That title is an obvious truism to decent Americans; but it merits reiteration for the Darwinists, treefrogs, moonbats, Marxists, IslamoFascists, and anti-Americans among us.
Case in point: this idiot.
Conservative GOP Senator and presidential hopeful Sam Brownback says that he believes in evolution. This confession is either intellectually confused or it is a political ploy to gain support with a wider group of voters. I’m assuming that it is the former and not the latter.
Moronic. The majority of Americans know that evolution is a lie foisted on us by scientists. Brownback knows this, too. But pointing it out in public can only enhance his already-burgeoning popularity.
In an op-ed in “The New York Times” (5-31-07), Brownback proposes that we should give evolution the “seriousness it demands.” He claims that “we cannot drive a wedge between faith and reason,” and because they are complementary, “there cannot be any contradiction between the two.”
As a theistic humanist, I believe that human experience itself will provide “values, meaning, and purpose,” but I will respect Brownback’s choice to take these on faith alone. But I reject his odd contention that “faith purifies reason so that we might be able to see more clearly.” I point out the danger of this below.
Theistic humanist=secularist=Islamist=America-hater. Color me unimpressed by his chest-thumping struttery.
Brownback’s confusion comes when he says that he only believes in micro- evolution within species, and he rejects the claim that new species come into being by natural selection, the crux of evolutionary theory.
The crux of lying. Micro-evolution within species can happen very readily- we can breed fruit flies for certain characteristics, for example, or dogs, or pigeons, or what have you. No one disputes micro-evolution. Where the lying comes in is when imbeciles argue that small changes within a species can create a new species over time. This has NEVER been proven. The world is only 6,000 years old- how could a new species “evolve” in the first place without God’s will?
Creationists accept microevolution but condemn the evolution of new species as unbiblical. They are more consistent and intellectually honest than Brownback in affirming their belief that God created all species de novo, a position strongly implied in Brownback’s column.
This paragraph is pointless, irrelevant, and tedious, as well as presumptuous. I’d refute it, but there’s nothing to refute. It refutes itself.
There is overwhelming evidence that human beings descended from a long line of ape ancestors. We share 98 percent of our genetic material with our chimp cousins. Chimps can learn sign language and teach it to their offspring, and we now have evidence that they use medicinal herbs.
If our DNA resembles that of chimpanzees, it is because Satan has made it so, through ionic pressures and the absences of angels from those specific chromosomes. The miracle of electricity has caused many angels to abandon DNA and flock to appliances. This enabled Satan to establish irrelevant, superficial control of DNA, and bend it to resemble that of monkeys. But the wise are not deceived by such irrelevances. The God who has given us microwave ovens and automobiles as well as sunshine and diamonds, would not cause the caretakers of His garden to consort with gorillas. The very concept is unspeakably demonic.
As for teaching chimpanzees sign language, that proves only that evil is strong within them. There are many creatures in the service of the Dark One, and monkeys are only the wiliest.
As long as Brownback and creationists insist that we are unique divine creations, then their faith and reason will not get along. Brownback repeats the doctrine of special creation so often that it becomes a dogma that will brook no challenge from reason and science.
Science is a fraud, exposed by Reason as well as by Scripture. Our faith is fortified by our Reason; using Reason, I know that what Scripture says is true. I also know that I cannot reproduce with monkeys. It is physically impossible as well as immoral and disgusting. Why are the scientists too dim to comprehend this?
If faith purifies reason so that it sees only religious doctrine clearly, then we have Martin Luther’s “enlightened reason, taken captive by faith,” one that “does not fight against faith but promotes it.” Luther once called reason a whore, but here it is a slave to faith.
As well it should be; our bodies are temples, our minds are priests, and our souls are offerings to God. All is as it should be. Why do scientists desire that we burn our temples to the ground with drugs, alcohol, and monkey-frolic? Why should our priests become devil-worshippers, sacrificing our souls to the crude altars of Satan? Where does this hatred of goodness come from? Simple pride, arrogance in their intellectual superiority; or is there something deeper?
Like many critics of evolution, Brownback assumes that belief in evolution forces one to embrace “an exclusively material- istic, deterministic vision of the world that holds no place for a guiding intelligence.” To interpret science as metaphysics rather than simply a time-honored method to interpret empirical data is “scientism” not true science.
True science requires no such mealy-mouthed end-splittings. True science uses Reason to guide us to Scripture. True science shows us that God’s plan is immortal, eternal, and unchanging. We cannot go against the Will of God, nor can we embrace His enemies without consequence.
If Brownback’s “guiding intelligence” is a deity that knows all of the future and causes everything to happen, then human beings have no free will, and they have just as little value as in the materialistic worldview that both he and I reject. Bringing in a traditional God causes more problems than it allegedly solves.
This is idiotic. Free will exists for us because we have no knowledge of the future. Our making a decision in ignorance of what is Destiny no more deprives us of free will than acting in ignorance of the Past and of history deprives us of it. Knowledge of the future is like knowledge of history in reverse; mere knowledge does nothing to will.
If God causes everything, then he produces evil as well as good. We know that sickle cell anemia evolved for a specific reason in Africa, where it protected the natives from malaria, but it became a debilitating defect for those unfortunate enough to be brought to America in chains.
Satan causes evil, blasphemer. Satan, and the darker will of Man. The will to science, to atheism, to nihilism, to monkey-worship. Sickle cell anemia is an example of the treacherous genetic manipulations of Satan. In the shortage of angels from human cells, it was easy for him to accomplish. But this triumph shall be a short one; God will overcome him. And his servants, the Darwinists, too.
Creationists, however, are left with a profound moral dilemma with this and many other similar examples. Natural selection has no moral scruples, but creationists must defend a deity who creates a myriad of things that can have both good and evil effects.
I believe I’ve already refuted this particular imbecility. Satan has acquired temporary control of DNA due to the presence of angels in electrical currents. Soon, the End of Days will restore our genes to God. We shall again become perfect specimens of God’s will. For now, He has chosen to punish us for our iniquities by making us the playthings of Satan. This is not evil; this is justice.
Senator Brownback is a Roman Catholic and in a recent response to his column, Robert T. Miller, assistant professor at Villanova’s Law School, finds Brown- back’s position confusing. Miller also demonstrates that his views of the relation of faith and reason do not conform to Catholic tradition, established by St. Thomas Aquinas 700 years ago.
Okay… Going anywhere with that?
If good saint were alive today, he would protect reason from slavery and not allow it to be taken captive by faith. I’m also sure that he would embrace all of evolutionary theory, not just a minor portion of it.
“If Thomas Aquinas were alive today, he’d be a Satanist like me.” Profound.
If this article seems like it was a waste of time, that pretty much sums up the entirety of Darwinism. If you read the Origin of the Species, it is similarly dull, dreary, and perverse. Rife with Satan’s influence, Darwin speaks of slave-driving ants, of kissing finches, and of fondling Galapagos Turtles. 150 years later, his followers have little changed.