Wow! Ben Stein has an awesome new movie coming out

[Susie Q Roo]

Originally Posted by SunKneeMarie

and game show host

just to up the ante

And one of my favorite game shows ever, btw.

[playabum17]

Originally Posted by playabum17

I'm predicting that this thread will fast become several pages long with several people joining in on a 'debate' on each side.

I could be wrong...but if I'm not, remember I said it first...okay, maybe Babs did, with his popcorn.

Ah, yes...5 pages, 60 posts in 4 hours...just as I had predicted....

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by Juanito

And people that do go to church don't like being called Nazis.

What a shocker that something promoting an out of context, anti-intellectual fear mongering campaign would feature Ann Coulter as an "expert."

If we're throwing out movements based on atrocities caused by their deliberate misinterpretation by zeolots, where does that leave Christianity?

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by kirbyfan

Boy theres a few here that get pretty excited when you mention ID.....

That kind of reaction usually means theres something to it...now i will definatly look into it if some of you get your undies this bunched up over it.

I do get a little excited about it.
But I am not ashamed about that...I just detest brute and willful ignorance and lies, which is what 'Intelligent Design theory' is.
ID is a sham and should never be taught in schools. Except maybe as an example of pseudoscience.

And I definitely think you should look into more kirby- and make sure your sources are unbiased and reliable.
Luckily, I don't think there is any real danger of it actually happening, so I should calm down.

About Hitler and 'social darwinism'.....Hitler misinterpreted Darwin completely.
So it cannot be scapegoated for or associated with his atrocities in any way, shape or form. Comparing people who believe in evolution with Nazis is just illogical.

Again, not an idea put forth by Darwin himself- who died long before 1944.

Social Darwinism is the idea that Charles Darwin's theory can be extended and applied to the social domain, i.e. that just as competition between individual organisms drives biological evolutionary change (speciation) through "survival of the fittest" (not a scientific term itself), competition between individuals, groups, nations or ideas drives social evolution in human societies.
The term was popularized in 1944 by the American historian Richard Hofstadter, and has generally been used by critics rather than advocates of what the term is supposed to represent (Bannister, 1979; Hodgson, 2004).

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by gingele

Well actually Ben Stein is saying something akin to what Dr. Kennedy said:

Alas, Darwinism has had a far bloodier life span than Imperialism. Darwinism, perhaps mixed with Imperialism, gave us Social Darwinism, a form of racism so vicious that it countenanced the Holocaust against the Jews and mass murder of many other groups in the name of speeding along the evolutionary process.


I *think* we agree on this point: The fact that Hitler took Darwin's theories to an unnatural and horrific extreme does not mean either that the theory of evolution is wrong (or inherently evil) nor does it mean that those who accept the theory of evolution as being accurate are therefore Nazis.

But it is important to note that I have no doubt the proponents of this argument -such as Stein and Kennedy - are fully aware of it's inflammatory nature and hope that some may be influenced by the very conclusion (albeit erroneous) that if you adhere to evloution you risk being a Nazi or some such BS.

But, the same kind of BS tactics are used by many atheists to tie Christianity (or religion, as a whole) to atrocities commited throughout time. As I said above, it is man perverting these ideas, not the ideas themselves, that is the problem.

[gingele]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

But, the same kind of BS tactics are used by many atheists to tie Christianity (or religion, as a whole) to atrocities commited throughout time. As I said above, it is man perverting these ideas, not the ideas themselves, that is the problem.

Not really the same thing. I think factually it can be said that many atrocities are directly attributable to religious zeal (the Inquisition or the Crusades, for example). That is not a BS tactic. What would be BS would be to then conclude that all Christians are therefore religious zealots who would trot off on another crusade at a moment's notice. And I haven't heard that argument being made by the atheists here.

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by gingele

Not really the same thing. I think factually it can be said that many atrocities are directly attributable to religious zeal (the Inquisition or the Crusades, for example). That is not a BS tactic. What would be BS would be to then conclude that all Christians are therefore religious zealots who would trot off on another crusade at a moment's notice. And I haven't heard that argument being made by the atheists here.

The Inquisition and the Crusades were led by men, interpreting the religion to fit their agenda. Just like Hitler. This is apples and apples.

[Rissask]

I think factually it can be said that many atrocities are directly attributable to religious zeal (the Inquisition or the Crusades, for example).

I think that is a good way of putting it. It is not the fault of the religion itself, but more how it is interpreted so differently, and twisted. If people are fervent believers, out of fear (or loyalty, or because they don't feel they have a choice) they are willing to do pretty much anything they are instructed to.

Religion can be a tool for good or for bad, basically....is that not just a plain old fact?

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

The Inquisition and the Crusades were led by men, interpreting the religion to fit their agenda. Just like Hitler. This is apples and apples.

and religion was created by men too. right? So how could anyone expect it to be perfect?

[StewartG]

Originally Posted by UGAplaya

That's awesome. Regardless of which side you're on, it's great to see people with open opinions.

Amen!

[StewartG]

Mmmmm...

Don't care about his movie.

Just wanna win his money!

[gingele]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

The Inquisition and the Crusades were led by men, interpreting the religion to fit their agenda. Just like Hitler. This is apples and apples.

Right - I agree with that. I guess then what you meant by using "the same kind of BS tactics" is that atheists will (erroneously) conclude that all christians are therefore crusaders?

[Rissask]

Come on Stewart, give us your opinion on what you think of ID...and don't mince words, just because you met and hung out with UGAPlaya and don't want to offend him!

If he is a mature adult I am sure he can take it.


so thus far we have refuted a couple points....

#1. Hitler used Social Darwinism to excuse his atrocities, therefore Darwinism is bad and evil and will make you a racist and a murderer like Hitler....

BEEP! wrong

#2. The majority of Americans disbelieve evolution happened, therefore we should teach ID in school.

BEEP wrong ...WHY do half disbelieve evolution? And what percentage believe in Intelligent Design? Not anywhere near a majority! So how can anyone justify teaching that?

So the best conclusion you can come up with is that evolution shouldn't be taught in school, if anything- and is that really the best solution, teach kids LESS factual stuff in school than they get already?


did I miss anything?

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

The Inquisition and the Crusades were led by men, interpreting the religion to fit their agenda. Just like Hitler. This is apples and apples.

A difference, I think, is one of degree. Religious doctrine by its very nature is open to multiple interpretation. Those who would use science for an extreme cause (like the nazis) in a way forced that science "on their side." Yes, this is a gross twisting of science, but they could still point to experiments, hypothesis, research data, etc to "prove" their delusional points. Whereas, in religion the that proof is based in the sacred, not in science.

[Daddy B]

Originally Posted by UGAplaya

No not the same group but even IF Ben isn't a Young Earth believer or a Creationist or however people chose to classify that belief, at the very least it's a step in the right direction.

Yep, leading mankind to the same point where obscurantist, fundamentalist Islam finds itself at the moment.

Great, just what this world needs: more religious fundamentalism...