1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 40 | bottom
Quote# 133272

Autists should be deported.

WhatNemesisMeans, Kiwi Farms 10 Comments [10/21/2017 10:28:53 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 133279

I had the "pleasure" of witnessing a coercion for abortion today.
A young woman was discussing her options with her "man," and I waved them over to talk to me. The woman smiled and seemed relieved to have someone with other options to talk to. As she made her way towards me, two deathscorts intercepted her and blocked me with their umbrellas. Another "man" got out of a separate car, and the four disgusting pro-aborts escorted her into the abortuary, head down.
A few minutes later, she came back out to talk to her "man," whereby the four lovers of baby-killing again surrounded her and "escorted" her back in. Nobody physically forced her or put their hands on her - they just guided her in and "discouraged" her from coming over to hear her other options. For that reason, I could not call the police.
No matter what any pro-abort says, there is no such thing as a "pro-choicer." If you support abortion "rights," you necessarily support this kind of coercion, because you support the CHOICE of what the deathscorts and bro choicers did - all perfectly legal.
And THAT is just one more reason (among thousands) for the incredible depravity of pro-aborts.

WorldGoneCrazy-NotMurderedYet, Live Action News 9 Comments [10/21/2017 10:29:52 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Jocasta

Quote# 133304

Transgenderism is a mental disorder, and should be treated as such.

caligatrux, Free Republic 8 Comments [10/21/2017 4:32:07 PM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 133281

Certainly there is merit in your comment, Oopster, that “it would be better to speak to a trained counsellor who will listen to the person and ask the right questions, never guiding them in one direction or another.” If that is so, however, can you address for us why it is that trans-activists have mounted a (largely successful) drive to make sure that never happens?

Legislatures across the United States have uncritically accepted the notion of banning “conversion therapy” that at least arguably includes any effort to reconcile a minor with his/her birth sex – or to take anything other than the “gender affirmative” approach with clients. It’s a problem with the legislation; the bills are all modeled after one put forward by the National Center for “Lesbian” Rights, and the language is so unclear that no therapist can know exactly what is or what is not prohibited. It seems pretty clear from the face of it that at the least there’s a serious question as to whether anything besides gender affirmation is permitted. Certainly a cautious therapist could assume that discussions of a full and fair review of the decision, in light of all the facts, would be prohibited under the law.

So what about that? Why exactly is it that the trans-activist community is so threatened by the idea that people should explore all possible causes, and options, for reconciling gender dysphoria, in addition to those presented by medical transition? Certainly pretty much everyone can agree that medical transition will entail some fairly serious and potentially detrimental physical consequences. Why is it that those consequences are to be embraced and promoted to the exclusion of all other less intrusive means?

worriedmom, 4thwavenow 4 Comments [10/21/2017 10:30:10 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 133234

The purpose of this article is to normalize perversion and generate sympathy for perverts. The purpose of normalizing perversion is to undermine and degrade the civil society, transferring more power to the State.

The issue is never the issue. The issue is always The Revolution.

NorthMountain, Free Republic 4 Comments [10/20/2017 9:43:26 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 133287

Prejudice is a mitigation strategy for a problem you didn’t know existed. You didn’t know it existed because it was confronted and resolved by your ancestors before you were born. And their solution was passed down as folk wisdom across the centuries. It is what you call your prejudice. Instead of trying to erase it, you should honour it as you would a great work of art or monument to a hero of your tribe. Because you can be sure that much suffering went into the finding of that solution. If you insist on dismantling the bulwark against harm that your prejudice represents, the harm will soon arrive unimpeded at your gates. And you will flail around desperately looking for a solution, wondering what caused this sudden new evil to emerge.

Honour Your Prejudices. They exist for a reason.

czakal, Wordpress 7 Comments [10/21/2017 10:37:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: hydrolythe

Quote# 133271

Alcoholics and junkies should be publicly executed.

WhatNemesisMeans, Kiwi Farma 7 Comments [10/21/2017 10:28:48 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 19395

[Re: <a href="http://www.earnedmedia.org/BFA0108.htm" target="_blank">A news story about a gay-friendly church</a> decided to make the sacred fish symbol (Ichthus)into a rainbow fish symbol pin, and handing out the pins in support of lesbian and gay Christians]

I don't know about anyone else, but I for one am getting tired of this crap. I know we're supposed to show nothing but love, but if I see one of those, I'll rip it off the car. If I see a pin like that on clothing, I'll rip it off. And if we have to fight over it then so be it. I'll pray for them after the beating. I'm sick and tired of seeing my faith stomped on.

[Soooo..........what are you trying to say?]

What I'm trying to say is that the next time a group of homo's interrupts a church service by throwing condoms at worshipers, they ought to have the crap beat out of them.

[Okay look. If you slug someone because of something they said you'd go to jail. And Jesus would NEVER approve of that kind of behavior. You would be sinning if you did the things you are suggesting.]

I understand love your neighbor, I understand vengeance is mine. But I also understand that when people disrespected the house of God, Jesus beat the crap out of them.

budgolf, rapture ready 42 Comments [1/14/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 133215

(This person is referring to the age of consent)
Yes, 12 is mature enough

Jenjenc10192, Debate .org 19 Comments [10/19/2017 3:43:17 PM]
Fundie Index: 13
Submitted By: FSM

Quote# 133289

England is so deeply infested with PC insanity that any native Englishman displaying a cross is considered engaging in "hate crimes" but if that same Englishman is stabbed to death by anyone from the ME it's excused as the victim was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Easyrhino, Disqus 6 Comments [10/21/2017 10:40:37 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 19352

Many black slaves have very nice, loving slave owners and those blacks did not want set free. Is that so hard to understand? I do detest BAD slavery! But if bad slaver must be, and obviously there is lots of it even today, one day these people will be liberated and they will be ever so thankful to God for liberating them (in spite of what you think.)

Furthermore, you cannot speak for my righteousness or lack thereof. Did God ever slaughter thousands (as you suggest) just to do it? It begs the question: Why do humans murder other humans? It goes back to Adam sinning and causing death to enter the human race. We sin because we are dying. It is true that this was all planned by God. He planted the tree. He put the serpent in the garden. He made the woman weak. Just because people murder one another does not mean we should approve of the act. We do have courts to put people behind bars for doing that. Yet this is of God too. But if someone came up to me and stabbed me a thousand times I would still thank God knowing it was for my best. God is working all together for good.

TonyN, Internet Infidels 52 Comments [1/13/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 8
Submitted By: Winston Jen

Quote# 19349

If you try dating sites you should SPECIFY how important these values are to you.

Avoid any woman that:
Experiments in bisexuality
Has tramp stamps
Has children
Is a feminist
Says anything about being a "Strong Woman"
Blames and projects all her problems on men
Lets you sleep with her earlier than 2 months into the relationship
Says that career is the most important thing to her
Says she wants a man to provide for her (duh, all women do, but if she says it, look out)
Says she is looking for her prince
Is a vegetarian or environmentalist
Plays any kind of testing games on you (see my earlier posts)
Yes, you will have WAY LESS dates, but why waste your time? IF you want sex, hire a sex worker, because most AW are not worth it and at least the sex worker is honest in her intentions.

ChicagoMan, Truth for Men 54 Comments [1/13/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 7
Submitted By: Miss Moloch

Quote# 133231

It's wearisome to live in a society where, if a person does not ceaselessly self-censor and select words with the greatest care to keep PC, a mindless furor will erupt. Then a statement of apology is in order. This is not freedom. This is the exact opposite of freedom.

A few decades ago the Left actually believed somewhat in free speech and sometimes even fought for it. Now, that freedom is slipping away with constant psychological conditioning in which "official doctrine" must be scrupulously affirmed or social ostracism will result.

We are living in a Soviet Union style thought-tyranny system -- only perhaps worse? There needs to be a powerful psychological revolution against this tyranny.

Lion's Mane, Disqus 14 Comments [10/20/2017 9:42:31 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 133268

On June 17, 1689 the Sacred Heart of Jesus manifested to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque His command to the King of France that the King was to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart. For 100 years to the day the Kings of France delayed, and did not obey.

So on June 17, 1789 the King of France was stripped of his legislative authority by the upstart Third Estate, and four years later the soldiers of the French Revolution executed the King of France as if he were a criminal.

newenglandsun, slacktivist 4 Comments [10/21/2017 4:12:30 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: skybison

Quote# 133269

(about Austria's recent election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_legislative_election,_2017 )

Glorious victory this week for Our Lady of Mariazell!
We are soon to reform the Holy Roman Empire for the glory of God!

newenglandsun, slacktivist 6 Comments [10/21/2017 4:12:37 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: skybison

Quote# 133294

LEBANESE ARE CANAANITE AND PHOENICIAN, NOT ARABS!!!!! Arabs are unevolved barbarians from the desert, living proof of the damaging effects of UV radiation on the human brain. The silly religious people of the Levant will soon wake up, and maybe will reclaim their LANGUAGE too!?

Luisa Miragliotta, Youtube 8 Comments [10/21/2017 10:43:41 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: hydrolythe

Quote# 19394

[From a thread about The DaVinci Code.]

I am so secure in my beliefs and faith.

No one can shake me, at least not anymore. I went through a period of thinking my faith and trust in Christ was a bunch of hogwash. I gave up everything I knew. But I went searching. I went searching to those of the faith and those who didn't believe. I researched, had months of sleepless nights, and after all the anguish, came to a conclusion. Christ is the Son of God, came to this earth, was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, was crucified, rose on the third day and will return someday.

No matter how many books or movies come out to say I'm wrong, I'm secure in my beliefs and know the truth. No one can ever again convince me otherwise.

canes1222, The Lounge @ CanesTimes.com 36 Comments [1/14/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: ForensicAtheist

Quote# 19390

Women are ruled by biology, men by reason. Feminists want everyone to just be sexual beings, taking the man away from the equation and having the village raise the child. Feminists claim that it is men that enslaved them and caused them to well basically not be whores and sleep around. I disagree that monogamy is a female thing and that men are not monogamous. It is women that are naturally polygamous, not men.

For millions of years we lived in a village raise the child mentality. The population was small, no inventions were being made, no history was being recorded. The matriarch mated with as many men as possible to ensure getting a seed to pass down. Society was stagnant. You were lucky if you made it past age 25.

6000 years ago society had an upturn. The rise of man happened. Wives and husbands entered monogamous relationships, the matriarchy that was almost repeatedly wiped out by nature, was replaced by society driven by men. Inventions came along to improve the quality of life, writing started to flourish as did science and math.

Populations boomed, children were now being raised by the parents and living longer healthier happier lives. Women no longer died at 25 or childbirth, but actually survived to live a long life.

Men took on dangerous specialized jobs to improve society even more. Fast forward 6000 years and the human lifespan has tripled to quadrupled. Your only worries were now what to watch on TV, not whether or not you will die tomorrow.

Feminism in essence wants life to revert back to pre-caveman times. This is dangerous for a number of reasons.

ChicagoMan, Truth For Men 58 Comments [1/14/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 11

Quote# 19383

RIYADH, 7 January 2007 — With the aim of strengthening business ties, two Riyadh business partners in their 70s have married their teenage daughters (17-19) to each other, reported Sayidaty magazine, a sister publication of Arab News.

“A man has the right to marry. When it comes to marriage, there is no stopping point,” said Al-Dossary, a man in his 70s with silver hair, a gray beard and gray eyebrows. “We have followed Islamic principles in the way we conducted our marriages and we are both happy with our wives,” he added.

Al-Dossary married his teenage daughter to his business partner and in turn married his partner’s teenage daughter. His partner, Saif Al-Qahtani, said: “It is true that our arranged marriages are strange, yet this does not mean that we are the only people to have married in this way, either in the past or the present. Anyhow, the main purpose of marriage is to protect men and women and we have both achieved this through our marriages.”

He added: “It took us only two months to decide and then arrange our marriages. It all began when my friend, Al-Dossary, continuously expressed the desire to marry.”

Al-Dossary added: “It is true that I wanted to marry. I proposed to several girls but all refused. One day I decided to ask Al-Qahtani to give me one of his daughters. He agreed immediately, but in return he asked me for my daughter. I was surprised because he already had three wives; however, I agreed since I had a young daughter who was of marriageable age.”

Al-Qahtani commented: “Yes, I asked him to give me his daughter in return. When he asked for one of my daughters, I thought I couldn’t refuse him because of our friendship. I knew that if I did refuse his request, our business would be affected. I didn’t have any other choice. I agreed to give him my daughter and take his daughter in return. At the time, I remember telling him to give me his daughter and that I would give him mine.”

He added that the two old men then set a date, not more than two months away during which time the marriages would be finalized. “We met our deadline and we have now been married for a year and a half,” he said.

When asked if they had consulted their daughters, Al-Qahtani said: “I did not ask my daughter. I don’t have to. I know what is beneficial for her. When I told her what I had planned, she was happy. If she hadn’t been, she would have told her mother.”

Al-Dossary said: “In bedouin culture, a girl does not have the right to express her opinion about marriage, especially if her father and brothers have decided on a particular man. In both our cases, we have been married for a long time and have had no problems with our wives. Although we are much older than our wives, the fact that we are together proves that we are right for each other.”

Al-Dossary and Saif Al-Qahtani, ArabNews 47 Comments [1/14/2007 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 9
Submitted By: Dave

Quote# 133244

(commenting on story "Trump: Media 'going crazy' with Wilson's 'total lie' about phone call")

I'm going to share something with you that everyone SHOULD know: alt-left trolls are very manipulative and deceptive...when things aren't going their way, they're not above "faking" a situation to event a crisis that in their insane mind gives them a right to troll and harass anyone that disagrees with them up to the point of issuing death threats and death wishes (think about the recent conservative restaurant issue, ANTIFA, etc.) when simple trolling doesn't do the trick. The alt-left is psycho loony.

Lady Checkmate, Disqus - News Network 13 Comments [10/20/2017 11:55:28 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Jocasta

Quote# 133227

The creepy creeping slow gradual signs of life that seems to be taking agonizingly slow shape in parts of Europe is like watching drug zombies go, “Oh f••k”. “95% non Muslim”! Been to London? It looks lot less than 95%!! I imagine the Muslims will simply sped up their program and start shipping in the newly freed up out and in ISIS.

Our ignorance seems never ending. Feminized news reporting. In bed with Wahhabism and apparently owned lock stock and load by the Saudi terroridts. The Irish allowing Wahhabis to build build the second largest mosque in Europe to go with their already thriving madrassas makes national suicide a real possibility.

Aghast Zorro, Bare Naked Islam 6 Comments [10/20/2017 9:41:18 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 133197

czakal, Wordpress 11 Comments [10/19/2017 12:54:02 PM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: hydrolythe

Quote# 133223

Peter Vajda, Ph.D. is a research scientist with the Division of Geophysics at the Earth Science Institute, at the Slovak Academy of Sciences in Bratislava, Slovakia. He studied geophysics at the Comenius University, Bratislava, specializing in paleomagnetism, and obtained his doctorate at University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, Canada, researching the earth’s gravity.

These days, people think scientists do not believe in God or the Bible, but Peter is one of many researchers who shatter those ideas. He is a successful scientist who believes the Bible completely.

Dr Vajda (a Hungarian name pronounced VIE-da) is the internationally acclaimed head of the Department of Gravimetry and Geodynamics at the Earth Science Institute. With more than 60 papers to his name, he has presented at conferences all over the world including in South Africa, Canada, Fiji, USA (including Hawaii), and in several European countries.

His research interest is primarily geophysics, with a focus on the earth’s gravitational field, its observation and interpretation. One important application of his research is studying magma deep inside volcanoes by carefully measuring the strength of the gravity in the surrounding area. It helps scientists understand how dormant volcanoes re-awaken, and the threat of impending eruptions. This helps keep people safe from volcanic explosions.

Peter grew up in Slovakia (formerly part of Czechoslovakia) in an orderly, happy home. His father lectured in physics at the university, and his mother taught at college. Peter recalls that his parents loved him, and the family enjoyed outdoor activities together, including hiking, swimming, skiing, snowboarding, and mountain climbing.

It was his passion for the outdoor life and the beauty of nature that prompted Peter to study mathematics and physics. “My idea was that I would do lots of field work and expeditions.” Peter recalls, “I was a satisfied atheist. I firmly believed that the world and life came into existence through evolution, although I knew nothing about it. And I thought of myself as a good person who never hurt anyone.”

Things started changing during his time in Canada. A friend introduced him to the Bible, which he began reading in the evenings. Within a few days he was ‘hooked’. As he read, he realized he was selfish, used people, and hurt them. That made him think there was something wrong with his heart, which started him reflecting on life.

“I began reading the Bible in Genesis,” Peter explained, “and the amazing thing is that, although I was an atheist and evolutionist, I did not dismiss it. As I read, the truth came through that the heart of man is corrupted. This matched my own experience. It left me wondering, ‘Why didn’t my parents tell me this? Why didn’t they teach me this at school’?”

When he read about animal sacrifices in the Old Testament, he felt he needed to get a flawless lamb to sacrifice somewhere to make him clean. “Eventually I reached the New Testament and discovered the solution—Jesus Christ died on the Cross 2,000 years ago as my sacrifice.”

Peter explained, “I knew the Bible was right about the corruption of man’s heart so I concluded it would be right about the cure.” Eventually, he got on his knees and asked God to save him. Peter recalls, “And God did. With time, I realized there were new things at work in me. I had new values in life. I had new desires. I discovered that God is alive and personal.”

Surprisingly, Peter’s evolutionary beliefs were no obstacle to him reading the Bible. At that time, the origin and history of universe were not at the forefront of his thinking. Rather, he was consumed by the issue of righteousness and justification. Evolution did pop up about two years afterwards. The context concerned the origin of death. According to evolution, death is a natural part of life on Earth, and has been around for hundreds of millions of years. But, according to the Bible, there was no death originally. It came into the world through the disobedience of the first two people, Adam and Eve.

Peter explains, “Then and there it hit me. I realized it was either/or. I immediately accepted the biblical account for the origin of death, based purely on the authority of the Word of God. For me the Bible stands infinitely higher than human speculation. My attitude was that the ultimate truth is the Word of God. He has all wisdom; He was the only ‘eye witness’ of the history; He reveals the truth to us.”

That decision began a quest to understand where and how the evolutionary explanation was wrong. “I was especially motivated because I work professionally in research in academia, and the majority of the people I knew considered it fact. I wanted to know every possible detail about the errors with evolutionary thinking.”

He was uneasy about the way researchers said so many things with such certainty about what the earth was like ‘millions of years ago’. In this regard, Peter remembered his research work for his Master’s degree1 in Bratislava. He was studying paleomagnetism, the past magnetism of the earth, allegedly reaching back over millions of years. He recalls how, even as an atheist, he was deeply concerned about all the unknowns in trying to recover information about the deep past. He was uneasy about the way researchers said so many things with such certainty about what the earth was like ‘millions of years ago’. He recalls thinking, “How can we know? How can we be certain?”

Peter quipped, “I eventually escaped from paleomagnetism to work in physical geodesy and geophysics, specifically gravimetry. I was very happy. Now I could research things that were verifiable by empirical science based on facts—on actual observations.”

The past is in accessible to empirical science. Observations can only be made in the present. The rest is reconstruction, in which beliefs play a pivotal role. Recalling this confirmed for Peter that we cannot discover the origin and history of the earth using ‘science’. “The past is inaccessible to empirical science. Observations can only be made in the present. The rest is reconstruction, in which beliefs play a pivotal role.”

He said, “God had already explained this in Job 38:4, that the only genuine knowledge about origins is His Word. He was there, and He has revealed this knowledge to us. Not only does He know the history of the earth because He witnessed it; He actually did it—Himself.”

One topic Peter initially found tricky to resolve was radioactive dating and the age of the earth. This, too, became clear when he recognized the difference between empirical knowledge and speculation. “The empirical knowledge, what is actually measured, is the ratio of isotopes. The age is a questionable interpretation based on untestable assumptions. Further, the value actually selected is chosen to match their naturalistic philosophy. Although they don’t want to say it, the ages they quote are taken on faith.”

In his quest on evolution he was greatly helped by the abundant creationist literature that addresses these ‘scientific’ issues. “I was thrilled as I discovered that when we begin with biblical assumptions the outcomes beautifully harmonize with the true history of the world.”

Peter thinks that laypeople would benefit from understanding “the spatial (3D) inverse problem in earth sciences”. This refers to the problem of reconstructing the three dimensional (3D) structure and properties of the interior of the earth using just two dimensional (2D) observations from the earth’s surface.

Peter explained that it is not possible to reach a unique solution because many different 3D models can equally well fit the 2D surface data. “Consider how much more uncertainty we face when we add the time dimension and try to reconstruct the deep past of Earth’s history—essentially a 4D problem. The uncertainty and ambiguity is greater by more than one order of magnitude,” Peter said. “This intrinsic uncertainty means that the materialistic, atheistic evolutionary claims on origins and history are ultimately religion, and their acceptance a matter of belief.”

On the positive side, Peter refers to many scientific evidences that give insights into and confidence in the Bible. In geology these include the abundance and preservation of fossils, the horizontal and vertical extent of sedimentary layers, their deformation, and the interfaces between them. Even more compelling are the evidences from biology: the impossibility of chemical evolution, the insurmountable problems with biological evolution, and the overwhelming evidence of design.

Peter said, “I find the origin and history of the cosmos and life to be the most interesting and ultimate of questions in the human quest for knowledge. And I am convinced that the Bible reveals the true history of the universe, and can be depended upon absolutely.”

Peter Vajda, Creation Ministries International 10 Comments [10/20/2017 9:39:47 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Katie

Quote# 133218

Pro-aborts once thought that the partial birth abortion ban was "extreme" too. How disgusting!

As science progresses, we see who are the science deniers, humanity deniers, and morality deniers though.

Whether it was the Native American genocide, slavery, Jew gassing, or now abortion, those on the wrong side of basic human rights have always been the ones to deny science, humanity, and morality - in their zeal to control and kill others they deemed to be "unwanted."

WorldGoneCrazy-NotMurderedYet, Live Action News 10 Comments [10/20/2017 9:37:51 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Jocasta

Quote# 133222

When I discuss the creation/evolution controversy, there are all sorts of interesting responses to the evidence. People are basically unable to answer the powerful logical and scientific case for creation. So, many eventually say something like this:

‘But if creation is true, why don’t all scientists believe it? All scientists agree that evolution is true.’ Others do not say this outright, but it is an unspoken criticism which they see as an automatic veto of anything that seems scientifically unorthodox.

Can the majority be wrong? Most people admit that the general public may be in error. But they doubt that the majority of scientists could be wrong. This implies that science is somehow different from other human enterprises, and that scientists are immune to the foibles of non-scientists.

History shows that the scientific establishment has been wrong time after time. It is unwise to bet your life on any scientific theory, no matter how popular it is. In fact, often those who have consciously sought safety by staying in the middle of the herd have ended up, like lemmings, in the middle of a stampede off an intellectual cliff.

Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis (1818–1865) found that by washing his hands between the time he examined dead bodies and the time he delivered babies, he could prevent certain illnesses in mothers and babies, and save many lives. He was appalled by the heavy death rate in Vienna maternity hospital when he worked there. He introduced antiseptics, and the death rate plummeted from 12 per cent to 1.5 per cent.

Even though Semmelweis should have been declared a hero for this simple but powerful discovery, he was not. He was not even asked for his data. Rather, his idea was soundly rejected by his colleagues, and he was forced to return to his home in Budapest. Germs had not yet been discovered, and the physicians of that day had no theoretical basis for understanding the phenomenon Semmelweis was talking about. Even so, the idea would have been easy to test and was clearly of great potential importance. But they did not even consider it.

If we had quizzed the ‘dirty hands’ doctors at a particularly frank and honest moment, they may have said: ‘It just doesn’t make sense. If I can’t see it, it must not be real.’ Or, ‘What I don’t know can’t hurt me (or my patients).’ Or worse yet, they might have said, ‘If I admit to this, I will have to accept responsibility for untold past preventable suffering.’

Our past decisions may prejudice our ability to evaluate the present. A scientist who has based his career on calculating what happened during the first few moments of the ‘big bang’ will find it difficult to be open to evidence that the ‘big bang’ never happened. Great learning does not always make a person more honest and accessible, but it may increase the complexity of his or her rationalizations.

A young graduate student who believes in creation, but also knows that rejection of evolution would jeopardize his degree and career, may try to work out some intellectual compromise, whether it fits the data or not. (This is essentially a form of protective colouration which makes his beliefs invisible in that environment.) He is then likely to spend the rest of his professional life ‘agreeing with himself’. He may even ridicule those more forthright than he, partly because they prick his conscience.

Many scientists hold firmly to evolution despite the evidence. They know that without evolution they must consider themselves responsible to a creator. Their need to reject that possibility is so emotionally powerful that they hang on to evolution tenaciously.

Most of us assume the best about our fellow humans unless forced to think otherwise. Have you ever read a newspaper account of an event you know by personal experience, and found the story inaccurate or incomplete? You then probably wondered about the accuracy of other stories in the paper. Even though the scientific method is supposed to encourage objectivity, some data get recorded and some get ignored, some articles get published and some get rejected—a lot depends on the very human motives of individual people. Even looking at the same data and the same articles, different observers can come to different conclusions.

Great breakthroughs in science are not achieved only by the brilliant. They are shared by the honest and courageous who study the emperor’s new clothes and regard truth as more important than political correctness or a grant for further study. This does not mean that someone outside the herd is automatically right. But proper conclusions may be opposed by scholars with ulterior motives.

At one time or another, most children probably say to their parents (in support of some questionable activity), ‘But everybody’s doing it!’ Good Christian parents invariably say, ‘No, they’re not! But even if they were, you’re not, because it’s against what God wants for you, so it’s wrong.’ We should therefore become a bit wary if someone says, ‘But everybody knows…’, or ‘All scientists agree…’. They probably don’t. And even if they did, it might still be wrong.

Ross Olson, Creation Ministries International 10 Comments [10/20/2017 9:38:27 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Katie
1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 40 | top