|
How is it not logical Delerak? Other than that you may place value in it, while a lot of people think its bloody silly. Sorry, but the simple fact is that I deal with people whose **only** argument against scientific facts are, on a daily basis, based solely on their religion. The arguments are illogical, internally inconsistent, often don't reflect the actual text they claim to be quoting, and even if they are quoting it right, they ignore other passages that contradict those things. Its all cherry picking from a half dead tree, where what you want to be true or feel must be true trumps everything, including what the bloody text itself says. Mind you, I don't scorn *people* that are moderate religious, or those religions that do not actively strive to be irrational, anti-science and denialist of basic reality, but those people/religions are not trying to tell me bald face lies about reality, for their own self promotion.
And, just to be @#$#$ clear, if I hadn't mentioned creationism as an example, why would any of my points be moot, other than the BS argument that the idiots pushing this crap get special treatment for their delusions of morality, while everyone else gets screwed because they can't wave a book of fairy tales around as justification for their views? Sorry, but your argument against my points shows a blind spot in your own logic and a pandering to stupidity for the sake of its supposed untouchability that I have always found horrifyingly disturbing when I have seen it.
But this is getting into an argument that is much better handled someplace else. My statement still stands that the people attacking this behavior are doing so on the basis of completely unfounded and baseless assumptions, rather than approaching it rationally, and that people are going to get deleted based **solely** on witch hunt style accusations, not on any valid basis. Prove me wrong.
|