When will Educated Society stop treating Religious Supernatural Claims with deference due to Political Correctness?

Kid gloves


A comment over on my friend Nate’s blog Finding Truth caught my eye today. 

Imagine if I were to publically announce the following on the internet:

Dear public,

I would like to share with you the most important event in all of human history.  Forty years ago today, my grandfather died and was buried.  However, three days later he was brought back to life by the ancient Roman god, Jupiter, given a superhero-like, immortal body, capable of walking through locked doors and teleporting between cities.  Then, after a forty day fishing trip with some of his closest buddies, he was beamed up into the clouds from a mountain in Oregon into a inter-galactic space vehicle which then traveled at super-sonic speed to the outer edges of space, where he sits on a throne of gold at this very moment, but will come again in two thousand years to judge the living and the dead.

My grandfather is God, the Creator. 

Believe in him as your Lord and Savior, or perish.

Analysis:  I would be laughed off the internet and possibly committed to a mental health institution.  So why does educated society use kid gloves in response to similar outlandish, absurd claims by “persons of faith”…who should really be referred to as…persons of superstition?

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “When will Educated Society stop treating Religious Supernatural Claims with deference due to Political Correctness?

  1. Fine, can you provide me a good reason why I should respect men who wish to place their penis inside the filthy anus of another man and call it “natural” or “marriage”? Can you provide a good reason why I should respect the “choice” of a woman to murder a child?

    You call that which is “good” evil and that which is evil “good”. You don't even see it but you're chaff, you've been culled.

    Like

  2. I'm not going to get into a debate with you regarding abortion. As I have said before on this blog, I consider the intentional killing of ANY human being who possesses a beating heart and a functioning brain (able to sense pain) to be immoral and evil, except, in situations of self-defense from imminent death or serious bodily injury.

    Regarding the first issue you raise in your comment: what other consenting adult men over the age of 18 choose to do with their penises and anuses is none of your god damn business.

    🙂

    Like

  3. Was the anus designed or intended for sexual intercourse Gary? If it was not then any such use would be a perversion. Sorry if that offends you but that is a fact.

    If it is none of my business then how is it any of your business what Christians believe? If sodomites wish to push their perversion on society as “normal” then you have no room to condemn any perversion at all and in your mind “superstition” is a perversion so once again your hypocrisy shines.

    Like

  4. Was the eye designed or was there a need for vision? Was there a need for hearing? Why? There is a need to fly but humans have yet to sprout wings. Was the heart designed? The brain? The circulatory system? Nervous system? They're all just a freak accident? Why 5 fingers Gary? Why not 6? Why only one penis? Why not 2?

    This all seems very intentional and controlled, not a coincidental spontaneous accident out of a necessity which was unknown since one cannot need what one is not aware of. How do we know 5 toes are enough? The anus is not intended for sex, the vagina and penis are. Yes oral sex is a perversion as well but anal sex is just absolutely vile, putrid and perverted.

    Like

  5. Frank, Frank, Frank. With all the misery and suffering in the world I would suggest you spend more time trying to help the needy as Jesus instructed you to do instead of lying awake at night worrying about the activities of penises and anuses.

    Like

  6. Here is something to think about, Frank:

    Why would a god create humans in his own image…with a TAILbone? Does God have a bone for a tail?

    The human tailbone is just one of many, many pieces of evidence that confirm the Evolution of Species. (Whales have very small vestigial leg bones, for instance, proving that their ancestors once walked on land—amphibians)

    Back to tailbones: other than serving as the origin of a number of muscles for the pelvis, the tailbone serves no other purpose. The evidence is pretty clear: At one time, our distant ancestors had tails.

    Like

  7. Are you serious? Why do you never answer the questions people ask you? Are you saying a “tailbone” is greater evidence for chance than the eye, circulatory and nervous systems are for design? You're insane Gary. You can look at the continued repetitive continuation of 2 eyes within each human and ignore that evidence for design yet scream from the mountain tops “TAILBONE!”…

    As far as worrying about what people do with their penis and their anus. Believe me I wish I would never have to think about it but when you are constantly bombarded with this perversion every single day in the media and news it's impossible to ignore it. When you have these vile sodomites shoving it in your face every day trying to convince you it is normal and just like a man and a woman it's hard to ignore.

    You refuse to answer if the anus was intended for sexual intercourse because you know it was not. Would you be as foolish to refuse to answer if the vagina was intended for sexual intercourse with a penis? It's amazing how the penis and the vagina are both intended for sexual intercourse and they seem to fit together so well without any perversion of intended use. Do you think sexual intercourse was discovered by accident by our tailed ancestors when they tripped and landed atop of each-other? Then POOF 9 months later what the heck is this? A tiny human! What a discovery you made Piltdown man! Uuuuu fire goooood!

    Like

  8. Excerpt:

    The human eye is a well-tread example of how evolution can produce a clunky design even when the result is a well-performing anatomical product. The human eye is indeed a marvel, but if it were to be designed from scratch, it’s hard to imagine it would look anything like it does. Inside the human eye is the long legacy of how light-sensing slowly and incrementally developed in the animal lineage.

    Not long ago, creationists often pointed to the human eye as an example of so-called irreducible complexity. Their claim was that the eye is so sophisticated, and with so many interconnected parts, that evolution could not have produced it through incrementation. Because the human eye does not function, even slightly, unless all of the parts are in place and working, there is no conceivable prior step of less complexity that the current form of the eye could have evolved from. So goes the complaint.

    (cont'd below)

    Like

  9. (cont'd from above)

    This bizarre objection misunderstands both how evolution works and how the eye works. It’s true that the eye won’t function if you remove any one part, but evolution doesn’t work by adding individual fully formed parts to a pre-existing structure. The entire eye evolves as a unit.

    There have been incremental advances throughout the entire structure of the eye, one at a time. Fortunately, we have many very good examples of earlier versions of the vertebrate eye, both from extant (living) organisms with more primitive eyes, and from the fossil record. In fact, the eye is now one of the anatomical structures about which we have the most complete understanding of its gradual evolution.

    For this reason, creationists have largely abandoned the argument of irreducible complexity of the eye, retreating to more obscure examples such as the bacterial flagellum.

    Before I discuss the puzzling physical design of the eye, let’s start off by making one thing clear: the human eye is fraught with functional problems as well.

    Many people reading this are doing so only with the aid of modern technology. In the US and Europe, 30-40% of the population have myopia (near-sightedness) and require assistance from glasses or contact lenses. Otherwise, their eyes cannot focus light properly and cannot resolve objects that are more than a few feet away. The rate of myopia increases to more than 70% in Asian countries.

    The defect in the myopic eye is not caused by injury or overuse: it is simply too long. Images focus sharply before they reach the back of the eye and then fall out of focus again as they finally land on the retina. It’s bad design, plain and simple.

    Like

  10. Do you have any idea how asinine that is? There's no hope for the liberal mind. I'm not going to read your copy & paste just as you claim you don't have to read the Christian experts. You're a walking definition of blind hypocrisy.

    Like

  11. It is asinine because you know nothing about human anatomy. Go study human anatomy and evolutionary theory before you start spouting off stupid statements.

    I'm done discussing this subject with you.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s