Is there a God? What do YOU think???

[Biochemist]

It is very reasonable to suppose that the ID proponents have a Creationist agenda...Th best known, are Christian fundamentalists.

LG- I am trying to be explicit with terms. I don't think that Behe (one of the leading ID proponents) is either Fundamentalist or Creationist. Most Christians are neither of those. In fact even most evangelical Christians are neither of those.

[Fishteacher73]

Much (not all by any means) of the religious right has no opinion outside of what specific cause is hyped in the media or pushed by the leaders in that camp. Many are just fodder for the voting booths.

Amazingly, one thing that seemed to surprise me was that national polls of the Schaivo case sounded out a popular cry to leave them alone and allow the husband to make HIS choice. A far cry from the picture of a fundamentalist heartland that was being painted after the election..

[Biochemist]

Much (not all by any means) of the religious right has no opinion outside of what specific cause is hyped in the media... A far cry from the picture of a fundamentalist heartland that was being painted after the election..

Perhaps unsurprisingly, this did not surprise me at all. The media characterization of the "religious right" is strikingly inaccurate. People of faith (which I think means folks that attend church regularly) are extremely heterogeneous. Last I saw, the voting split was something like a 54/46% favoring Republicans. The 54% on the Republican side are mostly really moderate folks, and are pretty heterogeneous in representation of values. My opinion is that they are much more united in distrust of government that any specific moral issue. The certainly came out in the Schiavo case.

[infamous]

Much (not all by any means) of the religious right has no opinion outside of what specific cause is hyped in the media or pushed by the leaders in that camp. Many are just fodder for the voting booths.

Amazingly, one thing that seemed to surprise me was that national polls of the Schaivo case sounded out a popular cry to leave them alone and allow the husband to make HIS choice. A far cry from the picture of a fundamentalist heartland that was being painted after the election..

 

Fishteacher; or maybe the fundamentalist heartland has a clearer view of the value of these arguments.

[Fishteacher73]

I think that a good deal of the misconception comes about by ability of the religious right of all flavors to congeal to a single voice on many issues (or those that dissent are downplayed unless of a high profile). Many times the loudest voices are least educated (on both sides) and one tends to generalize. This causes a pretty homogeneous image from the outside. while there are some issues that one can concede as at least viable (abortion for example) there are others that just seem absurd ("family values" vs. gay rights). The propogation of such absurd notions I think taints any valid issues that some facets may have.

[Biochemist]

I think that a good deal of the misconception comes about by ability of the religious right of all flavors to congeal to a single voice on many issues... Many times the loudest voices are least educated (on both sides) and one tends to generalize.......The propogation of such absurd notions I think taints any valid issues that some facets may have.

Well said.

 

I recall sitting watching one of the talking head shows when a right-wing pastor sort actually said that Jesus would have voted Republican. Cringe.

 

I am not really sure that Jesus would even have voted, but I am sure he would not have been a partisan. Guys like that just convince the casual observer that Christians are nuts.

[infamous]

I think that a good deal of the misconception comes about by ability of the religious right of all flavors to congeal to a single voice on many issues (or those that dissent are downplayed unless of a high profile). Many times the loudest voices are least educated (on both sides) and one tends to generalize. This causes a pretty homogeneous image from the outside. while there are some issues that one can concede as at least viable (abortion for example) there are others that just seem absurd ("family values" vs. gay rights). The propogation of such absurd notions I think taints any valid issues that some facets may have.

 

Fishteacher; When you say "Many times the loudest voices are least educated" are you refering to the majority view regarding the right to die? Or are you refering to the fundamentalist right which you were surprised by. And if the majority is illequiped to satisfy your wordview, what are we to do with the institution of democracy?

[bumab]

I recall sitting watching one of the talking head shows when a right-wing pastor sort actually said that Jesus would have voted Republican. Cringe.

 

Ouch. It's funny... Billy Graham, hero of the religous "right," said he'd always been a democrat in his final sermon.

 

In my experience, the majority of Christians I know are very liberal, or at least usually a democratic voter. While everyone wants to be "non-partisan," if you want anything done, you usually vote along party lines. But that's an aside.

 

While I don't think the media has a liberal bias anymore (if anything, it's a conservative bias), the relgious right are often the target of the media's jokes. Since the media is concerned mainly with bring the extremes to the forefront, a well organized extreme like the conservative coalition is obviously a favorite target for derision. Biochemist is certainly right in stating the "religious right," as protrayed with extreme positions, prejudices, etc etc are the exceptions, not the rule. While more then 50% of Christians may vote republican (if not much more then 50%), the majority certainly don't hold the extremely conservative positions that we see on TV.

 

Christians... the "great red threat" of today... :) .....silly

[Fishteacher73]

Fishteacher; When you say "Many times the loudest voices are least educated" are you refering to the majority view regarding the right to die? Or are you refering to the fundamentalist right which you were surprised by. And if the majority is illequiped to satisfy your wordview, what are we to do with the institution of democracy?

 

 

What I was saying that the media tends to gravitate towards the extremes for illustrations and often they are so biased and unfounded that it comes off as absurd.

To think that the majority has a valid idea of the real world I feel is a grave mistake. Many do not question what they are told nor do they delve into viewpoints other than their own. I would venture to say that at least 50% of the US population has no real understanding of the Constitution (And even higher in today's youth). I think that you would amaze the average citizen if you explained to them that the US is not a true democracy (In many aspects). This very fact was why Jefferson wanted an electoral college, he felt the average citizen was NOT equiped to make these types of decisions (It was also supposed to counter the emerging concept of political parties; which Washington warned against as well).

 

Granted this is not the ideal situation, but sadly this is how it is. I feel that education is the stongest tool available (I am a teacher) and that this trend is concievably reversable. It is an uphill battle and by no means an easy one at that.

[Biochemist]

Ouch. It's funny... Billy Graham, hero of the religous "right," said he'd always been a democrat in his final sermon.

Great example.

 

While I don't think the media has a liberal bias anymore (if anything, it's a conservative bias), the relgious right are often the target of the media's jokes.

Well, the traditional national media (New York Times, LA Times, network news, PBS) do lean left. Cable and radio mostly lean right, with the notable exception of CNN.

 

I think overall, we have pretty good balance now, but not on any single outlet.

 

This might be worth its own thread.

[Fishteacher73]

Well, the traditional national media (New York Times, LA Times, network news, PBS) do lean left. Cable and radio mostly lean right, with the notable exception of CNN.

 

I think overall, we have pretty good balance now, but not on any single outlet.

 

This might be worth its own thread.

 

Excelent idea...Got it going in the social science forum.

[infamous]

What I was saying that the media tends to gravitate towards the extremes for illustrations and often they are so biased and unfounded that it comes off as absurd.

To think that the majority has a valid idea of the real world I feel is a grave mistake. Many do not question what they are told nor do they delve into viewpoints other than their own. I would venture to say that at least 50% of the US population has no real understanding of the Constitution (And even higher in today's youth). I think that you would amaze the average citizen if you explained to them that the US is not a true democracy (In many aspects). This very fact was why Jefferson wanted an electoral college, he felt the average citizen was NOT equiped to make these types of decisions (It was also supposed to counter the emerging concept of political parties; which Washington warned against as well).

 

Granted this is not the ideal situation, but sadly this is how it is. I feel that education is the stongest tool available (I am a teacher) and that this trend is concievably reversable. It is an uphill battle and by no means an easy one at that.

Fishteacher; I must agree that education should be our top priority, but untill we reach this desired goal, in a democracy the majority must rule. I also agree that America has a way to go if it wishes to become a true democracy, but untill then, the rule of law and the collective desires of "we the people" should dictate policy. I understand that there needs to be much work done to achieve this, even so I believe that America has a good chance to attain unto these lofty ideals.

[DEIOLOGIST]

"Hmmm. It is conceivable that God was thinking about characteristics other than DNA overlap when He (according to the famous story) imbued man with some of His characteristics. Chimps do indeed have 98% of our DNA. You might note that they don't have 98% of the world's capital assets, literature, music compositiion, art history or Nobel prizes. I am not sure that the high DNA fraction makes them really peers.

 

Further, I suspect that our DNA overlap with God is relatively low, although arguably it was higher at a particular point in history. I suspect DNA phenotype and genotype were not the characteristics He was talking about."

 

Oh my God Biochemist, DNA overlap with God -that is blasphemous. God is the creator not the created. God is not made up of DNA. You are confusing the created with the creator. That is like confusing Edison with the light bulb. If God were anything like us nothing would be here.

 

We are made up according to a DNA program. We do not have God's eternity. God is made up of the unified natural laws that direct the four natural forces. God has infinite power and has an infinitely superior consciousness to us.

 

It is the consciousness of God that holds your atoms together. The consciousness of God created, explains and holds together all of reality. God's power is infinitely above human ability. For example, understanding E=MC^2 Einstein was able to decipher God's actual law regarding mass and energy. This knowledge gave man the power of atomic energy. Einstein did not make up E=MC^2 God did. We have no power at all unless we obey Gods laws. Paraphrasing Francis Bacon "To master nature you must obey God's laws ." God does not think like us, act like us or look like us. Without obeying God's laws -- the laws of nature -- we have no power at all.

 

Chimps did not master science or capitalism YET. If they evolved another 8 million years in our direction they could equal us. If we evolve another 80 million years, or several billion years, could we ever transform into the unified natural laws and become God? HELL NO. Chimps can turn into human like creatures but humans cannot turn into the unified natural laws.

[Biochemist]

Oh my God Biochemist, DNA overlap with God -that is blasphemous. God is the creator not the created.

This was intended as a good humored reference to Jesus.

It is the consciousness of God that holds your atoms together.

Hmmmm. That is actually Biblically consistent, although I rarely hear anyone take that position.

We have no power at all unless we obey Gods laws.

This does not appear to be entirely true, although I suspect you were being a little hyperbolic. Sticking with the God of the Bible (for a moment), He often gives folks province to do as they please for a period of time.

Chimps did not master science or capitalism YET. If they evolved another 8 million years in our direction they could equal us.

Some folks think they could be legislators in Washington with their current skillset.

If we evolve another 80 million years, or several billion years, could we ever transform into the unified natural laws and become God?

Probably not, but I have to admit that I am hoping for a decrease in sleep requirements, because there is so much good stuff to read.

[Queso]

Probably not, but I have to admit that I am hoping for a decrease in sleep requirements, because there is so much good stoff to read.

 

seriously...don't we sleep for 1/3 our life?

ever since i heard those statistics i have stayed up late, tried to get up as early as i could. but then it occured to me that i'll probably die sooner...balance in life is weird like that. so then i stopped really caring.

[Freethinker]

It is the consciousness of God that holds your atoms together.

OK, so you lack an understanding of Quantum Mechanics,

Chimps did not master science or capitalism YET. If they evolved another 8 million years in our direction they could equal us...Chimps can turn into human like creatures but humans cannot turn into the unified natural laws.

Just as you obviously lack an understanding of Evolution.

 

HINT: Chimps and humans evolved simultaneously, from a common ancestor. NEITHER existed "8 million years" ago. We are NOT an advanced evolutionary form of chimps.

[C1ay]

God is the creator not the created.

 

Nope. I think it's the other way around. Man created God to explain all of that stuff he couldn't figure out.