17
Chris Doyle
07/13/2011
8:04 am
Lizzie said “But, equally, it is possible that equivalent prejudices are impairing your reason, and blinding you to the scientific facts!”
As I explained in the post I linked to previously, ID proponents generally don’t bring prejudices to the table because we can take or leave evolution. In fact, we can even take or leave ID. Sure, we’d have to admit we were wrong about that particular scientific theory. But I can’t see how this would affect our worldview very much. We’d just end up agreeing with the Biologos crowd instead. So, we are free to go wherever the evidence leads, without prejudice.
Atheists, on the other hand are not free to go wherever the evidence leads if it spells an end to evolution. Nor can they embrace ID theory if the evidence leads there. Either outcome points to a Designer who might be the same Creator that everyone else believes in. That situation is completely unacceptable to atheism. It must be avoided, even if that means ignoring the appeals of reason and science.
Without their prejudice, atheists would be faced with the collapse of their worldview. You can’t equate that situation to ID proponents, Lizzie.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boy oh boy, have you got that backward. You IDiots are the ones who bring your prejudices to the table.
"In fact, we can even take or leave ID."
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!
"So, we are free to go wherever the evidence leads, without prejudice."
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!
"Nor can they embrace ID theory if the evidence leads there."
So, you're saying that the "evidence" doesn't lead there then? You said "if", so you're apparently hoping that some evidence that supports ID will turn up. Get used to waiting for nothing.
"Either outcome points to a Designer who might be the same Creator that everyone else believes in."
HUH? What? Everyone else? Which creator? Which designer? What outcomes? And why do you capitalize "Designer" and "Creator" in the middle of a sentence, but not "atheists"?
"Without their prejudice, atheists would be faced with the collapse of their worldview. You can’t equate that situation to ID proponents, Lizzie."
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And in another post, you barfed:
"When you talk about atheists being capable of leading a life with meaning and purpose (no doubt, you include with morality too), there is no logical or rational basis to support that position. Rather, we’re back to those prejudices: things which you must hold onto, despite the logical and rational basis to let them go."
I doubt that you've ever had a rational or logical thought in your entire life. And if you're so moral and christian, why do you attack atheists so often? Shouldn't you be a meek, kind, and forgiving person, with no malice toward anyone? What is the meaning and purpose of YOUR life, besides being a sanctimonious, hypocritical, bible-thumping blowhard?
