God

            I understand your point George, but I still respectfully disagree. Choice in of itself cannot be taken away . As long as your brain is fully (or at least partially) functional, then the ability of choice is there. By responding to each other, we make a CHOICE. By not responding to each other is a CHOICE. The argument on who is forcing who is irrelevant.
            Other response is you say that Christians (especially those in politics which can be an oxymoron depending how you look at it) are trying to take away that power of choice from a pregnant woman who wants to have an abortion. (before responding keep in mind I am fully for the power of choice so she wants to do it, then that’s between her and God. It’s not my place to judge, but to pray for her and love her). That is literally no different from atheists using their power to take away the choice of learning creation vs evolution or wanting to offer discounts to those who bring in church bulletins (by the way, the “slippery slope” is not taking away anything from anyone. Its the same argument if you include discounts from sporting events [taco night, 20% entree if you bring in a stub, etc…]). What Atheists want to do is try to make God not exist to future generations. They are taking the right for future generations to choose their own path. How is that any better? If you think that would make the world a better place then clearly you haven’t watched the world in the past century alone. Yea there has been great advancement of technology, medicine, and so on, but the abandonment of morals (not just Christian) in favor of the greedy and perverted individuals and as a result, the rich keep getting richer and the poor is left out with no consideration. Wars have been more frequent and more intense with useless violence. I can go on but like you I’m not going to argue history.

            As far as the propaganda that you had to watch. I don’t see any indication that you hate america or claim communist, so the answer is you CHOOSE not to follow them.
            Lastly, in order for me to be able to be in the position I am in to be a child of God and a very blessed Christian, I had to experience different cultures, beliefs, and environments. I have claimed atheism at one time, not believing in heaven or hell, God or Satan and even fully believed in evolution. Then I made some CHOICES. Those choices lead me down a path that was so dark, even society today would shun me quickly. I also grew up in an episcopal family and I suffered abuse in disguise as love from God. I found out that the life I was leading will continue to get darker (if that was even possible) if I didn’t do something to change it. So I prayed. I asked God to prove to me he was real. Show me some kind of sign that I can see and turn to for help. Right after (almost immediately) a man came and talked to me. I realized something very profound that day. God never created me to go out to control anyone or to take away their power of choice. I wasn’t created to judge, slander or hate.No, God created me to have a personal relationship with him. To trust and rely on him. To know that everything will be ok at the end. He didn’t tell me to be perfect or that he was going to reject me the second I lusted after a married woman or forget I borrowed a coworker’s pen and didn’t return. As a matter of fact, he told me I am a sinner. The worst kind of sinner too. How I wouldn’t of gotten anywhere near him no matter how many good deeds i did or how many people I helped. I died when I was born. My fate in this body was sealed when Adam and Eve bit that apple. The only way I could have that chance for my spirit is to believe that my sins were paid for when he sent his son Jesus to be tortured, and crucified by those who rejected him and God. For an eternity of peace and happiness, I’ll take that chance. I refuse to believe that when we die, that is it, no more, nothing. That is what evolution is telling me. The theory of evolution and the big bang theory are just that…theories.It’s not proven, just speculated based off of random things. Jesus existed. History has proven that. The theories were created by man and it was done within the last 700 years. The Bible was written over many many years and generations and by so many different people, but yet the same general messages ( not the nitpicky crap that people like to argue about) are written throughout and the timeline stayed the same continuous pace. I choose the history that makes a lot more sense. If we existed just to blink back out for nothing, then what’s the point of existing?

            Last thing. I see a great deal of similarities between , the pharisees In the Bible and those who are persecuting Christians now. They were always judging Jesus and trying to discredit him too.

          • George T

            Homer for God:
            So how are you spinning this in your mind? Is one of the choice options being redefined from legal to illegal? Another scenario to consider; If someone cuts off your hands doesn’t that remove the choices you have for what you do with your hands? I’m starting to suspect that you’re aiming for that lame “god gave us the ability to choose” claim, which I dismiss as an irrelevant myth.

            Parents can teach their children Creationism at home or in church in whatever way they want. Expecting schools to teach your religion via Creationism to a mixed class is arrogant and asinine. Pay for a private tutor or religious school in that case if you can’t do it on your own. Public schools are tasked with teaching children basic knowledge and skills that are needed to function in society. That includes scientific concepts like evolution. Creationism is religion specific and not called for to function in US society.

            I’m honestly glad that you found a belief that makes you happy and helps you to cope with life. I would no more disuade you from that than an alcoholic from AA if it’s helping them to avoid excessive drinking. I also see no problem with you sharing your beliefs with others. What I do take issue with is any religious person foisting their religion on others unsolicited. For example, a Christian bias presentation for a public school class deceptively claiming to be teaching science, to a captive audience of impressionable children. Another would be forcing into law an individuals beliefs about when a fetus should be considered human contrary to scientific findings. This last one is especially disconcerting because it strips a fully functional person of rights over their own body for nine months.

          • Homer for God

            I’m saying choice is a human ability. Rather it’s legal or illegal, Christian or Science, missing hands or feet, it’s still a choice. When you cover your mouth to sneeze or cough you made a choice. When you change lanes in a car you made a choice. whether you choose to argue, put on pants, eat an orange…it is still a Choice. The consequences (good or bad) is what follows that choice. Where we disagree is that I believe that power of choice comes from God. The only true power that makes all of us unique individuals.
            As far as bias teachings..that’s not just a Christian thing and you cannot deny that. The media is probably the biggest guilty party for that, but any belief system is going to put a bias spin on whatever they try to teach. You claim that Christians are trying to indoctrinate the youth and not give them a chance, but you are also taking away for the youth to decide for themselves and that’s not right either. You say Christians force their beliefs on the youth (which they do not by the way), but science and government are doing the same by forcing the belief of evolution on us as well.
            Lastly, grouping all christians in one category because one idiot made poor choices is just as dangerous as to say all rioters and looters are gang members or all gospel singer are black or all atheists are uneducated. You cannot single out a group for a few bad decisions.

          • George T

            Homer for God: Yeah, that’s what I figured you were aiming at. For the purposes of this discussion your “origin of choice” is absolutely irrelevant. If we’re telling each other myths and fables, I heard a good one from Aesop about an ant and a grasshopper.

            Back to the original point of this article. A person’s religion is a choice. In this country it was decided that we wouldn’t force that choice via government, but leave it up to the individual to choose in private. Public schooling is part of that government and trying to inject Christian teaching into it is a gross and unacceptable violation of that agreement.

            Now if you want to believe that evolution isn’t true, that’s fine. When you can provide falsifiable evidence for a different theory we’ll teach it in schools. At this point the theory and fact of evolution is a critical piece of information that every child needs to understand to function in our modern world.

            And yes, it is fair of me to say that Christians (plural) are trying to indoctrinate other peoples children without consent when more than one has been found to do so. I never said EVERY Christian does this. It is proper usage of English to use the plural form of Christian to refer to more than one member of that religious group. …until the various denominations start identifying themselves separately again.

    • weasel1886

      What things have atheist done that needs to be stopped ?

  • Tomas Clough

    I’m a resident of Troup County, and I’m reasonably certain this complaint came from outside somewhere. Lagrange is very church oriented. My daughter, who is 7 and an amazing example of a loving Christian (I fail miserably), asked me if it was ok to pray at lunch. I told her absolutely and to let me know if anyone says two words about it. Sometimes you have to be a little anti-establishment. Whether it’s in God’s name or for your own freedoms. There’s nobody far enough left to whine and cry me out of my lifestyle or my familys. Christians, we need to grow some balls and get off our OWN personal high horses. And buy a lot of tissues, because no matter what you do, someone else out there is gonna cry about it.

    • weasel1886

      Can I come there and talk about Wiccan in your girls class ?

      • Tomas Clough

        Lol. Of course not. You need to read what I wrote again. My daughter is allowed to practice her faith wherever she is as far as I’m concerned, as is her classmates no matter what their beliefs are. If YOUR daughter is in her class and talks about Wiccan stuff, then that’s just part of growing up around people who think differently and that’s healthy. You don’t go to schools to sell a product to children. Whether it’s religion or vacuum cleaners. How many teachers do you think go to church? Any church? We gonna fire them all? Use your head. And the whole “Wiccan” shock value is kinda lost on me though. I know people who practice. They’re cool. But their status spiritually isn’t my business any more than my kids are with the people trying to stop her.

        • Lark62

          Teachers can and do practice the religion of their choice on their own time. They cannot attempt to influence the religious beliefs of their students while on the clock.

    • weasel1886

      Someone with a student at the school complained to them

    • James Von Borcke

      “Sometimes you have to be a little anti-establishment.”
      You do realize that a student praying at lunch is ~not~ a problem and never has been? Nor has it ever been illegal.
      The problem is when the ~school~ itself (either by a teacher or other staff member) promotes prayer in such a way that it intrudes upon those who either pray differently or don’t pray at all.
      Most Christian Conservatives (especially those of the Creationist persuasion) would freak out if their kids were made to recite one of my prayers, just as I wouldn’t want my children made to say theirs. The First Amendment ~must~ work both ways or it doesn’t work at all.
      And for the record, if a school made a rule baring students from praying on their own (and on their own time, not the time of the class), then I would agree that this rule is wrong. Indeed, anyone with a secular viewpoint (including a great many Atheists I know) would agree as well. It’s not the school’s place to do that, and any situation that isolates and calls out a student for praying or not praying (equally) is unconstitutional.

    • Lark62

      Your daughter can pray at lunch. Your daughter can pray any time as long as she does not disrupt class.

      Teachers cannot tell her who to pray to.

      You seem to care about this, and in this example im going to assume you’re protestant. Be honest, how would you feel if

      1. Every day the principal used the intercom to lead all students in prayer to the virgin mary
      2. Your child’s teacher told her she is praying wrong, and taught her that she must confess her sins to a priest.
      3. Once a month the school held an assembly to honor and pray to saints whose days fall during that month. Any child that does not want to pray to saints can go to the principal’s office for extra homework.
      4. Your child’s teacher told her that her mother (you) is wicked because she rejects catholicism.

      All of these things have happened, but usually it is atheists and other nonchristians on the receiving end.

      Honestly, would you be okay with this? Can you truly not understand that it isn’t just illegal, it is wrong for school employees to promote their religion? It is wrong to ostracize children who aren’t part of the majority religion. It is wrong for school employees to attempt to change a child’s religious beliefs.

      Can’t you demand that every single child in your school be afforded the same right to be free from religious coercion? Protestant, catholic, mormon, jewish, muslim, hindu and atheist. Every single child has a right to go to school without being pressured / asked / encouraged to pray to someone else’s god.

  • http://northierthanthou.com/ northierthanthou.com

    It’s a shame that evangelicals keep coming up with ways to turn the schools to their own ends. The educational system is not there so you can push you faith.

  • James Von Borcke

    As someone who takes his faith seriously, I don’t understand why the school believed that Hovind is an expert on critical thinking? His entire profession is based on milking the ignorant and gullible for everything they have.

    And tax evasion. Let’s not forget that one.

  • Scott Rosencrants

    Are Christian students disqualified from attending public school or participating in debate class. Would that be a violation also?

    • weasel1886

      No not at all.

    • James Von Borcke

      Can a Christian participate? Absolutely! However, if a Creationist were to participate in a debate class, the student would be expected to follow the exact same rules of logic as the other members of the class, and that has proven to be a problem for them.
      Especially when trying to defend Creationism.

  • shannon oakley

    What a sneaky-snake that Creationist is. Took a lesson from the serpent in Genesis, eh?

  • Faith Apostolic

    What do atheists and Communists have in common? Oh yeah….

    • mirele

      What do evangelical Protestants and Communists have in common? Oh yeah, they’ll only allow their own belief system. I didn’t see alternatives to Eric Hovind’s 6-day / 24-hour day creationism being allowed in Troup County.

    • James Von Borcke

      “What do atheists and Communists have in common? Oh yeah….”
      Did you know that the man who wrote the Pledge of Allegiance was a Christian Socialist?

  • Go USA

    Those “tolerant peace loving” atheists! Always think they have monopoly on science and thinking.
    After all, Isaac Newton, a devout Christian never added anything to science, right?
    That is just a small sample, but asking an atheist to do some research instead of spreading venom is asking too much.

    • weasel1886

      Why is it assumed that people that believe in evolution or science or atheists ?

      • Go USA

        I can’t speak for other religions, If you believe in the evolution AKA “we all came from a primitive life form” and then call yourself Christian, or a Jew, then you are, and I am really sad to say this, confused
        Same as the “pro choice” so-called Catholics, same as the “Jesus is not God” so-called Christians, ..etc.

        • weasel1886

          Do you believe the Earth be 6,000 years are so old? There was no death before “the fall” ?
          It never rained before Noah? What were dinosaurs? Just asking

          • Go USA

            None of those are from the Christian faith. You want me to answer for some random cult? Not interested.
            Try asking a serious question, I might take you seriously then.

          • weasel1886

            So you can’t answer simple, sincere questions without insulting people. Good way to promote your faith

    • James Von Borcke

      “After all, Isaac Newton, a devout Christian never added anything to science, right?”
      He never added anything magical, and as a scientist, he followed the evidence within the limits of his ability. The issue, therefore, isn’t what Isaac Newton ~believed~ a couple hundred years ago, but what would he ~accept~ if presented with all the evidence we have now?
      Atheists know this, as do all religious people that are able to live within a modern context.

    • James Von Borcke

      BTW, I should add that the FFRF does not just represents Atheists… As a person of faith, I do ~not~ want your religion (nor that of the Hovinds given its anti-intellectual foundation) being taught to my kids outside of a secular/historical context. My children have the right not to be indoctrinated into other religious beliefs by the government, and for that reason ~I~ was also curious about what Eric Hovind was speaking about to a group of students at a public school (itself a college/tech preparatory school, no less) and felt the call for a proper investigation into his ‘lecture’ to ensure that his presentation did not violate the Constitution was justified.
      Especially now that we ~do know~ that he was presenting Creationist arguments as examples of Critical Thinking (when they clearly aren’t). The parent that contacted the FFRF was right to have been concerned.
      Just Google “Kent Hovind critical thinking” and you’ll find the article on Patheos that ~includes~ several slides from his presentation. There is no denying that his ‘Critical Thinking’ seminar is nothing but attacks on Creationism made by a religious institution being foisted upon a captive audience, which is illegal in ~any~ state.

      • Lark62

        You are using facts, evidence and critical thinking. You will only confuse them.

      • Go USA

        “FFRF does not just represents Atheists”
        Actually it does, and in a perfect world, it is also unconstitutional for starters.

        The Constitution stated Congress shall not issue laws on religious grounds, something we all agree on, but NEVER said government should be hostile to religion.
        Atheists just want to force their way of thinking and lifestyle on others, they are a cult, and all those “critical thinking” and “reason” propaganda should not fool anyone.
        Oh, and SCOTUS also said they are a religion. So the irony and the hypocrisy of atheists going after religions (specifically Christianity) is just too much to ignore.

  • Lesli Spice

    It’s like they want the right to indoctrinate but they don’t want anyone else to give an opposing opinon. When I was in school we were taught that America is a place of freedom and only the Communist governments control their schools so they can control their people and what their people believe.

    • George T

      Leslie: In court it’s been found that Creationism is teaching the bible with a different name. That’s not allowed in public schools. If you argue that Intelligent Design should be taught then we’ll wait for something worth teaching. Currently there is no falsifiable theory, vetted by the scientific community, that’s worth teaching.

      • Lesli Spice

        George, are you not aware that text books are written in such a way to push a liberal social agenda that has not been vetted by the scientific community. School is not about reading, writing and math.

        • George T

          Leslie Spice: Oh! Do tell. What’s the conspiracy theory du jour?

      • Lesli Spice

        George: in addition. I don’t think he was teaching creationism. I think he is known as a speaker for creationism.

  • Stan Hoffman

    FFRF needs to either get lock jaw or go visit jihadi john to get a head job.

    • Lark62

      Spoken like a true christian. People who disagree with your religious beliefs should be murdered. Religion rots morality.

  • Paul Hiett

    Ahhhh, so now the truth is coming out. It turns out, Hovind DID “preach”, but did it in a different manner. Unfortunately, we can’t post links on here, but a simple Google search on “Hovind critical thinking” reveals that that’s exactly what he did. If you’re open to learning the truth, click on the first link Google comes up with.

    It’s an article on Patheos dot com, easy to find.

    In that article, Hovinds actual presentation is viewable, along with many slides from it. Even Christians can’t argue against what he was presenting.

    I retract my previous statement that the FFRF jumped the gun. They are spot on, and Hovind had no business being in that school.

  • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

    Kellum further noted opined in a press release that he found it astounding that FFRF asserted that people of faith should be “disqualified” from speaking in public schools out of assumptions about the content of their speech. “Just like anyone else, Christians have a place in society,” he stated. “Christians cannot be banished from participation in public affairs due to their personal beliefs. ”

    Once again the FFRF has established something that did not exist, and made an assumption that it did. That being that the presenter (since he is a Christian) could not encourage students to evaluate critical thinking. Since the article clearly states that Mr. Hovind did not reference a Christian or Evolution in his approach, the FFRF once again is just trying to make trouble in public schools. This is not new because the FFRF agenda is to eliminate not religion, but anyone that is a Christian, no matter what they are teaching, in this case critical thinking. Why? Because the atheist community hates Christians, and so do atheists. It’s very clear that the time has passed since Christians have just bowed down to the FFRF, and that we stand up for our rights. To further illustrate this problem take a look at this. Although it doesn’t relate to this article so much, just wait until Christians stand up against the FFRF related to schools, public places, state capitals, federal properties that have had symbols of faith on their grounds. Another article just stated that middle school students stood against these FFRF people and others to put back “Under God” in their school and easily defeated them and I believe the ACLU as well. Even our own kids are making a stand for God. It’s time we as Christians follow their lead.

    “We will not obey.”

    That’s the blunt warning a group of prominent religious leaders is sending to the Supreme Court of the United States as they consider same-sex marriage.

    “We respectfully warn the Supreme Court not to cross that line,” read a document titled, Pledge in Solidarity to Defend Marriage. “We stand united together in defense of marriage. Make no mistake about our resolve.”

    “While there are many things we can endure, redefining marriage is so fundamental to the natural order and the common good that this is the line we must draw and one we cannot and will not cross,” the pledge states.

    The signees are a who’s who of religious leaders including former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, National Religious Broadcasters president Jerry Johnson, Pastor John Hagee, and Franklin Graham, president and CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse.

    The pledge was co-drafted by Deacon Keith Fournier, a Catholic deacon, and Mat Staver, the founder of Liberty Counsel. Also involved in the document were Rick Scarborough, the president of Vision America Action and James Dobson, the founder of Family Talk Radio.

    “We’re sending a warning to the Supreme Court and frankly any court that crosses the line on the issue of marriage,” Staver told me.

    He said that once same-sex marriage is elevated to the level of protected status – it will transform the face of society and will result in the “beginning of the end of Western Civilization.”

    “You are essentially saying that boys and girls don’t need moms and dads – that moms and dads are irrelevant,” Staver said. “Gender becomes pointless when government adopts same-sex marriage. It creates a genderless relationship out of a very gender-specific relationship. It says that it doesn’t matter and that two moms or two dads are absolutely equivalent to a mom and a dad.”

    Dobson said the legalization of same-sex marriage could fracture the nation.

    “The institution of marriage is fundamental and it must be defended,” he told me. “It’s the foundation for the entire culture. It’s been in existence for 5,000 years. If you weaken it or if you undermine it – the entire superstructure can come down. We see it as that important.”

    And that means the possibility of Christians – people of faith – engaging in acts of civil disobedience.

    “Yes, I’m talking about civil disobedience,” Staver said. “I’m talking about resistance and I’m talking about peaceful resistance against unjust laws and unjust rulings.”

    That’s quite a shocking statement. So I asked Mr. Staver to clarify his remarks.

    “I’m calling for people to not recognize the legitimacy of that ruling because it’s not grounded in the Rule of Law,” he told me. “They need to resist that ruling in every way possible. In a peaceful way – they need to resist it as much as Martin Luther King, Jr. resisted unjust laws in his time.”

    Scarborough said the pledge was meant to be forthright and clear.

    “We’re facing a real Constitutional crisis if the Supreme Court rules adversely from our perspective on same-sex marriage,” he told me. For me there’s no option. I’m going to choose to serve the Lord. And I think that thousands of other pastors will take that position and hundreds of thousands – if not millions of Christians.”

    Scarborough is urging pastors across the nation to sign the pledge.

    He referenced the “outrageous penalties” being assessed against people of faith simply because they don’t want to participate in a same-sex union.

    An Oregon bakery is facing a $135,000 fine for refusing to make a cake for a lesbian wedding and a Washington State florist faces fines for refusing to participate in a gay wedding.

    “Christians are being declared the lawbreakers when we are simply living by what we have always believed, and by a set of laws that the culture historically has agreed to,” he said. “Right now the courts are changing the playing field and declaring that what the natural eye can see and natural law reveals is not truth. … What will we do, and how will we respond?”

    Dobson said there’s no doubt that LGBT activists are targeting Christian business owners.

    “For about 50 years the homosexual community has had as its goal to change the culture, to change the ideology and if necessary – to force people who don’t agree by use of the courts,” Dobson told me. “I think there’s a collision here and we can all see it and where it’s going to go is anybody’s guess – but it is serious.”

    To be clear – the men and women who courageously signed this pledge did so knowing the hell storm that is about to be unleashed on them – and their families.

    “We have no choice,” Staver told me. “We cannot compromise our clear biblical convictions, our religious convictions.

    • George T

      So what horrors do you think gay marriage will unleash on the citizens of America? Gay divorce? We’ve already got lots of pious Christians divorcing every day.

      • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

        It’s not what I think that really matters. It’s what I do in my life to show love that matters. I will always make an effort to show I love people, even those I don’t agree with. It’s not gay marriage that is the issue. It’s the deterioration of people’s principles that is at issue especially now. Christians must change I agree. We must show there is a better way to live. We have not done that well. But I do think that Christ did it well.

        • George T

          Dream Theater Moment of Reason: I can appreciate that you’re making more refined distinctions regarding this issue. Still, it sounds like you’re saying gay people have flawed or no principles at all. Is that your assertion?

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            No, not at all. I know some gay people and my belief is God loves us all. I cannot as a Christian make judgements like that. Some do and I have spoken with them about this. Ultimately it is God that has the power of judgement and forgiveness. Jesus made a distinction. If I judge someone, I will have to account for my own judgement in the same way I judged others. What I support is the Freedom to express my joy and peace through the source in which I get that. Jesus is that source. Jesus said we all sin and fall short of the glory of God. So if I sin, how can I possibly tell someone else about the sin they may or may not be doing. I can only stand on my rights to my beliefs, and my freedom is to share those beliefs with anyone that wants to listen.

          • George T

            Dream Theater Moment of Reason: That’s a better and more inclusive mentality than most vocal Christians on the internet and in the news. Still, I do think that what you think matters. Your thoughts influence your actions in ways that you might not be aware of. Just mentioning this to make you aware. As you said in a religious way, we are all imperfect beings.

            About the original issue, it appears that Mr. Hovind’s presentation at the Georgia school did include misinformation in various forms that fosters Creationist ideas in all but name. Instead of being an honest, forthright Christian, he is apparently deciding to use deception and lies.

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            Once again I Thank you for being open and having a discussion without attacks. If what you say is true than we must look at intentions. Was the intent to help or hurt these kids? My thoughts are the same as yesterday or the day before etc. Christ didn’t come to destroy mankind, he came to save it. Many a Christian evidently judges prematurely. I believe with time, most every person that lives has an opportunity to know Jesus. I don’t know this man “Mr. Hovind” and I don’t know his intent. What I have taken notice of is the kids in our public schools. Let me give you an example: A young man recently that was a valitictorin (spelling) who got up in front of his fellow students and prayed before his speech. You could see the teachers and the principle squirming as he did it. However, when he was done with the prayer he received a standing ovation from the students. He had disobeyed his teachers and principal to stand up against what he called a deterioration of morals in our schools. When I see our young people standing up for God, I realize that God will always be a part of peoples lives. I ask this of you. Why is it fair to be forced to study Darwin’s version of Evolution in schools, without the same opportunity being given to Creationism. We always talk about equal freedom for all, and yet there is no equal opportunity to learn about Intelligent Design (and I’m not talking about any religion, just the concept and the science behind ID? If we want equality in the schools there are a number of very smart people who make their life about science, and believe that there is sufficient evidence for ID. It’s only when we have true equality to allow teachers to discuss both topics in a manner that the student can decide, will we have total equality in the schools. I’m not talking about a particular religion, I’m talking about freedoms that we take for granted. Science is the only area I see conflicts, while other studies such as Psychology, Behavioral Science, History, Mathematics, etc is taught with no FFRF insertions of protest. Our own history teaches us that many framers of the constitution believed in God, and even Christ, and just as you said my thoughts “matter”, so do the thoughts of those men in their time. I support the option of either or when it comes to ID and Darwins Evolution even if I do not believe that Darwin made a home run in Evolutionary processes. I didn’t believe in Evolution as taught even in school, because I don’t believe that a species evolves into another species and is an unguided process. It doesn’t make since to me primarily because I’ve not seen mankind evolve in form in over 2500 years. To come from an earlier form of Neantheral to homo-sapian to me represents an early form of man, not a form of ape. So that makes sense to me. I don’t see origins of mankind that can be explained by science, nor do I see the Universe explained by science in it’s complexity. That debate is on-going, and the origins debate is ongoing but not conclusive. That is a broad look at science because their have been great benefits to mankind because of science. The same is true to those that believe in God. When people mention for example that God is a myth, there have been god’s that are mythical. That in no way convinces me that God is not real. In fact it enhances my belief in God as the world’s populace primarily believes in God, Christian, Jewish, Muslim etc. So although you don’t believe in that, at some point its possible that you would, rather it be by science, or by scholars, archeological finds, the Bible, or some other method. It’s to me important to study both science and God. We can’t know it all, and not everyone with PHD’s or a simpleton like myself are going to always agree with each other, but if science is the method of discovery, it should in my opinion include all possibilities. That is equality in the real sense, utilizing the method’s of science. That is why I feel ID will make more headway in the coming years.

    • James Von Borcke

      “That being that the presenter (since he is a Christian) could not encourage students to evaluate critical thinking.”

      It’s not that he’s a Christian; it’s that he’s a Creationist who’s idea of critical thought only qualifies as anti-intellectualism.

      “Since the article clearly states that Mr. Hovind did not reference a
      Christian or Evolution in his approach, the FFRF once again is just
      trying to make trouble in public schools.”

      The article lies; his so-called examples of critical thinking were all affirmations for Creation and attacks on Evolution… Because he did not ~read~ the contents of those slides, which the students clearly saw, he thinks he can get away with stating that he did not ~talk~ about Creation or Evolution. Seriously? What is he, like 5 years old?

      Shame on those who would seek to subvert the US Constitution. This preacher and who ever hired him to speak should all be charged with treason and child abuse.

      • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

        A creationist has just as much right to explain creationism as you do to explain Evolution. That’s a fact.

        • James Von Borcke

          Except ~not~ in a public school setting, which has been found, ~repeatedly~, to violate the Constitution. That, too, is a fact. Creationists can preach and preach and preach and preach all they want; that’s what churches and street corners are for.

          But let me put this clearly so you understand: Eric Hovind ~falsely~ represented himself as a presenter on critical thinking and was hired by at least one school employee who ~knew~ that Eric Hovind would present materials on Creationism in order to ~preach Creationism~ to children ~without the legal consent of those children’s parents~.

          If someone used the public school system to preach a religious message other than your own ~to your children without your consent~, how would ~you~ feel about it?

          Don’t let the fact that you share this man’s religious views distract you from ~what he did~, and what he did was break the law and violated the Constitution ~by purposeful intention~. Or would you care to argue that Creationism should receive special treatment that no other religious view is granted?

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            I’ve read that from you. I should I suppose make the point that believing you over the article is difficult based on your recent comments. As for breaking the law, that has not been determined. You have determined that, but its not within your power to make the decision. I would care to say the Creationism should receive the same treatment that evolution gets. I’ve had the discussion before that I had no problem with the study of the Quran, or Torah for those that want to study it. Preaching, lets face it, it happens everywhere, and I can’t protect my child from every situation. What I can do is what these kids did: Middle Schoolers Rally to Get Religious Message Back on School Sign

            Students at a Louisiana middle school protested when the administration removed the phrase “In God We Trust” from the official marquee following a tussle with the ACLU. (Photo: KSLA)

            A group of student protestors at a Louisiana middle school has succeeded in getting “In God We Trust” back onto its official marquee after the phrase was removed by administrators in response to a tangle with the American Civil Liberties Union.

            “We are taking a stand for the lord,” Joey Ketchum, a district parent and local Baptist pastor, told Fox Carolina regarding the protesting students at Ridgewood Middle School in West Shreveport.

            The brouhaha began last week, after the ACLU Louisiana wrote an open letter to Caddo Parish superintendent Theodis Lamar Goree regarding official religious statements that had allegedly been made by the principal of another district school, Walnut Hill Elementary.

            The principal, said the letter, dated March 30, “has engaged in a pattern of religious proselytization by sending messages to parents invoking prayer, and through a lengthy ‘Principal’s Message’ on the school’s website,” which the ACLU noted is in violation of the First Amendment and U.S. Constitution. “The United States Constitution requires public schools to ensure that state-supported activity is not used for religious indoctrination,” the letter continued. “There is no question that the Principal has violated these legal mandates by repeatedly invoking God, prayer, and Christianity throughout official school publications.” The correspondence urged the principal to stop, for the district to look into the situation, and to “immediately remove all religious references from the website of Walnut Hills and any other schools in the Caddo Parish school district.”

            That, apparently, is when Ridgewood removed “In God We Trust” from its marquee — even though the phrase has been ruled as constitutional in many court cases, including a year ago, when a group of atheists and the Freedom From Religion Foundation lost a court fight to have it removed from U.S. currency. The decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit referenced many past decisions upholding the use of the phrase, noting, “The Court has recognized in a number of its cases that the motto, and its inclusion in the design of U.S. currency, is a ‘reference to our religious heritage,’” adding that “the printing of ‘In God We Trust’ on our coins serve the secular purposes of solemnizing public occasions, expressing confidence in the future and encouraging the recognition of what is worthy of appreciation in society.”

            In light of its legal history, it’s not clear why the school decided to remove the phrase from its marquee. District spokesperson Bill Strother did not return a call requesting comment from Yahoo Parenting.

            ACLU Louisiana executive director Marjorie Esman tells Yahoo Parenting, “We contacted the school board because the [Walnut Hill] principal was praying in school, clearly a violation of the constitution.” She says the school’s attorney has since assured her that he is investigating the situation. Regarding Ridgewood’s alteration of its school sign, she says, “I don’t know how that came about.”

            “In God We Trust” was reinstated on Friday after students rallied at lunchtime, handing out hundreds of T-shirts bearing the phrase, with Ketchum as their leader. “I’m so thrilled because that is such a victory for our students,” he told KSLA. “They wanted to take a stand and they did and we’re so thrilled to death that their voice was heard loud and clear.“

            As for the ACLU’s response, Esman says, “If the students are unhappy about something, they have the right to engage in a peaceful protest, and the ACLU would always support their right for a peaceful protest on any issue.”

          • James Von Borcke

            “I should I suppose make the point that believing you over the article is difficult based on your recent comments.”

            The ~full~ article can be found on Patheos; this article intentionally omits information in order to promote a persecution narrative.

            “As for breaking the law, that has not been determined.”

            His slides included pro-Creationist arguments as examples of Critical Thinking. He broke the law ~and~ failed to teach the topic he was paid (with taxpayer money) to teach.

            “I would care to say the Creationism should receive the same treatment that evolution gets.”

            No, it doesn’t. Creationists have brought the issue in front of SCOTUS ~multiple~ times, and have gotten their butts handed to them every time. That’s why they invent nonsense like Intelligent Design (which also failed to pass Constitutional muster) and disguise their material as lectures on Critical Thinking.

            (Hint: If you need to lie to get in the door, then you definitely belong outside.)

            “I’ve had the discussion before that I had no problem with the study of the Quran, or Torah for those that want to study it.”

            Neither do I. But the place for those subjects are Comparative Religion and Philosophy, not Science and Critical Thinking (unless, of course, to illustrate how they are ~not~ science or conducive to critical thinking.

            “Preaching, lets face it, it happens everywhere, and I can’t protect my child from every situation.”

            That’s why the Constitution forbids the use of schools as a platform.

            “What I can do is what these kids did: Middle Schoolers Rally to Get Religious Message Back on School Sign”

            I actually agree; SCOTUS has affirmed twice that “In God We Trust” is of Deistic, not Christian, character, and is thus part of our ‘civil religion’. Now, if only Christians would accept that instead of trying to claim that it proves we’re a Christian nation, everything will be peachy.

            “ACLU Louisiana executive director Marjorie Esman tells Yahoo Parenting, “We contacted the school board because the [Walnut Hill] principal was praying in school, clearly a violation of the constitution.” She says the school’s attorney has since assured her that he is investigating the situation. Regarding Ridgewood’s alteration of its school sign, she says, “I don’t know how that came about.”…”

            And the ACLU is right; if the principle was leading a prayer with students (or, for that manner, insisted that the staff and faculty also ~must~ be present), then he was in violation of the Constitution.

            It looks to me that the principle got spanked for breaking the law, then over-reacted and removed the motto of his own accord. The children acted as they saw fit, of course. However… I have to wonder how many of those children would, if learning that the foundational basis of the motto isn’t Christian, demand it be removed as being heretical?

          • Dream Theater Moment of Reason

            Am I to conclude that you are a “Deist” that believes in Jesus Christ? So far I do not understand your position, but I’m hoping you will clarify that to me.

          • James Von Borcke

            Yes, the term Christian Deist would describe me. Of course, that also describes nearly every Christian who doesn’t subscribe to a literal interpretation of the Old Testament, so I’d add that I approach the Gospels in the fashion of the Gnostics, one of the earliest (Pre-Catholic) forms of Christianity in which the individual is charged with their own meditations and contemplations of Christ’s teachings without the intervention of priests (which includes preachers, reverends, rabbis, etc.) due to their inevitable use of religion as a political tool.

          • DreamTheaterIlluminationTheory

            In other words you don’t go to church. I do not either. Christ said when two or more are gathered together in his name, that is “church” and the basis of Christ building the church to start with. I’ve never heard a “Deist” that believed in Christ so this is a first for me. I don’t have a problem in sharing the truth of Christ with others if they are willing to listen. If not Jesus told the disciples to wipe the dust off of their feet and go to another town to teach about him. I agree that “religion” is often used for political reasons, however I will say I would prefer our leaders believe in Christ as opposed to a leader who is an atheist. So that is where I stand. I know the trend is to move away from “structured religion” as I have done so, but I also feel very close to God and Christ as does my wife and my kids and Grandbabies. I experience Christ at work in our lives. That is not tangible but it is a fact.

          • James Von Borcke

            “I’ve never heard a “Deist” that believed in Christ so this is a first for me.”

            Actually, my faith is nearly in line with that of Thomas Jefferson (which would be identified as Unitarian Universalism), though I doubt he was a Gnostic. Overall, though, I do share his views regarding religious liberty.

  • Jim

    Atheists are Satan’s play things.

    • James Von Borcke

      Hate, anger, fear and ignorance are Satan’s play things…
      Atheists are as Atheists do.

    • George T

      Jim: Christians seem to be the playthings of conservative politicians, craftily telling you what you want to hear until they get your votes and money.

  • Paul Hiett

    How cute, the site removed my post regarding the truth of this article. Turns out, Hovind’s presentation was rife with “creationism” slides.
    Yep, the FFRF called it right again.

    • James Von Borcke

      No, your other post is still there… But I can relate; A couple of my own had vanished but then returned later after I had reposted.

  • http://www.google.com/ Jan van Niekerk

    This is another complaint by FRRF without a complainant. How is it they believe they have standing, beyond the notion that their letter will stand briefly in the trash? I suspect they look up speaking schedules for people they dislike, and then send cease and desist letters, without even bothering to hear what that person said, much less to determine that any wrongful act was committed, or any harm was caused.

    • weasel1886

      A parent at the school informed them. This article leaves a lot out.

      • http://www.google.com/ Jan van Niekerk

        The article includes the actual complaint. Feel free to read it in its baseless glory.

        • George T

          Apparently you don’t understand the meaning of the word “baseless”.

  • Mike Laborde

    The atheist religion of hate God. Thus their religion. Look up thr definition of religion.

    • bill2

      you can’t hate what doesn’t exist.

    • George T

      Mike Laborde: Do you hate Thor or Santa Clause for not existing? I hate your god in the same way. …by not considering it something worth hating.

      • Mike Laborde

        Thus God exist because atheist hate God. If you were smart, you would stop answering post on God if you really believe He doesn’t exist. I don’t hate Santa or the star cluster of Thor.

        • George T

          Mike Laborde: Is English your second language? Maybe I was too complex for you. There is no god, Santa, or Thor. There are star clusters. I like star clusters. I have zero interest in god, Santa, or Thor. I only care that people, with similar beliefs to yours, are willing to force their religion on others using public schools and government institutions. I’ve personally visited several countries where religion is directly involved in government and would hate to see that same injustice perpetrated in my homeland.

          The reason I keep posting is to remind theists like yourselves that you’re still obligated to take into account other religions and the non-religious in The US.

          If you want to imagine that I hate your imaginary friend, that’s fine. Whatever. All I feel on that score is disappointed that you still have a need for imaginary friends.

          • Mike Laborde

            I never said that I believed in santa or thor. But you do know that you have a religion; belief. Look it up. You believe and have certain values. Thus, you have the religion of atheism. Your speech gives you away. So, also, you believe in God since you fight so hard against His principles and preceipts. Why should it matter to you at all if people bring the gospel of Jesus Christ to those who have no life as I suspect you are. Where is it in your religion that brings love to a lost and dying world? All you preach is that we come from spit , are going nowhere , have no value, have no reason for living and will die and forever will be lost to nothingness. I, myself have hope that there is a God that really loves me and cares about me and will have eternal life with Him forever, unlike your god , yourself, has no hope or love or peace and will forever be lost into nothingness. Will never ever experience a Soverin God’s love.

          • George T

            Mike Laborde: Sorry, but you’re wrong. The only time atheism counts as a religion is in court cases due to flaws in human perception grounded in the language. In reality it’s no more a religion than bald is a hair style, abstinence is a sexual position, off is a TV station, or not collecting coins is a hobby.

            It matters how Christians bring the gospel to people because prideful and arrogant followers tend to be presumptuous regarding their rights to badger and hector people who don’t believe as they do. As a citizen you can stand on a street corner and tell me about your mythology all day long (see below why you shouldn’t). As an elected official, teacher, or government employee you are a representative of all citizens and are constitutionally restricted from advancing one religion over others.

            Finally, I don’t preach anything as I don’t have a religion. As smarter men than I have stated, of all the gods that men have ever believed in I simply believe in one less than you do. Because of that I’m not going to waste my life genuflecting to an imaginary friend in the hopes that there’s something else after I die. I’m trying to take full advantage of my moment in the sun before my end. I don’t let some imaginary illness like sin make me feel sad and guilty about my happy and healthy relations with women. I ride motorcycles, try foods and drinks I’ve never heard of in America, and travel whenever possible.

            If your belief in an imaginary friend makes you happy, then please continue. Just follow the advice of Matthew 6:5-8 and avoid being prideful and haughty about your faith.

          • Mike Laborde

            Well George. I can always tell when I am dealing with someone who thinks that they are interlectually Omni potent as they are always in denial like you and set themselves up and above anyone who shows them up as what they are. You deny the fact that you have a religion because you choose to only use that part of the definition of religion that you want to use to forward your agenda and to make those who disagree with you. You sir are not what you project yourself to be while you try to destroy that which you deny and crave love from yourself that you cannot give yourself. Love to you means destroying anyone who disagrees with you. Denying your creator is your choice. One day, you will meet Him and I hope that you will have found the Lover of your soul.

          • George T

            Mike Laborde: Would you please stop using the Straw Man fallacy on me? You can’t make up your own definition for atheism, or tell me how I define love. I’ve told you exactly what I think and you’re then building these false assumptions around my words.

            I’m honestly reaching out to you with truth and honesty and you’re trying to smack me in the face with a bible for daring to disagree with you.

            P.S. I was raised attending a church. I tried Jesus. Biblical “truth” just fell short of reality.

          • Mike Laborde

            If you really knew the truth , you would be free to worship Jesus Christ, the author and finisher of the true faith. The enemy of your sole has conjolled you into believing that you are God as he convinced himself that he was greater than god and knew more than He.

          • George T

            Mike Laborde: Everybody is free to worship whatever they want, or not worship anything at all in this country. I personally don’t see any reason to believe in any mythology that claims to know what happens after we die. I’d rather spend my time here and now enjoying this life while I have it. Not wasting it genuflecting to some imaginary friend that probably doesn’t exist.

            If you want one religion to get special privileges that oppress believers of other faiths and non-believers, try moving to Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, or any other nation with a theocratic government.

            Did you mean soul? Sole is a kind of fish, or a part of your shoe.

          • Mike Laborde

            Yes, you sure do, and you worship with people who want to get ride of people who worship the one true God. So, who’s religion is better? Christians don’t go around forcing other people to accept their religion. Yours does.

          • George T

            Mike Laborde: I don’t worship at all, so your claim is shown as a lie right there. There’s nothing to worship as there is no god or gods. Please stop bearing false witness. It’d be offensive if it wasn’t done in such a childish way.

          • Mike Laborde

            Oh, but you do. You worship yourself and anyone who thinks like you. Atheist are communist. One you become communized, you only have freedom that is deemed by the head communist.

          • George T

            Mike Laborde: Again, you’re making things up to justify your own beliefs about atheists. I do not worship myself. That is a Strawman claim.

            I do not worship anybody who thinks like me, by which I assume you mean other atheists. There are some that I respect. Others I disagree with. None are worthy of worship. Another Strawman.

            I’m not a communist. It’s a system that too easily falls victim to “the tragedy of the commons”. Third Strawman.

            Why do you keep bearing false witness? If you’re right and there is a god and heaven, you’ll have to answer for a lot.

          • Mike Laborde

            I see you like to use my words to justify your actions. You fail to see that you are digging yourself a deeper hole that you will never be able to dig yourself out of. Trying to throw your shame and sinful nature on me is not working. There you go again trying to be hollyer than thou and trying to tell God how bad you are being treated. But I tell you the truth, your accusations are never heard by God because I have an advocate with the Father who has conquered death , Hell and the Grave. Deep inside of you , you want to cry out to Him for your sins, but your flesh and worldlyness is getting in your way. Jesus can lift that burden for you. All you have to do is ask Him.

          • George T

            Mike Laborde: No. I’m simply trying to explain my perspective and how you’re misrepresenting me. Is it wrong to correct you when you make false, nearly slanderous statements about me?

            In a certain respect you are right. I do wish there was some kind of afterlife. It would be nice if this wasn’t my only brief moment of existence. Sadly, like my belief in Santa Clause and other mythical characters, I had to admit to myself that god isn’t real and everybody dies with no apparent option for a life beyond our current existence.

            Maybe you’ll come to the same realization one of these days. Maybe you wont. Either is fine. This nation grants both of us the right to believe whatever we want.

          • Mike Laborde

            You are wrong on all counts. Christians only seek to worship while atheist seek to stop their worship. We already have that 1st amendment of freedom of religion as you do lie in saying we want special privilages. You have that right also to voice your own religion of hate and bigotry against Christians. And don’t deny that you dou and your pals don’t. Seem Like I hear it in your speech as you want all Christians to leave this Christian nation which makes you a biggot again. You and your ilk are bullies and appeasers of misery, trying to push your own missery upon others trying to make them miserable. Well, you and your communist friends can’t take my joy away because I have an advocate with the One True God who sustains me and is working in my life to make me hole unlike you who has nothing to look forward to but trying to make everyone miserable because you are miserable in your life. Take heed, because you will meet your maker and you won’t like it unless you accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior of your life. And please be informed that I have not sinned or been un Christian like in answering you as it was and is all truth. The truth will set you free if you accept it.

          • George T

            Mike Laborde: “Seem Like I hear it in your speech…”

            You hear what you want to hear. It’s called confirmation bias. You’ve built atheists up as “evil” in your own mind and now have to lie to yourself about my intent or accept that I don’t fit your mental image of the scary EVIL ATHEIST that your arguments depend on.

            I’m sure that you think everything you’ve said is true. Unfortunately your thoughts don’t match the reality of this situation.

            I don’t want all Christians to leave The US. That would mean my mother and father would have to leave, and I don’t want that. I also don’t see any reason to persecute people for their beliefs. In that way I hold Christians to the same standard. Now I know that not all Christians think this way, but there are several in positions of power and influence that have openly claimed that The US is a Christian nation in opposition to its real secular nature. This minority of Christians do actually want to interject and force their religion on others, similar to how you’re imagining atheists are trying to “take over” this nation. I simply support a group that finds these religious intrusions and takes the people or organizations to court in an effort to keep things neutral.

          • Mike Laborde

            In your own little evil mind, you hold me to a Christian moral belief system while you in your Ivory tower of being Omni correct in your own little world have a belief system of what ever I want must come to pass because I have authority that I have given myself to be the orbitor of freedom. Yet your authority is insufficient to moral character. Especially your creators that you deny exist but war against to your own mental illness of denial.

          • George T

            Mike Laborde: I think you’re trying to say that I believe I’m some kind of authority figure or arbiter. I appreciate the compliment but I’m just trying to explain to you the neutral position of our nations government and the societal standard that has been agreed upon. I wish I could claim that it was my idea. That credit goes to our founding fathers who disagreed with the theocratic system of government in England.

          • Mike Laborde

            Circle spin. You haven’t a clue aboutwhat I am trying to say because you are throuly and unequivially confused and have been taken in by evil.

          • George T

            Mike Laborde: So you know how I feel! From my perspective you haven’t a clue about what I am trying to say because you are thoroughly and unequivocally confused and have been taken in by religion.

            In reality I do understand what you’re saying as I was raised attending a church and I recall my thoughts and beliefs from that time. I comprehend what you’re saying and simply reject it as legends and mythology. If you want to believe them, I support your right to do so. Practice your religion and a citizen. I just don’t support anybody practicing their religion while acting as a government or military representative of The US.

  • Sweetpea

    Freedom from Religion Foundation are idiots who don’t understand the Constitution (Amendment I
    Congress
    shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
    prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
    speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
    assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.) No where does it say anyone has the Freedom from Religion, It says congress can’t make a law respection religion & congress never did, but congress can’t prohibit ones right to practice their religion.

    • bill2

      look up the court cases idiot, religion has no place in public schools

    • James Von Borcke

      “No where does it say anyone has the Freedom from Religion…”
      Would you care to explain how I might have the freedom of ~my~ religion when I’m subject to laws dictated by ~yours~?

    • George T

      Sweetpea: Actually, it’s said that people do have a freedom from religion based on several major court cases.

  • Bill Ludlow

    Here are a couple examples of Eric Hovind’s critical thinking skills.

    “If dinosaurs died millions of years ago then God’s Word isn’t true. If God’s Word is not true then there is no savior for mankind. If there is no God and no Savior then we are nothing but animals and can do whatever we would like with no accountability.”

    “You would have to know everything in order to know anything or you must know
    someone who knows everything in order to know anything.”

    Is this someone you would want explaining critical thinking skills to your children? What are his qualifications? Look at what he said in a video while standing on the rim of the Grand Canyon.

    “Some people claim that itty bitty river down there carved out all this dirt over millions of years. That’s impossible because sedimentary layers are laid down in water.”

    In a radio interview last year Eric Hovind said this.

    “If I didn’t know God I don’t think there is a prison that could hold me. I’d be doing anything and everything I wanted to do.”

    If he is allowed to continue speaking to High School students I just hope he doesn’t lose his belief in his god.

  • James Von Borcke

    Here’s something that is bothering me…
    Being that this site excluded information from this article which indicates that the FFRF had good and just cause to question the presence of a charlatan giving a lecture in a public school (both in that a concerned parent called the FFRF ~and~ that the discussion included Creationist materials), are they not baring false witness?

  • Ed Words

    A born-again is hardly an expert on critical thinking.

    “The Bible says–the Bible says–the Bible says . . .”

  • Lark62

    Thou shalt not bear false witness.

    Other sites included examples from his presentation. The message was a clear promotion of religious creationism with not one iota of critical thought in evidence.

  • ToonForever

    The laughable part being the very idea that anyone would schedule Eric Hovind to discuss “critical thinking.” He wouldn’t know critical thinking if it smacked him in the rear and called him honey.

    And anyone who pretends the “critical thinking” aspect isn’t simply a ruse on the part of the Christian Dominionists who finagled this in order to get this known Creationist (who’s doctorate is a fake from a diploma mill to begin with) Christian apologist a platform at a public school is flat out dishonest.

    But we’re used to that from Christians who are so certain of their delusion they’re willing to run roughshod over the entire constitution to try and indoctrinate our youth with their nonsense.

  • Craig Reynolds

    Don’t see a problem here – discuss what critical thinking is and how it’s applied, then demonstrate its practice by crushing all the arguments about metaphysical beings and influences and about climate change denials and anti-vaxx, jet contrail lkunacy and the like.

  • gager

    Trump said…”Atheists and Muslims loathe Christianity… and will desperately attempt anything and everything to silence it.” Not true…atheists are indifferent to Christianity. Yell and scream to your imaginary friend all you want, just don’t do that in my face. You have special houses that you are free to praise and discuss god all you want…just don’t use a public supported forum to spread your nonsense. If you continue to insist..I will suggest that it is only fair to teach evolution and science in your church.

  • mutley

    FINALLY, the Christians are stepping up and speaking out. The FFRF is completely out of line, and thankfully Nate Kellum wrote a letter, bc otherwise, poor Mr. Hovind would never be able to speak just bc he’s a Christian, when that is totally unrelated to the content of the speech. Most often these schools or organizations IMMEDIATELY bow down to FFRF threats, despite the FFRF twisting FACTS.

  • George T

    Respectfully Sir,

    The god of nearly every mythology created the universe. Yours happens to be one of the more popular god beliefs in western nations.

    Not trying to be a dick here, but it’s “a lot” or “allot” if your dealing with logistics. The word “alot” is a very popular typo. There are some funny comics about this at *Hyperbole and a Half* and *The Oatmeal*.

    I’ve read the bible before. That’s one of the reasons I’m an atheist.

  • bencassel

    If “critical thinking” meant to Mr. Hovind what it means in standard pedagogy, I would have no problem with his offering a talk on the subject, even though he does not seem to have any credentials to do so. The problem is that “critical thinking” has become a buzz-phrase for “challenging the teaching of evolution.”

    We have a speaker who is educationally unqualified to speak on a topic, and whose entire raison d’être is challenging evolution and pushing the concept of Intelligent Design. As that is the only thing for which Hovind has achieved any recognition, it was reasonable to assume that that would provide the backbone of his talk.

    As for the familiar, but still silly, argument that “God has been taken out of public schools,” let me correct you:
    *Student-led prayer meetings and clubs can exist under the same rules that govern all student clubs. (We have three in the school in which I teach)
    *Students are not prohibited from praying in any place on campus during non-structured time.
    *Employees may gather during their non-structured time for prayer or religious study. (We have a regularly scheduled prayer meeting for teachers.)
    *Employees’ personal work stations may be decorated with religious items.
    *Employees who are representatives of the public may be present at student-run religious club meetings during non-scheduled time, but may not lead them.
    *Individual religious expression is permissible during school-sponsored activities, but it may not appear that the school or its employees are endorsing such activities, as that would tend to “[respect] an establishment of religion.”

    There were 36 school shootings in the 19th Century, and 70 between 1901-1962. When the two bills regulating religious indoctrination in schools were passed 1962-63, religious observances were unknown in half of the nation’s public schools. Eleven states had state constitutions that forbad them. There is no evidence whatsoever that there was an increase in school violence after 1962-63.

    Studying the facts of an issue is the centerpiece of critical thinking (the real kind.)

  • Trip Gallaxi

    This guy has a terrible reputation! The school should have known, and probably did know, that he has been up to no good for years, spreading false information and promoting bad values.
    We hope the school pays the price for illegally subjecting school children to this mountebank.