quote:

No, I did mean pro-lifers, who, for the most part, are intelligent design people. Mycrofthomes is correct!

As someone who has been involved with pro-life groups for many years, I have to disagree with that. By far the largest bloc of pro-life people are Catholics, who, to make an intelligent guess, make up more than 50 percent of the membership and leadership of pro-life organizations. And Catholics have no "creationist" orientation. Evolutionary theory is taught at virtually every Catholic high school and college.

quote:

belief in God or a higher power, which, as such, is generall seen as incompatible with Darwinism.

Let's look at the largest religious denominations in the United States:

1. Roman Catholicism (24.5% of U.S. pop. in 2001) has no doctrinal problem with evolution, and hasn't since at least 1950. Evolution is taught in virtually all Catholic high schools and colleges.

2. Baptists (16.3%). The Baptist Faith and Message, a summary of Southern Baptist doctrinal beliefs last revised in 2000, has no position on evolution.

3. Methodist/Wesleyan (6.8%). "The UMC [United Methodist Church] does not have an official statement on any theories of evolution."

4. Lutherans (4.6%). Of the major U.S. synods, the Wisconsin (410,000 members) and Missouri (2.6 million members) synods have doctrinal positions against evolution. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the largest synod (4.9 million members), states:

quote:

God created the universe and all that is therein, only not necessarily in six 24-hour days, and that he may actually have used evolution in the process of creation.

5. Presbyterians (2.7%). Evolution Statement Evolution Statement adopted in 1969:

quote:

Neither Scripture, our Confession of Faith, nor our Catechisms, teach the Creation of man by the direct and immediate acts of God so as to exclude the possibility of evolution as a scientific theory...Some form of evolutionary theory is accepted by the majority of modern scientists...We conclude that the true relation between the evolutionary theory and the Bible is that of non-contradiction.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Walloon,

In "Top Kid," a very cute and thought-provoking show about a little genius boy in 1940s Australia, the boy was questioning a priest about God creating the earth and asked, "Put in all the fossils and everything, did he?" As if putting in things older than the earth was supposed to be was a test of faith.

Worthwhile reading on this subject is "Icons Of Evolution"
http://www.iconsofevolution.com/

Walloon:

You really do your research, don't you? Okay, I stand corrected! Guess I shouldn't make generalisations based on my limited, personal experience.

Groon:

The flaw that might be seen in your reasoning is that if God uses evolution, that is, the system of "survival of the fittest," then what is to stop people from justifying abortion by asserting their right as a superiorly (sp?) developed animal to eliminate whatever stands in their way? (The same incidentally, goes for the death penalty: "You threaten me, so to ensure my survival I'll execute you.") If God is a god of life, why would He use death to accomplish His ends? Besides, if you're omnipotent (and God, whoever He is seen to be, by definition is) why use such an inefficient method? As Albert Einstien once said, (approximately) "God does not play with dice." A chance process seems a bit too messy to be divine. I know this doesn't really address the issue of life ethics here, but this is why I said creationism is generally seen as pre-requisite for a pro-life stance.

Evolution within species, yes. Between species, no.

Mycroft,

You bring up some interesting points. Personally, I see "Survival of the Fittest" as only one theory for the cause of evolution. I don't believe that organisms randomly mutate and the better ones survive. Plants grow toward the sun (as opposed to the plants that grow toward the sun are the only ones who happen to survive) If they do, we don't know that for sure.

As for the death penalty as a means of survival (as in, destroy hopelessly violent criminals to protect society) that would have definitely been valid at one point in time, before people had developed the necessary means of containment of such persons. With human intelligence at the level it is in modern times (and has been for several thousand years) the technology necessary for imprisonment of such persons (bricks, basically) is sufficient to protect society. So to me the whole "societal protection" argument is really a euphimism for retribution against heinous criminals, which if you ask me isn't necessary for human advancement.

In all respect, I still disagree. I'd say pacifism is a prerequisite for a pro-life stance. Creationism is just another theory that a few people believe in and many people don't.

By the way, has anyone ever heard of M.C. Hawking? This thread always makes me think of this song....here's a link....it's a little crass, so be warned....
"F**k the Creationists" (mp3)
"F**k the Creationists" (lyrics)

Nothing new the saying concerning Bible passages...
"Well, that's YOUR interpretation!"

Yet, scriptural passages leading to interpretive arguments are few. Settle down, take it line by line in context, and it's pretty much understandable. Don't go into scripture with pre-conceived notions. Take it for what it is plain-as-fact saying!

Thus, what do YOU make of the following, essentially taken from the 1st Chapter of Ephesians:
______________________

'Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who knew us and chose us when there was yet a universe, and the world had not come into being. He chose us then, and made it so we should be holy and completely without fault before Him in love. And He did this very thing so that in the ages to come, even the ages when all things seen and unseen have passed away, He would forever show the exceeding riches of his kindness towards us in Christ Jesus before all creation.'
______________________

Those ideas jump over all sorts of controversial topics. Did God really know me as a person before He set the stars in the sky? It says YES! So, then, where does man begin? How does abortion fit into this? Or evolution! Has God locked me into some sort of sphere where I am given a chance of life or death, without other options? (!!!)

Get your own translations out...go to the very first chapter of the book of Ephesians...

Something inside all of us really does want the Truth; but most of us won't continue seeking the Truth once we begin to feel uncomfortable.

It is not people seeking Truth who make me uncomfortable, it is those who already know the Truth and stop looking!

groon:

Yes, I was using a different reasoning behind it, but I agree with your conclusions about "societal protection" and the death penalty. But pacifism? This sounds interesting. I've never heard it before. Could you expound? Do you just mean a non-combatant stance rules out executions, or what?

Not just non-combatant, but non-destructive in general. I don't step on spiders, I just move them out of the house if they're dangerous, and let them stay if they're not.

patrask,
?
Take me thru that again. You said, "It's those who already know the Truth and stop looking that make me uncomfortable?" Isn't that like saying, I went looking for a bottle of milk in the refridgerator, found the bottleof milk, and then continued looking. Explain.

It is often worthwhile to analyze WHY we're uncomfortable.

quote:

Originally posted by libRArY:
patrask,
?
Take me thru that again. You said, "It's those who already know the Truth and stop looking that make me uncomfortable?" Isn't that like saying, I went looking for a bottle of milk in the refridgerator, found the bottleof milk, and then continued looking. Explain.

Science is a process for looking for truth. It is a continuous process that allows Mankind to build upon prior truths in order to achieve a better, more complete, understanding of the universe. If we stop looking, i.e., questioning, we have reached a stagnation that will likely prevent us from knowing more truths. It is the old adage, the more one knows, the more questions there are that need to be answered. To simply stop the process and be satisfied with AN Answer is to surrender to a feeling of comfort that we have reached the end and do not need to learn anythng further. How sad, if we have missed a new opportunity to learn more about the universe, and thus about God, if you will, due to a feeling of comfort. The struggle is endless and is what sets Mankind apart from other living things on this planet. We NEED to know about our world and why we are in it. Thus, we hunger for Truth in what ever form it takes. In science, truths are tested against facts that can be verified to some level. If the current truth in the testing is found wanting in the data analysis, it is discarded or modified with a better truth or paradigm. With knowledge comes responsibility for our actions. WE are in charge of our desitny. Mankind grows and seeks happiness in this process. I hope Mankind will continue to learn and can manage the truths that we uncover as we journey on this path. I believe that will bring us closer to God.