I have purposefully not said what I use to determine right from wrong; but will say I'd rather have people living by the Bible than not; to try to assure you my comment was not made in any to say you're beliefs are "wrong."

What I believe is irrelevant by Law. The Establishments Clause ["Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"] is in the 1st Amendment. The 1st is first because its most important. We cant use religious thought from Christians, Muslims or Scientologist to decide when life beings; it must be science that decides.

Abortion is not only done by the unmarried, if we consider The Bible [IE Jeremiah 1:5]. God knows us before conception; anyone using birth control to prevent conception has just sentenced that child that God knows to death. If we understand the Bible like the Catholic church does, like you mention, Christians are committing abortions every time contraception prevents conception.

The problem is, science is very often unscientific.
Evolution is said by most scientists to be "fact", when of course it isn't. It's only a theory, which can't be proven. Anymore then I can prove that God created everything as He said he did.
Each has to be believed by pure faith.
Thus it's not "science".
Same with when a child is conceived.
Is it like you said, that birth control is killing children? I don't know . But I would rather be cautious when there already is a baby growing inside the woman, to not kill what we know is a living being.
I watched a video called "seeing is believing" . I think anyone that is thinking of aborting a child should have to watch it before deciding to go through with it.
Dehumanizing a fetus makes it "easy".
"Baby a problem? We will kill it for you."
Easy, hey?

---

You have never followed science with an open mind at all, have you? Or the study of bones? Evolution is real. Evolution from Monkeys (or whatever the evolutionists claim) to Humans? Eh, I do not think so, I've read enough and seen enough to dispel that one. Although, I am hairy like monkey!! :D

---

People who say they base their beliefs and behaviors on the Bible amuse the hell out of me, because their lifestyles never resemble that advocated by the Bible in any way. Not to mention, they usually also are the same people who have no problem with bombing the hell out of nations (*cough* Islamic countries *cough*) where the typical, accepted lifestyle still does resembles in many respects that found in and promulgated by the ancient scriptures. The truth is that no one -- and I mean NO ONE -- in the Western world bases their beliefs or behaviors on the Bible. A truly biblical lifestyle would be intolerable even to the most conservative of Christians. I should know: I was raised in a radically right-wing, fundamentalist Christian household (the kind in which my father would tell me I shouldn't so much as touch a girl's hand until after I'd graduated from medical school!), and we no more lived a biblical lifestyle than does Madonna. Our lifestyle was thoroughly Western in every way.

Let's be objective about this: at least 99% of what passes for "biblical morality" amounts to nothing more than self-validation of 19th- and 20th-century American cultural preferences and biases via cherry picking of vaguely related biblical texts as viewed through Western eyes. Does the Bible condemn premarital sex? No, not really -- though in fairness, it does discourage it. Does it condemn homosexuality? Obliquely, if you look at it just the right way -- and even then, only male homosexuality; female homosexuality gets a pass for some reason. Does it condemn abortion? Nope -- it never once even mentions the topic. You can't even support a rigid anti-abortion stance on the basis of Jewish tradition, considering the fact that Judaism has never held life to begin at the moment of conception  and has always made exception for saving the life of the mother (as did every ancient culture).

The phrase "New Testament Christianity" as it's used today is even a bigger joke. Take a few minutes to read 1 Corinthians 11  and 14 . That's New Testament Christianity. It sure as hell doesn't resemble any church I've ever encountered in the United States, even if Pentecostal churches try to emulate it in some ways. Nevertheless, I can't count the number of straitlaced, evangelical churches who advertise themselves as "New Testament Christians." No, they're just American Christians, every last one of them thoroughly steeped in the traditions and worldview of Western Europe.

And that's fine. One of the reasons why Christianity achieved such hegemony in the world is that it's inherently a flexible religion. Christianity started out as a sect of a Mesopotamian tribal cult whose outward expression very much resembled many flavors of tribal Islam still in existence today. But as it spread into Africa, it started looking remarkably like an African tribal religions, just as it started very much resembling a Greco-Roman religion once it moved into Europe. Likewise, Asian Christianity today looks nothing like South American Christianity, which doesn't resemble Oceanic Christianity in the least.

But no, you don't base your lifestyle on the Bible. Having spent time in a region in which people still live much as people did in biblical times, I can assure you, that is not a lifestyle that would appeal to you at all. So what? That's nothing to be ashamed of. After all, we don't live in the ancient Near East! Why would we feel the need to live as though we do?

---

lets see....where do I begin? Micro evolution is REAL. But one kind of creature turning into another is NOT real.
I have followed science my whole life. I went to public schools and public college. Studying bones is just that, the bones of something that died. It doesn't prove that a fish turned into a reptile, or anything else for that matter.
Creatures have become extinct all throughout history. Just because bones look similar to some other kind of creature, doesn't mean it "evolved" into something else. It's man making up stuff to try to explain what he doesn't understand, or want to understand.
If evolution from one creature to another kind was real, you wouldn't be able to shake a stick without seeing it happening now.
If evolution is real, how come there are still monkeys? Wouldn't they all have evolved? Did one just decide, "Hey, I want to be able to build things and speak, and all that stuff" while the others just were happy eating bananas (and their own feces?)
How about "LUCY", the most recent "proof" by scientists? Only one partial skeleton, that had no foot bones and the pelvic bones of an ape. The "scientists" didn't like that, so they fabricated the pelvis to look like a human, and gave it human feet. They then put models of this "missing link" into museums, with no explanation of how they fabricated most of this "find". If you don't know, monkeys and humans have very different pelvis bone, as a ape walks on it's feet and hands, a human walks upright. In the museums, they have "lucy" walking upright like a human.
Is this real "science?" Or science fiction?
Look around you....do you see evolution, or intelligent design? That's why I think evolution is only a theory, and not provable.
I'm typing on a computer in the library. Do I believe this computer came to be by an explosion in a electronics factory, or was it put together by intelligent people?
And this computer is NOTHING compared to a human being, or even common animals.
That's how I came to believe in a creator.
Every "proof" of evolution I have seen, has turned out to be smoke and mirrors, and wishful thinking.

---

Female homosexuality does NOT "get a pass" in the Bible. I will look it up when I get home, and show the scripture when I get the chance.
And one of the major problems today is, many churches have watered down the Bible so they don't "offend" people, and can get people in the seats.
They allow things that the Bible says should not be allowed, and misuse scripture to try to "ok" some of what they practice.
Man made "religion", God didn't. Man is imperfect, God isn't.

Ok, am home (and using my wife's phone) the scripture is Romans 1:26-27
"For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for the woman exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error."
So women don't gat a pass, and also will answer for what they choose to do.
Of course that's why ALL of us need to accept Jesus as our saviour. Not one of us is free of sin, certainly not me! I KNOW I'm a sinner, and am no better then anyone else. The only difference is that I have put my faith in Christ. I KNOW how far short I fall in a perfect God's eye. I have EARNED eternity in Hell because of my sin. I thank the Lord I won't have to end up there because of HIM.

---

I say this


You say this??

You have amazing faith, I admire it and respect it. I loved talking to you about God and your religious beliefs. You unfortunately aren't open to believe anything other than whichever version of whichever interpretation of the Bible you entrust your beliefs to.

Why can't evolution be PART of the intelligent design? Why are you so hell bent that it is ONE or the other? You cherry pick things to disprove an entire aspect. The Packers lost a game, that means they are terrible! Forget that won 15 games, right? This is what you're doing. It's no different than saying the found a tablet rock with "pontius" on validates EVERYTHING in the Bible.

What about our appendix? Didn't that evolve a couple dozen times? There's a lot to support evolution.

And I repeat myself. Evolution from Dog to Monkey, or Cat to Dragon, Nope, sorry, I cannot believe that.

We are all animals (my belief) and the fact that we learned to communicate is what sets us apart from other animals.

---

I can't see science, or evolution scientist ever conceding and allowing them to coexist.

My personal theory is that evolution is creation. God created man he also created everything else, so is would only make sense that he created many things very similar. So what science sees as the evolution of Man, I see as the evolution of God's creation. I also don't believe what is written in the bible can explain everything. the bible was written by man and is not an all inclusive history of the world.

---

If science doesn’t have an answer; then it must be left up to each individual when life begins. If not then we are allowing religion to define our law. I’d urge you to reconsider your desire for the government to cater to Christianity. Right now Christianity is the majority religion, but with birth and immigration rates and conversions to Islam, one day Christians will be certainly be the minority. Then should their philosophies be installed in our Law? And if the oligarchs finish the job they started last November 9 with the help of evangelicals, one of their first orders of business will be to ban all religion. Ironic, isn’t it?

You keep using “the Bible” as your guide; but do you even know how that document was created? Let’s say God spoke to these guys; yet, it was man that wrote it. And not a word of it was written in English, hence, it was translated by men into Latin, then English, from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. But you said Man’s not perfect. How can you be sure man didn’t eff up God’s inspired word when writing and translating? And man decided, which writings were and were not included in the “Bible.” How can you be sure man didn’t eff that up too?

If the Bible is truly a perfect reliable document to guide our thought, it must be the ENTIRE word of God and nothing but the word of God. You can’t afford to denounce the LGBTQ community if, for example, the Book of Gayness, is inspired by God, speaks positively of LGBTQs and was left out. The last book was written around 95 AD by [Revelation] John. Surely, if a perfect God was guiding the writing, the translations and the collection of all the inspired writings into one “Bible;” there’d be just one “Bible” after 95AD, right?

The Muratorian Fragment was written around 170AD and is oldest known list of the books that should be in and out of the New Testament. The writings we know of today as Hebrews, James, and Peters I and II were not included in the Bible before or after 170AD. Based on the Fragment The writings added into the “Bible” of the day were: The Wisdom of Solomon, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, Gospel of Thomas, etc. This document removed from the Bible of the day, Paul’s writings to the Laodiceans and Alexandrians, writings by Marcion, Valentinius, Basilides and the Gospel of Judas. Then the Council of Trent, in the 16th century decided what books would be in and would be out of the Bible you possess today. However, that Catholics rejected some of Trent’s decisions, so today the Catholic Bible has about 12 extra books in the Old Testament.

Most pastors say God inspired the writings and translations and inspired the Council of Trent to correctly decide all the writings to include or exclude. But, here’s the problem. The “Bible” before 170 AD included Paul’s writings to the Laodiceans and Alexandrians, writings by Marcion, Valentinius, Basilides and the Gospel of Judas; and excluded, Hebrews, James, and Peters I and II. From 170-AD until Trent the “Bible” contained the Wisdom of Solomon, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, Gospel of Thomas and excluded, Hebrews, James, and Peters I and II. Then there’s your Bible, effectively put together at Trent. 3 Bibles, all different. If one truly contains all the inspired word of God, then necessarily the other two don’t.

So if God was guiding the men; God fucked up 2 out of 3 times or he simply doesn’t have the ability to control imperfect man to do perfect Bible work through his inspirations.

And on translations, some have been shown to be flat out incorrect and many passages are translated lacking accurate fullness. Translating from Greek to English is especially difficult. So God must have effed up on his guidance over the translations as well.

Next, Is God a shameless chauvinist? How come none of the Bible books were written by women? Or did God speak, EG, his Gospel to Martha, who wrote it down, but the men of the day ignored her?

And how about the Bible saying women should remain silent in church [1 Corinthians 14:34-35]? Of course, all non orthodox pastor’s really pull out their twist-o-rama bullshit spin on this one big time. How can you say, the Bible says this about LGBTQs; but women don’t have to remain silent in church? If you think you can pick and chose which parts of the Bible apply and don’t apply; it can only mean you don’t really believe it’s the word of God. I say believe what you want; but hypocrisy will not be tolerated. If the literal interpretation of your Bible declares LGBTQs are sinners, then okay. But god dammit, this Sunday you are going to MUZZLE every woman that dares walk in your church. And my god if you got a woman pastor, you stone that Biblical breaching bitch of Bealzabub right on the pulpit.

Next, God supposedly spoke to Moses 4000 years ago, Isaiah 3400 years ago, David 2900 YA, Solomon 2700 YA, The Maccabees 2100 YA, Paul 1950 YA and Revelation John 1900 YA and everyone and every time in between for this 2100 year span. Then silence for 2000 years? WTF is up with that, is he napping, on strike, is he pissed that Rodgers was gonna break both collar bones? How do you know that God didin’t approach the Profit Nonstopdrivel, like Paul, giving him a vision on his IPhone as he walked on the road to Lambeau. And imperfect man is screwing up by not collecting his writings on PH Random Babble and inserting them into the Bible?

If you’re going show me a book and say, this is the be all and end all, ya got prove to me your not just handing me something that could be a collection of writings by the brothers Grimm. They wrote some good stories too. “Hans Dumm” is about a man who impregnates a princess simply by wishing it, there’s your immaculate inception. That hussy Repunzel had premarital sex, there’s your Mary Magdelene. In “The Robber Bridegroom,” a maiden is dragged to an underground hideout, force to drink ‘til her heart bursts, her clothes are ripped off and her body hacked into pieces, here’s your violence. “The Jew in the Brambles” has the protagonist tormenting a Jew by forcing him to dance in a thicket of thorns, calling him cheap, a good bargainer and a “dirty dog,” among other things, there’s your antisemitism.

The reason creation and evolution can't coexist is that God would have said he used evolution. He said He created man in Hus own image, not as some non living gunk.
And our appendix is not some useless thing that is not needed. It's part of what helps our bodies fight off disease. It wasn't so long ago that "science" thought it was a left over thing that was a part of evolution. They know different now.
Can you live without your appendix? Yes. Just like you can live without your fingers, or eyes, or whatever. That doesn't mean those items don't have a purpose.

---