Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Loving the Enemy - "I thought creationists were monsters, until I married one"
Newsweek ^ | January 4, 2007 | Tatiana Hamboyan Harrison

Posted on 01/06/2007 7:36:44 AM PST by DaveLoneRanger

It was only a little while after our first lunch as a married couple that my new husband got a test of faith. It came from my grandmother, who said that she didn’t know how anyone intelligent could be a creationist. Not that I could blame her. Before I met my husband, Rob, I would have laughed and agreed with her. This time, though, I glanced at my new husband, inwardly sighed, and wondered how he’d respond. With grace, as it turned out. “I’m a creationist,” he calmly said. Grandma quickly changed the topic.

When I first met Rob four years ago, I had no idea that he was a creationist. He had told me that his parents were fundamentalist Christians, but was silent about his own beliefs. At the time, I was between churches. I had left the Roman Catholic Church of my youth when I was 16 and would spend the next eight years searching for a new religious home before finally settling upon liberal Quakerism. It was only months into our relationship that he broke the news, while I was wondering aloud how different shapes of noses evolved. “I don’t believe in evolution,” he said. “I’m a creationist.”

Before Rob, I hadn’t known any creationists. I assumed that they were people who believed in the Bible more than in scientific data, probably out of stupidity. Whenever I imagined what a creationist might look like, he or she was always standing up on a podium, passing judgment on all evolutionists, condemning them as nonbelievers and scorning them with hateful words. I wasn’t sure where these people lived, but I figured it was probably down South somewhere, or in the Midwest. Surely I’d never have to interact with any of them.

But falling in love with Rob changed everything.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Religion; Science
KEYWORDS: creationist; crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-156 next last
To: doc30
No, they didn't make you look like dimwits. And no, they weren't trying to show how smart they were.If they were, most people would not be able to understand the their posts because they would be so technical.

That is a fact.

51 posted on 01/07/2007 9:00:44 AM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: doc30

"The Asessemblies of God and the Church of God are charismatic cousins. I've been to both and they are scary to me."

I've seen a few of these while traveling. Most notably First Assembly of God. Most of the buildings are quite old and apear to have been in service for some time. I realize this is a monumental task, but have often wondered if any are nearing completion.


52 posted on 01/07/2007 9:08:41 AM PST by Lurker 50001b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b

I've seen these 10K seat mega churches in Lakeland FL - Carpenter's Home & Victory. No lack of $ or ambition there.


53 posted on 01/07/2007 9:32:47 AM PST by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what an Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: doc30; DaveLoneRanger
It was believing in the sanctity of marriage as well as the shame of divorce, that caused many people to die at the hands of their spouses, or see thier children abused physically or sexually.

Granted, there are sick fathers but children are far, far more at risk from mom's boyfriend than from dad.

If protecting children is your goal we'd be much better off going back to the old divorce rules than what we have today.

Children residing in households with adults unrelated to them had the highest risk of maltreatment death compared with decedent children residing in households with 2 biological parents and no other adults (aOR: 8.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.6–21.5; Table 2). Children in households with step, foster, or adoptive parents also had an increased risk of maltreatment death (aOR: 4.7; 95% CI: 1.6–12.0) as did children in households with other relatives present (aOR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.1–4.5).

54 posted on 01/07/2007 9:33:11 AM PST by Tribune7 (Conservatives hold bad behavior against their leaders. Dims don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

If you haven't already, check out this site.
http://www.intelligentdesignversusevolution.com/


55 posted on 01/07/2007 10:04:24 AM PST by Jo Nuvark (Those who bless Israel will be blessed, those who curse Israel will be cursed. Gen 12:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: doc30
It was believing in the sanctity of marriage as well as the shame of divorce, that caused many people to die at the hands of their spouses, or see thier children abused physically or sexually.
The deeds of the past wrought good as well as ill. The ill of one side does not undo the good of the other.

Perhaps that is why King Solomon wrote "Do not say, 'Why were the old days better than these?' For it is not wise to ask such questions."

Still, in older days, people understood the cost and the need to give battle to the enemy, and war was costlier back then too. And many today long for the "good old days" of being united against a common foe, instead of the political mess it has become.
The real point is whether people should feel trapped because of the seriousness of the sanctity of marriage, or if there should be no stigma on someone for leaving a failed relationship? In both cases, there are problems
I can't get past the fact that we're dealing primarily with exceptions and not the norm here. You seem to feel that domestic abuse was much more common, and a belief in the sanctity of marriage handcuffed the hands of the victims.

I understand you are speaking from personal experience on this, but I'm not sure that such abusive relationships are the primary cause of divorce in this country.
And I am concerned that you will be gut wrenchingly devastated, an I mean so broadsided by something that it will shake you. It happens to everyone (even Job had his moment), but I suspect it is in your future and not your past.
I do not doubt that great joy and great pain both lie ahead and not behind. Such is life. I say, bring it on.
I know you've been teased by others about that and, in some measure, it must have bothered you.
You know, it really hasn't. I know that in the end, the joke will be on those who scorn me.
My point is that there you have not been humbled by marriage, or even a serious relationship so it is easy to overlook the depth of these issues.
The opinions and beliefs I hold regarding divorce are held by all manner of people, married, divorced and single. Note that my first post which started this discussion was simply a response to #7 by DelphiUser.
56 posted on 01/07/2007 10:36:00 AM PST by DaveLoneRanger (Wellllllll! Guess it's not about the economy anymore, is it? Stupid?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: doc30
I have a lot of objections to charismatic churches and leaders in general. I believe they live more by feeling than by faith, which lines up with your assessment that they are not deep thinkers.
57 posted on 01/07/2007 10:37:35 AM PST by DaveLoneRanger (Wellllllll! Guess it's not about the economy anymore, is it? Stupid?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman
You are anti-science. Where there is a conflict, you espouse your religious belief over the findings of science.

Specific quotes to prove your accusation? One?

58 posted on 01/07/2007 10:45:44 AM PST by NewLand (Always Remember September 11, 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: doc30
It's the people who do the work that are the problem.

No, not at all. It's just the arrogant, abusive, anti-FR creeps that are the problem. Many that soiled this website, thankfully, are now gone.

59 posted on 01/07/2007 10:48:22 AM PST by NewLand (Always Remember September 11, 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
All those highly educated PhDs are gone. Now there is a win for FR.

Having a PhD is no defense for arrogant, abusive behavior. There are PhD's on DU, PhD's in Syria and Iran, PhD's who are working on ways to kill you right now. Am I supposed to show all of them reverence if they show up on FR? Earning a PhD does not make anyone bulletproof from criticism, let alone being an idiot.

This website was founded to fight liberalism and advance conservatism. I would rather have high school drop outs in the trenches with me who are loyal, who are committed to the goal, who are focused, who are effective...as oppsed to a gang of PhD's who could care less about FR and the stated mission on the home page. The issue is not whether a PhD is superior to anyone else (which it appears you clearly place more value on PhD's versus those without)...the issue here is fighting liberalism. I have no problem with a PhD or a home schooler or or a drop out or everyone in between. Virtually none of your gang have exhibited the desire to fight on behalf of the FR mission, while at the same time, trashing many FReepers because they disagreed with your belief in evolution.

Do you hate scientists that much? I pity you.

Not at all. I don't hate anyone. I have no respect for the thugs who have polluted this website, who ganged up on Christian posters like a bunch of brown shirts, most of whom have been rightfully banned or have run like rats to that other website where they hurl insults like 12 year olds.

Many on your team seem to have ignored the fact that this is private property, and it's not enough to just believe you are right about something, and trashing everyone and any thing that gets in your way. Maybe now that you have your own private property, you will grow a little appreciation for that fact.

60 posted on 01/07/2007 11:15:32 AM PST by NewLand (Always Remember September 11, 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman; Admin Moderator
I'll stay here until I'm banned for my pro-science posts.

Nice try Mr Accurate. Your friends were banned for abusive language or threatening language or comparing Christian FReepers to radical Islam or the one suggested that I kill myself. Those are just a few examples. I challenge you to produce an entirely and purely 'pro-science' post that got somebody banned.

BTW, why don't you thank JimRob for allowing you to continue to post here and insult his supporters.

61 posted on 01/07/2007 11:30:32 AM PST by NewLand (Always Remember September 11, 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: NewLand
I have no respect for the thugs who have polluted this website, who ganged up on Christian posters like a bunch of brown shirts,

You are a wee bit off on you facts here.

ALS and his thugs came on to this site looking for a fight. Fortunately most of them were banned. Unfortunately, a new crop of the same "dumb as a stump" in your face types showed up and finally most of the scientists left voluntarily.

What you don't (or are unwilling) to understand is that being a republican does not necessitate being anti science (and indeed you are anti science in a big way – like it or not).

However, this is exactly the impression that is sweeping the nation and one of the reasons I think we got our hats handed to us in the last election.

You may have noticed just about every “ID in the classroom type” was tossed. Dover should have been a wakeup call. Obviously it was not.

62 posted on 01/07/2007 11:38:17 AM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

Comment #63 Removed by Moderator

To: Coyoteman
Sorry folks, this "evocreep" is still here. And I'll stay here until I'm banned for my pro-science posts.

So let me see if I get this straight...If you get banned, it will be because you are pro-science, not because you push an agenda that goes against conservatism, ie abortion, embryonic stem cell research, etc. Is that right?

How scientific is it to "believe" that a Christian cannot be a scientist?

64 posted on 01/07/2007 12:01:17 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi

"...not because you push an agenda that goes against conservatism, ie abortion, embryonic stem cell research, etc..."

Yup, the TOE does all this and more, it's a tool of the devil for sure. The sooner these demons are gone the better.



65 posted on 01/07/2007 12:07:14 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Head Shaved, Koolaid Drank, On The Bus, Check)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi

How right is it that one must be a Christian in order to be conservative? Or, equally, how right is it that to be considered Vhristian, one must be conservative. The two are not synonymous. Many scientists are Christian, but are not IDers nor YEC's.


66 posted on 01/07/2007 12:24:18 PM PST by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what an Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: doc30
I'm sorry I don't see your point. I don't recall anyone saying that in order to be conservative one must also be a Christian. I also don't recall seeing anyone say that in order to be considered a Christian, one must be a conservative.

I will say that embryonic stem cell research, aka abortion, is neither a Christian nor a conservative principle. I think that's a safe statement to make.

67 posted on 01/07/2007 12:45:57 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b
Yup, the TOE does all this and more, it's a tool of the devil for sure. The sooner these demons are gone the better.

"I do not avoid women, Mandrake. But I do deny them my essence."

68 posted on 01/07/2007 12:58:41 PM PST by dread78645 (Evolution. A doomed theory since 1859.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi
I will say that embryonic stem cell research, aka abortion

And that is included in TOE - how?

69 posted on 01/07/2007 1:14:56 PM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: dread78645

Doctor Strangelove I presume.


70 posted on 01/07/2007 1:18:58 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Where is the "Birds with wheels" guy when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
And that is included in TOE - how?

I have no idea. Is what included and what is TOE and do I really need to know? I don't think so because this isn't a "science" forum. It is a political forum for conservatives. When science and politics cross paths, science is open for discussion by everyone on this forum, not just so-called "scientists".

71 posted on 01/07/2007 1:24:14 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi
I have no idea. Is what included and what is TOE and do I really need to know? I don't think so because this isn't a "science" forum. It is a political forum for conservatives. When science and politics cross paths, science is open for discussion by everyone on this forum, not just so-called "scientists".

What an idiotic statement. You really think you can have a meaningful discussion on the TOE without knowing what it is? When science and politics cross paths, science is indeed open to discussion by everyone but that doesn't mean that the discussion isn't full of crap. I don't know what you think merits a discussion on evolution if you don't think needing to actually know anything about it is a prerequisite.
72 posted on 01/07/2007 2:23:10 PM PST by Vive ut Vivas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Vive ut Vivas
You really think you can have a meaningful discussion on the TOE without knowing what it is?

Who is having a discussion on the TOE, whatever that is? I was simply replying to a comment that someone says if they get banned, it will be for their pro-science comments, not their political beliefs, even though this is a political forum, not a science forum. I followed that with an observation regarding embryonic stem cell research, Christians, and conservatives. That requires me to know whatever TOE is? Who is the idiot?

73 posted on 01/07/2007 2:27:32 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

"and we science-literates have indeed largely left this site to them."

And that is indeed sad. This lurker will miss the enlightenment you and yours freely provided to those of us somewhat lacking in the scientific fields. Your effort was not wasted, and I would bet I'm not the only lurker to think this way.


74 posted on 01/07/2007 2:28:25 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Where is the "Birds with wheels" guy when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Vive ut Vivas

And just for the record, I agree with you that many of these discussion are indeed full of crap.


75 posted on 01/07/2007 2:37:30 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi
Who is having a discussion on the TOE, whatever that is? I was simply replying to a comment that someone says if they get banned, it will be for their pro-science comments, not their political beliefs, even though this is a political forum, not a science forum. I followed that with an observation regarding embryonic stem cell research, Christians, and conservatives. That requires me to know whatever TOE is? Who is the idiot?

First of all, I didn't call you an idiot, just pointed out that you said something idiotic. Second of all, I was simply reacting to the statement you said that implied that nobody has to actually know anything about science to discuss it: When science and politics cross paths, science is open for discussion by everyone on this forum, not just so-called "scientists".

And anyway, it seems that science is open to discussion by everyone on this forum but scientists.
76 posted on 01/07/2007 2:42:08 PM PST by Vive ut Vivas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Vive ut Vivas
Second of all, I was simply reacting to the statement you said that implied that nobody has to actually know anything about science to discuss it: When science and politics cross paths, science is open for discussion by everyone on this forum, not just so-called "scientists".

I don't have to be a scientist to know that life comes from an embryo and any time man interferes with nature by destroying an embryo, they are potentially destroying a person.

I don't need to be a scientist to know that if I conceive and I don't have an abortion, the likelihood of me having a baby is extremely great.

Sometimes I think some of these scientists (not all, I personally know some very fine scientists) get so full of themselves, they will ignore the obvious just to prove that they are right.

There are others that come to places like FR solely for the purpose of convincing others that embryonic stem cell research and abortion aren't really murder. Those are the ones I really have a problem with. I'm not impressed with big brains who deceive.

I really don't need to know anything about evoloution to discuss what I stated above. I also don't need to be an "expert scientist" to know when I'm being lied to.

Do you need to be a payroll specialist to know if your paycheck is short? I think not.

77 posted on 01/07/2007 2:53:28 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Vive ut Vivas

Of course, knowing something about something helps with the discussion, but like we were discussing earlier, sometimes all that is needed is some high waders to cut through all the crap, not a fancy degree in some science field.


78 posted on 01/07/2007 2:56:35 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi

Abortion is not one of these "science and politics crossing paths" issues. It's purely moral/political. When the discussion turns to a scientific area, like the TOE, then education becomes important.


79 posted on 01/07/2007 3:05:09 PM PST by Vive ut Vivas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi

"I don't have to be a scientist to know that life comes from an embryo and any time man interferes with nature by destroying an embryo, they are potentially destroying a person."

And that has exactly what to do with the TOE?

The people you want to expunge from this site may share your beliefs in your above statement, but due to the fact they are learned in the ways of that evil science, you have no room for them in your heart.

Christian? No you're a hypocrite.


80 posted on 01/07/2007 3:05:38 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Where is the "Birds with wheels" guy when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Vive ut Vivas

I used abortion as an example and I'd be willing to bet you there are some currently active "scientists" on FR who would disagree with you that embryonic stem cell research is purely moral/political.

Education is important. Something I've observed on these threads is people on both sides (are there really only 2 sides to any of this?) is that neither side wants to "hear" the other. There are way too many attempts on all sides to silence everyone else.

It really is possible to disagree without attempting to silence those you disagree with, but that doesn't mean that every agenda should be tolerated on a "conservative" forum.


81 posted on 01/07/2007 3:13:40 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b
The people you want to expunge from this site may share your beliefs in your above statement, but due to the fact they are learned in the ways of that evil science, you have no room for them in your heart.

Christian? No you're a hypocrite.

Huh? Where did I say I want anyone expunged from this site other than a generality about those who are here to promote anything but a conservative agenda? And I really don't get the hypocrite part. ???

82 posted on 01/07/2007 3:16:48 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi

"Huh? Where did I say I want anyone expunged from this site other than a generality about those who are here to promote anything but a conservative agenda?"

The conservative agenda has more than enough room for the TOE (Theory of Evolution). The scientists on this forum that are promoting the TOE, are not out to kill your children (or any children), nor are they out to disprove God. Most of the scientists I've read here, are of the opinion that the TOE was a tool God used, and they are just trying to understand this tool.

The wonders of this universe are far greater than any of us posting on the internet today will ever know. Only those of us with closed minds are not able to see this.

"And I really don't get the hypocrite part. ???"

It has to do with a closed mind and preconceived notions. Look back at your posts, what have you accused people you don't even know of?


83 posted on 01/07/2007 3:34:05 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Where is the "Birds with wheels" guy when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b
It has to do with a closed mind and preconceived notions. Look back at your posts, what have you accused people you don't even know of?

Please, point it out to me.

84 posted on 01/07/2007 3:36:25 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi

How about here...

To: Coyoteman
Sorry folks, this "evocreep" is still here. And I'll stay here until I'm banned for my pro-science posts.
So let me see if I get this straight...If you get banned, it will be because you are pro-science, not because you push an agenda that goes against conservatism, ie abortion, embryonic stem cell research, etc. Is that right?

How scientific is it to "believe" that a Christian cannot be a scientist?


64 posted on 01/07/2007 12:01:17 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]


85 posted on 01/07/2007 3:40:55 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Where is the "Birds with wheels" guy when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b
The conservative agenda has more than enough room for the TOE (Theory of Evolution). The scientists on this forum that are promoting the TOE, are not out to kill your children (or any children), nor are they out to disprove God. Most of the scientists I've read here, are of the opinion that the TOE was a tool God used, and they are just trying to understand this tool.

Okay, so what does that have to do with anything? You guys keep telling me I should be talking about the TOE and I keep asking why must I be an expert on TOE to have an opinion about scientists pushing a non-conservative agenda?

Sorry folks, this "evocreep" is still here. And I'll stay here until I'm banned for my pro-science posts. Coyoteman in post 29.

I was simply asking him to clarify so that if he gets banned, are we to honestly believe it is for pro-science posts and not an anti-conservative agenda since this is a "conservative" forum, not a science one. Doesn't make sense to me, does it to you?

Second, I used embryonic stem cell research and abortion as examples because they are 1)easy 2)of interest to me and 3) the evolutionist from the article seemed overly concerned about the creationist's family wanting to find a gynecologist that doesn't do abortions. She made the EVO/abortion connection.

86 posted on 01/07/2007 3:44:02 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b

What's wrong with that post?


87 posted on 01/07/2007 3:45:53 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer

"Flapdoodle. Most scientists, yes even ones who accept the mountains of evidence showing TOE is real, are men and women of faith.

But you knew this"

Believe whatever you wish!


88 posted on 01/07/2007 3:49:54 PM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Me: They may not even realize that they are doing Lucifer's bidding.

You: You are full of crap.

Me: That's what I like about evolutionists ... such thoughtful answers when they are cornered.
89 posted on 01/07/2007 3:51:35 PM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi

"...I keep asking why must I be an expert on TOE to have an opinion about scientists pushing a non-conservative agenda?"

You don't, just do not claim the scientists are something they are not.
____________________________________________________________
"I was simply asking him to clarify so that if he gets banned, are we to honestly believe it is for pro-science posts and not an anti-conservative agenda since this is a "conservative" forum, not a science one. Doesn't make sense to me, does it to you?"

Look at this...

"The good news is, we have been successful in chasing most of those self appointed, self righteous "experts" away from FR...finally, after 5 years. But, there are still a few FR hating trolls left that show up on these threads...join the fight to rid FR of the evocreeps!

There is not one person here who is anti-science, but the evocreeps use that term the way liberals use 'racist'."
____________________________________________________________

There is a new trend on this site to reject any information that does not agree with literal accounts of the bible. Think about this, if you had to explain how humans came about to people 2,000 years ago how would you do this?

Heck, if you had to explain to me how my computer worked today, how would you do that? Hint... sparks and magic would be a good start.

"She made the EVO/abortion connection."

So I ask you, is there one?


90 posted on 01/07/2007 4:01:45 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Where is the "Birds with wheels" guy when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b
Look at this...

"The good news is, we have been successful in chasing most of those self appointed, self righteous "experts" away from FR...finally, after 5 years. But, there are still a few FR hating trolls left that show up on these threads...join the fight to rid FR of the evocreeps!

There is not one person here who is anti-science, but the evocreeps use that term the way liberals use 'racist'."

How does someone else's post make me a hypocrite or attach to me calling for people to be expunged? That is not my post. I will not take responsibility for it.

91 posted on 01/07/2007 4:14:01 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b
"She made the EVO/abortion connection."

So I ask you, is there one?

According to the subject of the article yes. In a previous post, you indicated you know quite a bit about the TOE. Why don't you tell me if there is a connection? You already said once there isn't. Which is it? Is there only one answer?

92 posted on 01/07/2007 4:16:35 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b

odds are, you will soon "FReep with the fishes"

you know where to find us when you get purged as a marxist baby-killing sodomitic eeevilooshunist.


93 posted on 01/07/2007 4:17:16 PM PST by King Prout (many complain I am overly literal... this would not be a problem if fewer people were under-precise)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

"odds are, you will soon "FReep with the fishes"

you know where to find us when you get purged as a marxist baby-killing sodomitic eeevilooshunist."

Yep, I know. I do hope I'm welcome there, but I'm still working on my wreath.

Hope to see you soon.

01


94 posted on 01/07/2007 4:26:31 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Where is the "Birds with wheels" guy when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b
if you had to explain how humans came about to people 2,000 years ago how would you do this?

That's easy. I would say God created us in His image, male and female. I wouldn't presume to know the details. I wasn't there and He hasn't shared them with me other than to say we are from dust, He used one of Adam's ribs to produce Eve and He breathed life into Adam. I'm pretty sure we can prove that once dead, we return to dust as well.

He also ordered Adam and Eve to be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.

95 posted on 01/07/2007 4:29:41 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b
Your turn:

if you had to explain how humans came about to people 2,000 years ago how would you do this?

96 posted on 01/07/2007 4:30:48 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi

"In a previous post, you indicated you know quite a bit about the TOE. "

Actually I know very little about the TOE, but enough to know that abortion was not a part of it last time I looked.

"Which is it? Is there only one answer?"

There is always only one correct answer. Are you sure you are the one holding it?


97 posted on 01/07/2007 4:34:02 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Where is the "Birds with wheels" guy when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Lurker 50001b
There is always only one correct answer.

So you are telling me that ALL evos believe exactly the same thing regarding abortion?

98 posted on 01/07/2007 4:35:18 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi

"Your turn:
if you had to explain how humans came about to people 2,000 years ago how would you do this?"

Much the same way, but I would know the explanation was incomplete. I would also not hold any hard feelings towards those in the future trying to make the explanation more complete.


99 posted on 01/07/2007 4:38:13 PM PST by Lurker 50001b (Where is the "Birds with wheels" guy when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: King Prout; Lurker 50001b
odds are, you will soon "FReep with the fishes"

you know where to find us when you get purged as a marxist baby-killing sodomitic eeevilooshunist.

That comment was posted in reply to my comments to Lurker5000lb. It is a gross mischaracterization of anything anyone has said or implied about him on this thread. You owe both of us an apology.

100 posted on 01/07/2007 4:39:02 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-156 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson