PaulSpoerry.com

I’m constantly mystified during discussions where people argue “they should show BOTH sides of the arguement about evolution in science class.” What they mean is that they should discuss Creationism, the belief that god created everything, in science class. I’m ALL FOR teaching creationism in a world religion or a philosophy class. However, creationism does NOT fall under the scientific method as a means to prove anything so it should stay OUT of the science classroom. It’s for this reason that, for instance, evolutionary biologist and astronomers, etc usually avoid the idea of Creationism altogether. It’s not that they do not believe in god… in fact many well know scientist are very religious. The avoid the subject because it cannot be proven. There’s no mountain of recreatable/verifiable evidence to back it up.

For those who have never had the opportunity to find out about biology or science, claims made by those who believe in supernatural alternatives to evolutionary theory can appear convincing. Meanwhile, even among those who accept evolution, misconceptions abound.

Most of us are happy to admit that we do not understand, say, the string theory in physics, yet we are all convinced we understand evolution. In fact, as biologists are discovering, its consequences can be stranger than we ever imagined. Evolution must be the best-known yet worst-understood of all scientific theories.

Read the rest of this entry »

Ok this is funny,  Bible Fight is a flash game, kinda like a Bible version of Street fighter that spoofs both the Bible and Street Fighter.

The creators, those guys at This Is Pop for Adult Swim are completely insane, that said… I think this is hi-larious.

You can use Bible fighters called Eve, Noah, Moses, Mary, Satan, and Jesus, who look and dress like Eve, Noah, Moses, Mary, Satan, and Jesus and then battle is out Street Fighter style.

Wow, this is just an awesome speech. Alan Keyes says “Jesus Christ would not vote for Barack Obama.” Keyes claims Obama is not a true Christian, and Barack’s response is just awesome. If we had more people in politics who held religious beliefs but understood that while it’s perfectly reasonable to expect someone to have religious beliefs, but that those beliefs cannot be the only arguement for policy, our country would be a much better place. Obama discusses how to reconcile faith with our modern, pluralistic democracy.

“For one, they need to understand the critical role that the separation of church and state has played in preserving not only our democracy, but the robustness of our religious practice. Folks tend to forget that during our founding, it wasn’t the atheists or the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of the First Amendment. It was the persecuted minorities, it was Baptists like John Leland who didn’t want the established churches to impose their views on folks who were getting happy out in the fields and teaching the scripture to slaves. It was the forbearers of the evangelicals who were the most adamant about not mingling government with religious, because they did not want state-sponsored religion hindering their ability to practice their faith as they understood it.

Moreover, given the increasing diversity of America’s population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.

And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson’s, or Al Sharpton’s? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount - a passage that is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application? So before we get carried away, let’s read our bibles. Folks haven’t been reading their bibles.

This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God’s will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.”

You can, and in fact SHOULD, watch the video above or read the full text here.

Bill Maher talking some straight talk to the religious test for office.

Lewis Black on creationism. This… is… awesome.