On 25 Sep 2004 at 21:13, mtong5@...
> > Michael: Why not cite some scriptures and we will see whether they can
> > interpreted as racist?
> Lenny: Can be, in whose opinion, Tong. Yours? Why is yours any
> better than anyone else's?
> Michael: Just cite the scriptures and we will see whether the
> interpretation is just a matter of opinion.
Answer my question, Tong. Why are your interpretations
any better than anyone else's?
> Lenny: And since ID is supposed to be science that is NOT based
> on the bible or any other religious writings, what fuckign
> difference does it make to YOU whether the bible is racist or
> Michael: If someone say something that is incorrect, I will correct him.
Answer my question, Tong. If ID is not religion, then what
fucking difference does it make to you whether or not the
Bible is racist.
> > Michael: But none of these racist websites cite any scriptures.
> Lenny: Oddly enough, none of them cite anything from biology or
> Darwin, either.
> Why is that.
> Michael: Because large numbers of people in their area of operation
> profess religion and they want to recruit them.
How do you know that, Tong.
> Michael: Including evolutionists. But this shows that early
> evolutionists believed that Caucasians were the culmination of human
> evolution not because the evidence suggested this, but because they found
> this appealing and satisfying. But this could be the same thinking that
> resulted in evolution. Some people believed it not because the evidence
> supported it, but because they found the theory appealing and satisfying.
Just like Christian racists who opposed the civil rights
movement. Right, Tong? Just like the Klan and the Aryan
Nations, who both use religion as their source (and who
BOTH reject evolution as being anti-Bible).
What about statements such as "Caucasian women are
more beautiful than Asian or Black women", Tong. Is that a
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked:
My Reptile Page: