Originally posted by RatX
As a Christian, I can condemn the racist and murderous actions of the mob who killed those unfortunate Jews (although Bosse still hasn't brought forward any backing to link this act with his "Christians killing Jews because they killed Jesus" post).

For your information: http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_blib2.htm

Originally posted by LemonJello
you do not have an argument, Rat. you have merely a gathering in your head of misguided notions. Bosse and others have already explained it to you, so i am not sure why you still don't get it:

the theory of evolution imparts only descriptive "is" claims and makes no prescritpive or normative "ought" claims. you are saying that many people have ...[text shortened]... ims that you (and I also) find morally repugnant but which are completely separate from the TOE.

Ok, let me go thru this slowly.

I derive my worldview from my Origins (from understanding where i come from, where I'm going to, what my purpose is etc). If you say evolution doesn't attempt to answer these questions, I ask you where you do derive answers to them and how make the two compatible (the only ones I ever see are a poor adaptation of Judeo-christian principles piggy-backed to evolution.

Being an evolutionist (throwing in Bosse too...), on what grounds do you condemn the actions of the eugenics program. Please answer me - even if it's just "gut feeling".

Who's to say you can't just use evolution to answer all questions in life (as it supposedly answers where nature came from, what our emotions and desires are, how the universe works, the laws of nature etc).

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Here is an article perverting Christianity to suit racist views:

http://www.heretical.com/mkilliam/biblrace.html

Here is one that uses the concept of "survival of the fittest" to justify certain attitudes towards Jews:

http://www.heretical.com/oliver/js04.html

Of course as a person sympathetic to both Christianity and science (though like ...[text shortened]... of both) it goes without saying that I accept the premises of these articles without question 🙄

Is this the best you can do - pose a perverted, fallacy-filled and astoundingly ridiculous propaganda link? Reason "with your own words" please...

Using Origins based on the Genesis account of Creation, racism cannot be tolerated. This is because man has intricate value based on his God-given rights (mostly his value is based on the understanding that every person has an immortal soul).

Using Origins based on evolution, how can one find a moral basis by which to condemn racism and something like the eugenics program other than piggy-backing another (often Judeo-Christian) worldview?

Originally posted by David C
You have a point? Oh, yes. There it is.

"God is good, Darwin was wrong. Therefore, God exists."

For your last two posts:

Originally posted by David C
Before you go and get all mushy on me, bRat...that page is just another example of a whiny apologist plagarizing and warping someone else's work. Xtians seem to be pretty adept at that.

Following your own advice, be original with your witless insults, stop borrowing...

Originally posted by RatX
Following your own advice, be original with your witless insults, stop borrowing...

Please. You've been getting plungered with witty, original insults since you created this username. Face it like a man.

Originally posted by RatX
Is this the best you can do - pose a perverted, fallacy-filled and astoundingly ridiculous propaganda link? Reason "with your own words" please...

Using Origins based on the Genesis account of Creation, racism cannot be tolerated. This is because man has intricate value based on his God-given rights (mostly his value is based on the understanding that eve ...[text shortened]... ng like the eugenics program other than piggy-backing another (often Judeo-Christian) worldview?

I agree with evolution gravity and a whole raft of explainations of the physical world based on scientific method. I do not refer to them when making moral choices.

Am I able to make moral choices? Well, I don't believe in god, religion or any such nonsense. Yet I make moral choices. How do I manage it without god, well I just muddle along.

In my muddling along I think, I listen, I read, I discuss. I don't guarantee my moral choices as being right for anyone but me.

I also don't make claims don't make claims (as you do) that your methods (through belief in cod) are the only valid ones, and while I may 'piggy back' moral views from a variety of sources (including Judeo Christian) I would suggest that the christian morality also piggybacks views from elswhere. Morality is older than your church.

Out of interest, where do you place the moral views of christians more enlightened than yourself who have no problem with evolution?

Originally posted by RatX
Ok, let me go thru this slowly.

I derive my worldview from my Origins (from understanding where i come from, where I'm going to, what my purpose is etc). If you say evolution doesn't attempt to answer these questions, I ask you where you do derive answers to them and how make the two compatible (the only ones I ever see are a poor adaptation of Judeo-chris ...[text shortened]... e came from, what our emotions and desires are, how the universe works, the laws of nature etc).

Why don't you react to his post rather than trot out the same old stuff?

Originally posted by aardvarkhome
I agree with evolution gravity and a whole raft of explainations of the physical world based on scientific method. I do not refer to them when making moral choices.

Am I able to make moral choices? Well, I don't believe in god, religion or any such nonsense. Yet I make moral choices. How do I manage it without god, well I just muddle along.

In my ...[text shortened]... the moral views of christians more enlightened than yourself who have no problem with evolution?

So in your muddling along, do you condemn the eugenics program, and on what grounds?

I'd rather be certain about my belief, than muddle along. The reason I stand by my moral values, is because they hold up to scrutiny, they have a very high standard and are non-contradictory and non-compromising (as I've found a moral view based on a fruitsalad of ideas - picking and choosing which moral values suits you best and can thus be open to abuse and are not absolute).

Morality, according to the Judeo-Christian understanding of Origins is as old as man (instilled by God into Adam, when given the do's and don'ts).

For thiestic evolutionists, all Christian morals are still meant to apply... However, despite you calling them enlightened, I think they've missed a little when trying to marry the two world-views.

Originally posted by aardvarkhome
Why don't you react to his post rather than trot out the same old stuff?

Because why aren't my posts answered? I've posted these questions time and again, and all I get is side-stepping...

His post is irrelevant to this discussion because he's trying to say that my conclusion to this discussion is that evolution doesn't exist. Whereas I was only looking at these two world-views from a moral perspective.

Originally posted by RatX
Is this the best you can do - pose a perverted, fallacy-filled and astoundingly ridiculous propaganda link? Reason "with your own words" please...

Using Origins based on the Genesis account of Creation, racism cannot be tolerated. This is because man has intricate value based on his God-given rights (mostly his value is based on the understanding that eve ...[text shortened]... ng like the eugenics program other than piggy-backing another (often Judeo-Christian) worldview?

"reason with your own words,,,"????????????

Bosse was answering your :
"Originally posted by RatX
As a Christian, I can condemn the racist and murderous actions of the mob who killed those unfortunate Jews (although Bosse still hasn't brought forward any backing to link this act with his "Christians killing Jews because they killed Jesus" post). "

Originally posted by frogstomp
"reason with uour own words,,,"????????????

And there I was thinking that I'd lost my mind. How comfortingly simply that would be.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
And there I was thinking that I'd lost my mind. How comfortingly simply that would be.

I was simply asking you to explain your points and assertions without pointing me to some propaganda link and then underlining it with a little drivel. Instead of giving me a book/link/article and say - there's my argument, why don't you be creative and summarise your thoughts and relate them to the discussion while answering the points/reason of the opposition.