New Charles Darwin film is 'too controversial' for religious American audiences

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by CastleBravo

And by Darwin's standard, as defined by you, the 'human race' should......

Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have
dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the
air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Umm... arent we kinda doing that already?

[antikristuseke]

Originally Posted by CastleBravo

Ya got yourself into a mess. You know it, and are thus pwned.

Jesus ****ing chrst. What are you on about now?

Lets go over this **** again then, shall we?
Te title of darwins book is not racist when applied to humans in any way, shape or form unless you remove the context of the title. *******s supporting social darwinism have done so and you are walking down the same superficial path, albeit for different, yet equally silly reasons. The preservation of preferred races in context is nothing more than a way to describe natural selection in different terms. And it has already been mentioned that humanity as a whole is the same race or species. Then for some bloody reason you pull a completely irrelevant bible quote out of the air and just because you were either unable or unwilling to comprehend me claim to have pwned anyone. No, the only person pwned here is you, by your own ignorance and superficiality.

I will get back to this thread after I either get some sleep or my hangover subsides. Till that time, try to read Darwins book and see for yourself if the man was racist or not, But to be completely frank you probably will not do so, heavens forbid, you might actually learn something.

[Thomen]

Well.. that didn't take long..

Then when a person is called a racist it should be taken as a compliment?

Wow you really have problems with the English language don't you.
Race as a term of taxonomic identification is clearly defined ,
on the other hand a racist is best defined as an idiot.
People who are unable to differentiate between two words with different meanings can also fit one of those definitions.

And by Darwin's standard, as defined by you, the 'human race' should......

Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have
dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the
air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Errrrr....no, perhaps you could do better if you had the faintest idea what you were talking about instead of recycling garbage from a badly translated, heavily edited fragment of ancient mythology.

Originally Posted by Dowly

Umm... arent we kinda doing that already?

Absolutely. But that was given long before Darwin advocated it. Hold no misgivings, that is exactly what Darwin is saying in his book.

[Task Force]

lol... people wineing about a scientific movie... some people are nuts...

what are they gonna say next... lol a new Astornomy movie is un religious...

[AVGWarhawk]

This is the reason I only watch the Wiggles. No arguments at all

[Task Force]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

This is the reason I only watch the Wiggles. No arguments at all

and thats the reason I dont watch tv.

Hold no misgivings, that is exactly what Darwin is saying in his book.

Hold no misgivings , you demonstrate that you havn't read the book and havn't got the faintest idea what it says

[Skybird]

There is a difference between knowledge and belief. And when people just believe, but claim that what they believe in is knowledge - then the troubles begin.

The theory of Darwin - is a theory, it is being used because the overwhelming majority of scientists consider it to make more sense and cooperating better with the current scientific paradigms then any other theory dealing with the developement of life and species. Maybe one day it will be replaced, when our understanding of things and life widens, or we start to see more contradiction than pragmatic value in it. Maybe not. Different to religions' always un checked and alwqays unprovable claims, theories in science can be examined, tested, changed, corrected, supplemented, precised or replaced.

Religion needs the self-limitation and lacking education and dogmatism of people in order to be what it is, a religion. It needs the weakness of people in order to be powerful itself.

Scientific theories are not to be believed in. They are being used, as long as it makes pragmatic sense and is seen to match reason. Reason is religions's arch-enemy. Reason and logic unveil all the decpetion and superifical believing in relgion, and rips the mask off it'S face. In this opposition to education and reason, all religions are the same and are natural allies. Not just one special religion is an educated, reasonable man's enemy - but all.

Originally Posted by Aldous Huxley

The more a man knows about individual objects, the more he knows about God. Translating Spinoza's language into ours, we can say: The more a man knows about himself in relation to every kind of experience, the greater his chance of suddenly, one fine morning, realizing who in fact he is---or rather Who in Fact "He" Is.

St. John was right. In a blessedly speechless universe, the Word was not only with God; it was God. As a something to be believed in. God is a projected symbol, a reified name. God = "God."

Faith is something very different from belief. Belief is the systematic taking of unanalyzed words much too seriously. Paul's words, Mohammed's words, Marx's words, Hitler's words---people take them too seriously, and what happens? What happens is the senseless ambivalence of history---sadism versus duty, or (incomparably worse) sadism as duty; devotion counterbalanced by organized paranoia; sisters of charity selflessly tending the victims of their own church's inquisitors and crusaders. Faith, on the contrary, can never be taken too seriously. For Faith is the empirically justified confidence in our capacity to know who in fact we are, to forget the belief-intoxicated Manichee in Good Being. Give us this day our daily Faith, but deliver us, dear God, from Belief.

All words about religion, all religious teachings necessarily must be untrue and wrong, for the one reality that just is, is so much bigger than terms and labels, but terms and labels are just a small, an arbitrary part of the uoltimate reality, and so a reality in which the words we use actually have a meaning that we can understand by the rules of the language we use, necessarily must be a most uncomplete one. A thought god is our thought only, and dies when our brain activity comes to a standstill. the divinity of the university cannot be understood, embraced, described or adressed in names. "The name of God cannot be pronounced".

So why is there talking in the name of religions, and why is there religious argument, when the mere fact that it is being given is evidence that what it says is and must be untrue?

All religious books should be burned immediately. They are just a terrible confusion bringing out the worst in man again and again and again, causing intolerance, mental self-mutiliation and self-righteous elitism.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Wow you really have problems with the English language don't you.
Race as a term of taxonomic identification is clearly defined ,
on the other hand a racist is best defined as an idiot.
People who are unable to differentiate between two words with different meanings can also fit one of those definitions.


Errrrr....no, perhaps you could do better if you had the faintest idea what you were talking about instead of recycling garbage from a badly translated, heavily edited fragment of ancient mythology.

Darwin's work is theory, yes? That means proof is necessary. I haven't seen any, but I love when my posts are argued. Yet the Bible is believed by multidudes, including those who have read Darwin.

Come onboard and Christ will save you!

[Task Force]

Originally Posted by CastleBravo

Darwin's work is theory, yes? That means proof is necessary. I haven't seen any, but I love when my posts are argued. Yet the Bible is believed by multidudes, including those who have read Darwin.

Come onboard and Christ will save you!

... LOL... this reminds me of the greeks... useing gods to explain things...

Originally Posted by CastleBravo

Come onboard and Christ will save you!

Become a Hellen and Zeus might shag your daughters!

Originally Posted by Task Force

... LOL... this reminds me of the greeks... useing gods to explain everything...

We use Gods to explain stuff we haven't found an explanation too yet.

Originally Posted by Task Force

... LOL... this reminds me of the greeks... useing gods to explain everything...

... LOL... this reminds me of the communists... using science to explain everything...

[antikristuseke]

Originally Posted by CastleBravo

Darwin's work is theory, yes? That means proof is necessary. I haven't seen any, but I love when my posts are argued. Yet the Bible is believed by multidudes, including those who have read Darwin.

Come onboard and Christ will save you!

Evidence here http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
Read and learn, ignorance is not a badge of honor. And before you pull the good old "Science does not know everything" BS, science knows it does not know everything, if it did, it would stop. Trying to explain things you do not understand with goddunit does nothing but let minds rot away in make believe.