Quote:
Originally Posted by taiarain  mplltt, lots of assumptions about me. Patently false assumptions at that.
The question is, what kind of debate would there be if the creationism claptrap being pushed on our kids wasn't Christian.
BTW: How is a fabricated notion like male supremacy the natural reply to anything? |
I would like to apologize for assuming if it has been taken as such, I must object. Had there been a person who would try to refute this they would have taken your side had I not placed a disclaimer like: "The natural reply to this would be male supremacy, (please do not say that I made that up) I think that the universe could have no supreme being and has only people trying harder and harder to go further back in the history of all existence to have more of it to exist."
I know now that you are on the correct point insomuch I recind my theological assumption of your tastes. I am sorry. (where I said that if you wanted a theological answer...blah!) I believe that you are a well founded person who wishes only to question myths or possibilities.
NOW! to answer the claptrap!! I am glad and so very happy that you have brought this up. First I would like for you to read my post:
http://www.agnosticforums.com/evolut...schools-5.html . Now I want for you to imagine that there is a God and he does exist to be the answer of all things natural. If we were saying that there is a God and that he does exist to make the answer to all things and there was a female Goddess that were, if it be known, a part of God, what would our belief system include? Would she/he have to make decisions to hide the truth from the opposite sex? This would give rise to the male supreme and/or female supremicy I spoke of as the natural response. Would this also give rise to some sort of psychological disorder of God/Goddess proportions? Is it possible for God to hide something from himself? The interesting part of this would be the consistency that God has inherent within theological books, but they base their proof on the way they organize the books, so are books necessarily (and this has been heard before) the final truth of all things? So now, are both words and books flawed? THis makes me want to laugh at my own line of questioning, hence the quote by Voltaire: "You despise books; you whose lives are absorbed in the vanities of ambition, the pursuit of pleasure or indolence; but remember that all the known world, excepting only savage nations, is governed by books. " So we are to believe that would stregthen my point. The issue here is to only give a notion that to truly not be ruled by anyone else, one would have to
appreciate the opposite sex.