Fact v. Fiction #2: Evolutionists claim that their battle against creation-science is primarily a "scientific" issue, not a constitutional question. But our treasured U. S. Constitution is written by persons and for persons. If man is an animal, the Constitution was written by animals and for animals. This preposterous conclusion destroys the Constitution. The Aguillard Humanists leave us with no Constitution and no constitutional rights of any kind if they allow us to teach only that man is an animal.
22 comments
It's a wonder that people this rigid in their thinking can even move! He puts humans in completely unique category, as if we could not possibly have anything in common with anything on this planet. You'd think that would make it difficult for us to eat anything, or for anything to eat us, or for us to have symbiotic relationships with other organisms (such as digestive bacteria in our intestines). He wants to think of us as pristine machines, unsullied by organic existence. Sorry, but there's something in the way of that interpretation: a slight matter of reality.
I second the Bizarre Creationist Assertion Award nomination. This one deserves at least a solid nomination, if not the award outright. After all, it IS an honor just to be nominated, right?
;^D
~David D.G.
We all know that the authors of the Constitution had the civilization of 'caninity' in mind.
Play dead now, Ginny. Good bitch.
It's a scientific and constitutional issue. And yes, humans are animals, including the writers of the US Constitution. Would you prefer a Constitution written by fungi for fungi?
Oh, wait, wouldn't that just make us the Mushroom Kingdom? At least the Mario Bros. would be able to save us if any turtles attacked.
1)The Theory of Evolution and it's continuing research violates no constitutional edicts.
2)The Constitution is written by men and are rules to govern men and the system of Laws that all citizens are to follow.
3) There is no Creation-Science, there is only myth and speculation, none of which has disproven any scientific field
4)The scientific field is, constitutionally, free of any religious interferance or obligations.
So everything you said up there is poorly thought out bullshit.
In the end doesn't this come down to one mindset?
:If it was written by men of Christian faith, it's good (like the KKK)
:If it was written as a document of people free of religious rule, it's bad (like the freeist parts of the world)
They honestly seem to not know weither something is good unless they're sure there's a commitment to Jesus expressed by the author. This explain the milage that Sarah Palin, Perry and Santorum have achieved despite all being total idiots.
Fact vs Fiction: I wasn't even aware that there was a battle between the fact of evolution and the fiction of creationism, before I found this page five years ago.
The treasured U.S. Constitution was written by men and for men. Since then, women have been "upgraded" from property to (almost) equal human beings.
The fact that humans are animals is of little or no importance in the legal sphere, which is written by the animal Homo Sapiens and concerns the animal Homo Sapiens.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.