Conquer Club

Dear Player,

We now know that you think young earth creationists are as bad as Al Qaeda. They also should be banned from the presidency. So I thought I would ask what creationists are allowed to do with their lives and how many rights you would take away from them if you had the power.

Let's start with these

Should young earth creationists be allowed to adopt children?
Who is more evil.............Hitler's 3rd Reich or young earth creationists?
Should young earth creationists be allowed to have access to government health care?
Should young earth creationists be allowed to serve openly in the military?
If your house was burning to the ground with your family still inside, would you be willing to allow a fireman who is a young earth creationist attempt to save them?
Should young earth creationists receive the death penalty for believing in a young earth or just life in prison?
Should young earth creationists who work at WalMart be paid a livable wage even if the management believes in Darwinian evolution? Should young earth creationists be paid equal wages in general if they do the same job and work just as hard as evolutionists?
Should illegal immigrants who believe in a young earth be allowed a path to citizenship, or just the illegal immigrants who believe in Darwinian evolution?
Should islamic young earth creationists be allowed to build a mosque or creationist museum close to Down's House?
Who is more evil..............Pol Pot or Henry Morris?
Who is more holy.............St. Paul or Charles Darwin?
Should creationists be designated as terrorists, enemy combatants, or detainees for their crimes? Do they have a right to civilian trials or military tribunals?

I've got more questions but that should do for now.

Creationists are dangerous when they have absolute faith in the rapture and consider the Earth's deteriorating eco-systems as signs prophesying 'end-times' which convientiently ties in with their belief of absolute dominion over non-human animals and land. The result sees environmental destruction considered a mild side-effect in the quest for profit.

If there are creationists who do not neccasarily line up with the above ideology, and they consider the impacts their lifestyle and consumption creates, then they probably don't fall into the category alongside al-Qaeda.

Dean! Dean! Dean Dean!

I mean Player! Player! Player! Player! We're gonna take back SIB and give it back to the AlGoreians who were here first! Yeaaaaaaaaaaaah!

radiojake wrote:Creationists are dangerous when they have absolute faith in the rapture and consider the Earth's deteriorating eco-systems as signs prophesying 'end-times' which convientiently ties in with their belief of absolute dominion over non-human animals and land. The result sees environmental destruction considered a mild side-effect in the quest for profit.

If there are creationists who do not neccasarily line up with the above ideology, and they consider the impacts their lifestyle and consumption creates, then they probably don't fall into the category alongside al-Qaeda.

This. Absolute faith tends to bother me.

What the ...

I'm seriously offended that this thread isn't addressing an atheist.

Also, to answer those questions you just have to replace "young earth creationists" with "psychotic"

wikipedia wrote: Psychosis (from the Greek ψυχή "psyche", for mind/soul, and -ωσις "-osis", for abnormal condition) means abnormal condition of the mind, and is a generic psychiatric term for a mental state often described as involving a "loss of contact with reality"

Pretty damn accurate.

No need to thank me.

Here's how I see it concerning this particular subject matter (thread). There are three categories of people. There are Christians, Non-Christians and anti-Christians.

Now the Christians can be rational or irrational people. Non-Christians are rational or irrational but they aren't on a crusade against Christians (pardon the pun). Anti-Christians can be rational but generally they are not rational in their contemptuous rhetoric. The anti-Christian posts in this thread pretty much show it. I mean c'mon; calling Christianity a 'psychosis' and pretending that 'absolute faith' negates critical thought. That's just a load of shiz and really it borders on hate speech if it isn't hate speech outright.

Anybody that thinks they can size up a person by their faith (or lack of faith) is a small minded and arrogant person. Anybody that is presuming an entire religion to be along the lines of terrorism is an idiot. I'm not going to equate any person that goes to church with a guy that's murdering people. That's just mental.

Look I respect rational people first and foremost. If a person tells me that they are Christian, I don't automatically respect that person any more or less than the person that tells me he isn't Christian. Spirituality and faith are personal things and they aren't determinants of character despite what the small minded people on here are promoting.

If you think the Earth is 6000 years old, you have lost touch with reality. If you consider psychosis losing touch with reality, well...

ViperOverLord wrote:Here's how I see it concerning this particular subject matter (thread). There are three categories of people. There are Christians, Non-Christians and anti-Christians.

Now the Christians can be rational or irrational people. Non-Christians are rational or irrational but they aren't on a crusade against Christians (pardon the pun). Anti-Christians can be rational but generally they are not rational in their contemptuous rhetoric. The anti-Christian posts in this thread pretty much show it. I mean c'mon; calling Christianity a 'psychosis' and pretending that 'absolute faith' negates critical thought. That's just a load of shiz and really it borders on hate speech if it isn't hate speech outright.

Anybody that thinks they can size up a person by their faith (or lack of faith) is a small minded and arrogant person. Anybody that is presuming an entire religion to be along the lines of terrorism is an idiot. I'm not going to equate any person that goes to church with a guy that's murdering people. That's just mental.

Look I respect rational people first and foremost. If a person tells me that they are Christian, I don't automatically respect that person any more or less than the person that tells me he isn't Christian. Spirituality and faith are personal things and they aren't determinants of character despite what the small minded people on here are promoting.

i usually don't play in these kinds of sandboxes, but you just made me rofl vipey. from now on i'm dividing all of god's creatures into 3 categories: squishy, non-squishies, and cupcakes.

Frigidus wrote:If you think the Earth is 6000 years old, you have lost touch with reality. If you consider psychosis losing touch with reality, well...

- I never said that the Earth is 6,000 years old or not.

- Many Christians believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old, but you are painting them with a broad brush. You will find that many also do not believe that.

- You call it a psychosis to believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old but what proof do you have that proves that the Earth is X amount of years old? The answer is you have no proof. If you're like me perhaps you have learned about tectonic plate movement and other explanations that help us to understand the natural development of Earth, but even still those profound concepts are still very rooted in theory, particularly regarding the origins of Earth.

- Christians have a psychosis for believing what they believe that the Earth is 6,000 years old? I don't see it that way at all. I think they're entitled to their beliefs and they don't need to be blatantly insulted just b/c you want to pretend that you're a know-it-all when it comes to the origins of Earth and life.

- By your standard for psychosis, a stronger case for psychosis could be made against people that fully accept ('absolute faith') scientific theories as facts to justify their biases. Look at carbon dating. They were saying this and that was thousands, millions, billions of years old. Then tests would show objects that were three days old to be 40,000 years old. And look at global warming. We've seen data skewed and manipulated and reports that just blatantly lied and yet the most ardent supporters of global warming are sold on the concept as much as ever.

- And perhaps you should know more about the opposing viewpoints if you are going to ignorantly insult them. Many Christians believe that the Earth was formed in 6,000 years. That does not mean that Christians do or do not believe that the matter used to form the Earth is 6,000 years old.

- So perhaps you should quit being pompus and bigoted and engage in dialogue instead of immediately trying to defy the opposing or different viewpoints as being a matter of psychosis. It's a pretty pathetic attitude quite frankly.

squishyg wrote:i usually don't play in these kinds of sandboxes, but you just made me rofl vipey. from now on i'm dividing all of god's creatures into 3 categories: squishy, non-squishies, and cupcakes.

LOL - Aren't cupcakes squishy though?

ViperOverLord wrote:

squishyg wrote:i usually don't play in these kinds of sandboxes, but you just made me rofl vipey. from now on i'm dividing all of god's creatures into 3 categories: squishy, non-squishies, and cupcakes.

LOL - Aren't cupcakes squishy though?

No! Stop eating play doh cupcakes!

The intent of the OP here has been considered mere baiting and this thread is being locked. Publicly trying to troll other members is uncalled for.

-rd