Back to the SSX Fan Site Gravitude Bar Index
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:42 pmBoard indexFAQSearchArcadeUser Control PanelPrivate MessagesLoginRegister
 



Post new topic Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 5:23 am  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi NA:

You're welcome.

I will now honor RE Virus' request, and leave this debate.

Take care.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 8:50 am  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Gravitude MVP
User avatar
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:43 pm
Scoreboard Honors: 1
  • SSX 3: Showoff: #3
Rank: Gravitude MVP
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
Hi NA and RE Virus:

Here is undeniable empirical proof that Jews perished in concencentration camp gas chambers during World War II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sUNw2DEtEg. I will provide additional information which establishes the Holocaust as a unrefutable historical fact upon request.

Take care.


I would like everyone reading to watch the above video which QP touts as "undeniable empirical proof that Jews perished in concentration camps." It's only 3 minutes long and it tells a lot about the footage of the camps seen on TV with added commentary, and it tells even more about our "erudite" friend QP.

Thank you QP, I hadn't laughed so hard in a while.

_________________
Image
Are you a patriot? Then spend 1 hour reading this site.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 10:53 am  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
User avatar
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:39 am
Rank: Sensei
XBL: Resetting
PSN: IDontHaveAPS3
quotidianperception or whatever your name is:

Barrack Obama's methods in silencing his opponents, while unscrupulous, never involved bloodshed.

haha! thats a good one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 03, 2012 7:12 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi RE Virus and Resetting:

Thank you for your feedback.

I am of the opinion that Barrack Obama has a proclivity towards passing laws which tend to limit the freedoms of his constituents. (An example of the preceding would be his habit of allowing the government, rather than parents, to decide what foods and beverages children can consume in school during lunchtime.) Nevertheless, Obama has never targeted specific groups (i.e., Jews, blacks, gypsies, gay persons), placed them in concentration camps, and then systematically slaughtered individuals belonging to these categories like Adolf Hitler, the attrocities of which are documented by numerous historians from varying philisophical and religious persuasions. Therefore, I stand by my assertion that comparing Obama to Hitler is a weak analogy.

Take care.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 11:04 am  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
User avatar
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:06 pm
Rank: Master
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
I will now honor RE Virus' request, and leave this debate.

QuotidianPerfection wrote:
I am of the opinion that Barrack Obama has a proclivity towards passing laws which tend to limit the freedoms of his constituents. (An example of the preceding would be his habit of allowing the government, rather than parents, to decide what foods and beverages children can consume in school during lunchtime.)

Uh, welcome back.
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
Take care.

Oh, darn. Well bye again.
Assuming you'll come back, do you know what an analogy is? Well, it basically means they're similar in principle but not the same. What you said makes it sound like for the two to be comparable Obama would have had to commit genocide as Hitler did. That's not how an analogy works. You agree that the principle of limiting the freedoms of the people is common in both of them, and that seems to be what you're arguing against.
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
Nevertheless, Obama has never targeted specific groups (i.e., Jews, blacks, gypsies, gay persons), placed them in concentration camps, and then systematically slaughtered individuals belonging to these categories like Adolf Hitler, the attrocities of which are documented by numerous historians from varying philisophical and religious persuasions.

Oops, just reread it and it turns out you're trying to convince us that Hitler killed people.
Click to reveal hidden content: show
Your win :lol

Also, to everyone in this thread (not targeting you QP): using legal-sounding words or putting in vague, so-deep phrase padding doesn't make your argument any better.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 04, 2012 10:52 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi Marcus Annex:

If I wanted to draw analogical comparisons between historical political leaders and Hitler, my first two picks would be Mussolini and Stalin, since both the former and the latter were known to target various groups of people for genocide. The same comparisons can be established between Hitler and 1) one of the Rwandan General responsible for widespread bloodshed in that area, and 2) an Eastern European gubernatorial leader who participated in ethnic cleansing during the Bosnian War. I am fully cognizant of the fact that people try to create rough parallels between Barrack Obama and other leaders on the basis that both have controling personalities. However, the similarities end there. Obama never planned the deliberate extermination of undesirables like Hitler, or any of the above named individuals. My point, therefore, is not that cannot say Obama is like Hitler, but, rather, one can establish only a very weak connection between Obama and Hitler. For illustration's sake, I could make the analogy that St. Theresa is similar to Vlad the Impaler by virtue of the fact that both are imperfect. However, St. Theresa spent her life attempting to help those afflicted with pain, while Vlad the Impaler inflicted cruel and unusual punishment on others during his lifetime. If I made that analogy, it would be, indeed, a laughable one. Thus, the preceding examples show that, although analogies can always be drawn between two people, they are not necessarily good ones.

Take care.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 6:38 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
User avatar
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:06 pm
Rank: Master
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
I am fully cognizant of the fact that people try to create rough parallels between Barrack Obama and [Hitler] on the basis that both have controling personalities. However, the similarities end there.

Nope. I agree with what you said the first time though:
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
I am of the opinion that Barrack Obama has a proclivity towards passing laws which tend to limit the freedoms of his constituents.

QuotidianPerfection wrote:
(Obama didn't commit genocide and an example of a useless analogy). Thus, the preceding examples show that, although analogies can always be drawn between two people, they are not necessarily good ones.

Here we are, this is why we have a disagreement. It's all based off of what we consider makes an analogy good or bad. To you, if an an analogy can have the most things similar as possible, then it's great! Your analogy of Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin I consider bad, since they're too similar, making the analogy useless.

Analogies are similarities between otherwise unrelated things, like a heart and a pump. In that example, they both move liquid through mechanical means, but are otherwise unrelated.

Comparing Obama to Hitler works, because both "have a proclivity towards passing laws which tend to limit the freedoms of his constituents." Otherwise, as you have said numerous times, they are dissimilar.
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
Take care.

Every time you do this I wince.
It sounds to me like you're trying really hard to get the last word in, like you had a huge groundbreaking point, spat it at me, and then walked away smug as hell.
I hope you're not mad at me or something.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 05, 2012 6:59 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi MarcusAnnex:

Let me begin by stating that my use of "Hi" and "Take care" is not an attempt "to get the last word in." Rather, they are my attempt to address a fellow poster in a friendly manner. I use "Hi" as a way of saying "How are you doing?," or "I acknowledge your presence," and "Take care" as a shorthand way of saying "I hope that you are doing well."

Basically, I agree with you--an analogy is analogy no matter how strong or weak the correlation between the two things being compared is. What I am trying to articulate is that some correlations are stronger than others. Suppose, for example, scientists found a 40 percent correlation between A and B, and a 90 percent correlation between X and Y. If we square both correlations, we can establish the strength of the aforementioned mathematical comparisons. The mathematical relationship between A and B is .16, as opposed to the connection between X and Y, which is .81. Based on these findings, we can say that, although both comparisons have a degree of verity to them, the latter relationship is more convincing than the former.

Once again, if I accidently come across as "mean-spirited," I apologize. I am simply trying to illustrate the complexities of what seems a relative simple subject (i.e., correlations).

Take care (I mean it in a good way).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2012 1:31 am  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
User avatar
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:06 pm
Rank: Master
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
Let me begin by stating that my use of "Hi" and "Take care" is not an attempt "to get the last word in." Rather, they are my attempt to address a fellow poster in a friendly manner. I use "Hi" as a way of saying "How are you doing?," or "I acknowledge your presence," and "Take care" as a shorthand way of saying "I hope that you are doing well."

Well this is a relief, I'm glad to hear it.
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
Basically, I agree with you--an analogy is analogy no matter how strong or weak the correlation between the two things being compared is. What I am trying to articulate is that some correlations are stronger than others.

Well there we go, it seems we're in total agreement. Problem resolved, mission accomplished, all aircraft report. :china


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:46 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi MarcusAnnex:

I'd like to discuss the vague similarity between Barrack Obama, our president, and Adolf Hitler, a dictator--telling the public what to think. Personally speaking, I voted for Obama because I thought he would implement a benevolent economic socialist policy which would facilitate economic growth while "closing the gap" between the affluent and the impoverished. Nevertheless, "it didn't take long" for Obama to pass the boundaries of socialism, and to step into the territory of communism. I find it deplorable that Obama is currently trying to force Catholic hospitals to perform abortions when Catholics find performing such a procedure morally abominable. Lately, I have also questioned how one can label Obama as communist when he decides what is best for his constituents rather than allowing society to make these choices. Simply put, Obama is now running the United States government like a dictator. It is at this point where I accept your postulation that a very slight correlative link can between Obama and Hitler.

Take care, and enjoy your Holidays!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 06, 2012 10:29 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
User avatar
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:06 pm
Rank: Master
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
Lately, I have also questioned how one can label Obama as communist when he decides what is best for his constituents rather than allowing society to make these choices.

Darn, we're at a disagreement again. :frusty Agreed with the rest of it though.
To me society makes their choices through voting. Obama can't create laws, destroy laws, or (theoretically) declare war on his own , so I don't think it's fitting to call him a dictator. The U.S. government is set up specifically to not allow that kind of thing to happen, and I think it's doing it's job nicely. Basically, Obama can do what he wants because people approve of it.
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
Take care, and enjoy your Holidays!

And you as well!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 8:48 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi MarcusAnnex:

Thank you for your kind words.

As a voter, I agree with you to a degree: people need to accept the outcome of the policies of candidates whom they campaigned for once these individuals reach the Oval Office. For instance, I do not feel as if I have any moral right to "whine" about Barrack Obama's Health Care Reform plan--even though it "turned out" to be dissapointing--since I favored this particular social policy of his a priori to the time Obama ascended to his presidential White House seat. What I am indignant over, though, is Obama's attempt to interfere with Supreme Court proceedings over the constitutionality of his Health Care Reform Bill in order "to get his way." When Obama was campaigning for president, he never once spoke about using coercion, and tinkering with the Unites States Constitution, as a way of passing his Health Care Reform Bill. Obama's sudden decision to "twist" our Constitution, and issue threats against those who present an obstacle to his achievement, scares me, since it might lead to a "slippery slope" where future presidents can eliminate the Constitution and their rivals unlawfully. If this trend continues, one future president might decide to suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus altogether, to eliminate both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights en toto, and to claim himself or herself as the Absolute Dictator of the United States. This is why, in retrospect, had I known Obama would resort to coercion during his presidency for the purpose of getting his Health Reform plan passed, I wouldn't have voted for him.

Take care, and, again, enjoy your Holidays.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:38 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
User avatar
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:06 pm
Rank: Master
^ It sounds to me like you totally changed your mind over the course of this discussion, yeah?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:28 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi MarcusAnnex:

I apologize for not "getting back to you" right away, but I was very busy. I didn't "totally" alter my opinion--I "changed" my perspective based on how you defined the etymon "comparison." Still, even though Barrack Obama, like Adolf Hitler before him, seeks an ungodly amount of power and control, I still do not feel that a strong analogy can be drawn between Hitler and Obama. They are, to borrow a term from Major League Baseball statistician Bill James, "vaguely similar" in the respect that both of the aforementioned political personalities crave power and control. What differentiates Hitler from Obama, though, is that he, with the help of some of his Nazi cohorts, masterminded the planned extermination of Jews. By contrast, Obama never participated in acts that were aimed at singling out, then eradicating, those belonging a specific race, ethnicity, gender, or people which are sexually oriented in a specific way. In short, after reviewing your defenition of "comparison," I agree with you that vague corollaries can be drawn between Obama and Hitler. I just want to be careful when making such analogies, however, since Obama's arrogance is a thousandfold less repulsive than Hitler's Final Solution.

Take care--it was great to hear from you!

Best Wishes,
QuotidianPerfection


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2012 11:49 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:21 pm
Rank: Master
Hi QuotidianPerfection:

I read what you said, and I have to agree. Barrack Obama is different from Adolf Hitler. They are different in all the ways you described. You are quite accurate in your analysis. However, I have a question. How do you exist?

Best Wishes,
Lord Elevation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 11:48 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi Lord Elevation:

Thank you for your kind words.

In response to your query, I believe that I exist because I was created by God.

Here is my first defense: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoO2tQuPmtY&feature=relmfu.
Here is my second defense: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzylj8N4oRQ&feature=relmfu.
Here is my third defense: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkFtspud8Ac&feature=relmfu.
Here is my fourth defense: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPZx_ZLVjGk&feature=relmfu.

All of these videos use the scientific method to refute evolution.

If you have an alternative opinion to mine, though, I respect it.

Take care.

Best Wishes,
QuotidianPerfection


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 10, 2012 8:34 am  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 11:14 am
Rank: Master
Location: Canada
You know why I will always side against creationism? Because I don't believe that there is such thing as an empirical knowledge claim that isn't tentative. By virtue of claiming to be the end all be all of knowledge, I am immediately suspicious of the intellectual rigor of any creationist and their motives. Scientific facts, (facts of any kind really) about the world are by definition tentative, and I stand by them with shrewd eyes and make sure I never feel too comfortable next to them.

(I have no idea how this topic ended up here)

_________________
transientb.bandcamp.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:56 am  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
User avatar
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:06 pm
Rank: Master
doyle wrote:
By virtue of claiming to be the end all be all of knowledge
It's called a faith because we can't know. If someone knew, they couldn't have faith.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:13 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
User avatar
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:31 am
Rank: Master
MarcusAnnex wrote:
doyle wrote:
By virtue of claiming to be the end all be all of knowledge
It's called a faith because we can't know. If someone knew, they couldn't have faith.

That doesn't really distance it from a faith in science at all. The word shouldn't belong here as it applies to everything.

_________________
ImageCharmy comes in all different colors - UrbanDictionary.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:21 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:21 pm
Rank: Master
Hi QuotidianPerfection:

The religious crusade against science is responsible for preventing progress in evolutionary biology. Creationism is not science, and Darwinism is an incomplete theory. Because the conversation about evolution is politicized, and because ignorant people think they have a right to have a valid opinion about it, we struggle to make much progress. A biologist hesitates to talk about the intelligence of nature, for fear of being labeled a creationist.

The truth is much more awesome than any single holy book could ever describe. If you actually have the wherewithal to study other holy books the way you study the Bible, you'll realize they all tell the same story about the history of global cataclysms here on Earth, and the truth does not favor one or the other religious tradition. Unfortunately, these books are our best historical records of these events (the rest of the evidence is geological). And because of religious nutjobs, the conversation gets muddied, and it is difficult to get anywhere.

If you want to know the truth about what we have discovered about these topics, you have to be willing to put aside all your assumptions about religion, science, and human history.

So, thanks for holding the human race back.

Love,
Brian


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 1:59 am  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi doyle, Marcus Annex, Midian, and Lord Elevation:

If we want to be fair, teachers in public schools should teach evolution and intelligent design objectively, and allow students to decide which theory they want to accept. In astronomy classes, instructors should also dispense information to students concerning big bang and creation hypotheses, and address their relative strengths and weaknesses. This, again, will allow students to choose which religion they find most acceptable. If teachers cannot at least illustrate both postulations stated herein to students, and are forced, as a result, to proselytize the dual creeds of the big bang and evolution to their pupils, then this constitutes academic censorship.

It does not surprise me, though, that schools want to "push" an atheistic outlook of the world on tomorrow's college graduates. One of the most troublesome consequences of instilling the previously alluded to view of life in the consciences of pupils is that such learners do not fear God's judgment--and Hell--and, consequently, sometimes behave in an immoral manner. Today, our society is filled with school shootings, bullying, and other forms of unscrupulous conduct just as reprehensible as the antiscocial behaviors pointed out here.

It should be duly noted that Charles Darwin, accredited with being the father of evolution, held a racist attitudes towards Polynesians, and even went so far as to say that this particular indigenous group were not that far removed from canibalism. A sublet of Darwinism, called Social Darwinism, used rules of survival of the fittest, and natural selection, to uphold supremacist attitudes, such as Aryan superiority, the deplorable conception that African-Americans resembled primates, segregation, Anti-Semitism, the belief that Adolf's Hitler Final Solution was somehow justifiable, and other such convictions. It is these theories which, for many years, demonstrated how the human race can devolve. Creation, on the other hand, teaches love for other individuals, including enemies, and is steeped, as I have shown in my previous response, in certifiable scientific fact.

In concluding, I would like to say that opinions expressed in this post are my view of evolution. Others can be free to accept the creeds that our universe effectuated from spontaneous cosmological expansion, and that humans derived from single-celled organisms situated in a promordial soup after the universe cooled following the big bang. I just want the theories of intelligent design and creation to be taught alongside the hypotheses of the big bang and evolution so that students can make informed decisions about both the origin of the universe and of humankind.

Take care.

Best Wishes to All,
QuotidianPerfection


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 22, 2012 10:56 am  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:21 pm
Rank: Master
Creationism is not "steeped in certifiable scientific fact." You are ignorant, and I have no respect for your opinion. Your reading of Darwinism is a deplorable mixture of bullshit and propaganda. You know what I could do with Christianity, if I took the same approach you just did? You are dishonest, at best.

It is not an either-or situation with evolution vs. creationism. This is what makes this tired debate that just won't go away so frustratingly stupid. The reality of it all is far more beautiful and complex than you can imagine. The same thing applies to cosmology. You act like the Big Bang is the only other theory out there. See, that's your real problem. You take your experience with religion, and you apply it to science, thinking they are similar. Like all scientists agree on a grand atheistic mythology. The truth is that scientists are the most disagreeable people in the world. They are notorious for arguing with and picking at each other's ideas. That is why it works, why they have discovered things about the universe, and changed the world for the better, while you sit and read the same book over and over again.

And, by the way, if you need the fear of hell to keep you from harming others, get the fuck away from people, and go be a psychopath somewhere else, you delusional narcissistic child.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:50 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi Lord Elevation:

It seems that whenever I fathom the plausibility of intelligent design and creation science being advanced alongside big bang cosmology and evolution, it invites libel and character assassination. In my last post, however, I did not ask you to agree or disagree with my sentiments on creation science or evolution. All I asked you is whether or not you thought it is fair that schools purposely omit creation science from schools, on the grounds that it violates the "separation of Church and state" requirement which is embedded in the Unites States Constitution, while evolution is exempt from the mandates stated above, even though many individuals consider Darwinism a creed, and not a science. The question forwarded to you necessitates little more than a yes or no response.

Your second comment suggests that evolutionists, such as yourself, occasionally stoop to prevaricating and name-calling to avoid answering queries presented to them which they find uncomfortable fielding. Let me quote and refute four fallacious phrases of your diatribe.

1. You insist that I "need the fear of hell to keep you from harming others." You misquoted me here by portraying this as my personal philosophy. The credo stated herein constitutes a belief which is in no way unique to me. James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries, for instance, believes that if God did not monitor the action of the wicked, we would be reduced to beasts. I am sure that other Reformed Baprist harbor a viewpoint similar to White and myself regarding the view expressed above.

2. It seems as if my post bothers you to the point where you have to resort to using profanity to belittle me. I reference the following quote: "get the ---- away from people." What business does a person, who uses salty language, have in telling one to depart from the company of others? If you cursed around others, I am sure that they would not have to tell you to stay away from them--they might automatically distance themselves from you.

3. I cannot comprehend why evolutionists and atheists tell Christians to "go be a psychopath somewhere else," when Adolf Hitler, who exhibited notable psychopathic conduct during his reign over Germany as dictator, based his Nazi philosophy (e.g., whites are genetically superior to blacks) on facism, which is a derivative of Social Darwinism.

4. The final insult which you hurl at me--specifically, that I am a "delusional narcissistic child"--is laugable. First and foremost, I am not "delusional" anymore. In fact, ever since the time which I departed company from Harold Camping's Family Radio evangelist sect, I have read books on others religions, and made the informed decision that Christianity is the creed best equipped for exploring and answering the natural phenomena in the world. I will grant you that I might be "narcissistic," but you are equally as culpable of making libelous and inflammatory statements, so what right do you have to judge me? Finally, I am not "child," but a thirty-six-year-old man living with my Chinese girlfriend, who is also Christian.

I hope I answered all your questions.

Take care.

Best Wishes,
QuotidianPerfection


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 8:41 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
User avatar
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 3:50 pm
Rank: Master
QuotidianPerfection wrote:
In fact, ever since the time which I departed company from Harold Camping's Family Radio evangelist sect, I have read books on others religions, and made the informed decision that Christianity is the creed best equipped for exploring and answering the natural phenomena in the world.

What did you read and think to deem Christianity the creed best equipped for exploring and answering the natural phenomena in the world?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:25 pm  Post subject: Re: Obama vs. Hitler  
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:05 pm
Rank: Master
Location: United States
Hi Khalpz:

Although I am a Christian, I did not say that one particular religion should be taught if schools decide to teach Intelligent Design in tandem with Big Bang Cosmology. The Creator could be a He, She, or It. All I am trying to do is to offer students the opportunity to choose between two creeds: the doctrine of Creation, and the creed of the Spontaneous Expansion of the Universe.

Now, you might wonder why I consider Big Bang Cosmology a religion, when, according to that particular model, someone or something did not cause the birth of our cosmos. I stand by the preceding point for two reason, the first of which is that it takes faith to believe that items can suddenly emerge from a big crunch singularity which can theoretically keep an infinite amount of matter from escaping. Believing that the preceding occurence can transpire defies the laws of science, including that which states that spontaneous generation is impossible. In order to believe in the previous alluded to dogma, one has to invest a tremendous amount of faith in the Big Bang Cosmology model. Secondly, even Big Bang Cosmologists concur, according to Stephen W. Hawking, one of the greatest theoretical physicists of our time, that, if an evil dictator tries to travel through time so that he or she can reach an era where he or she reign over people in a god-like fashion, that particular individual will be annihilated by a big crunch. The ultimate irony of the Big Bang Cosmological model is that, although it does not take the concept of benevolence and malovence into account when explaining how our universe comes about, the aforementioned hypothesis suddenly finds itself at liberty to opine why "mad scientistists" will fail in their craft. If a model, such as Big Bang Cosmology, wants to illustrate why some good scientists will be rewarded, and why certain bad scientists will be punished, then Big Bang Cosmology is no different from other religions in which the just are rewarded with prizes, and the unjust are sentenced for criminal acts. For these two reasons--specifically, that only a miracle could cause the Big Bang effect, and that any subject which rewards the just and punishes the wicked constitutes a faith--I consider Big Bang Cosmology a creed.

Hence, I believe that Big Bang Cosmology and Intelligent Design should be taught in schools alongside each other, thereby permitting to decided which belief they want to invest the faith in.

In that manner, schools cannot be accused of privileging one doctrine over another.

Take care.

Best Wishes,
QuotidianPerfection


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next


Jump to:  



Information
Page 5 of 8 [ 180 posts ]  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

Show or Hide Information
cron


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group