re: #201 Right Brain

I’m unclear why “being a creationist” is an issue running for public office? Why would their conclusions about 19th century zoology be a factor in administering social security or running the military? Its the natural selection people who are acting looney: Czar Cass Sunstein wants animals to have lawyers, philosopher Peter Singer likens animal liberation to women’s liberation and wonders aloud how animals can vote.

It’s an issue because creationist politicians like Bobby Jindal and Rick Perry can fuck up everyone’s childrens’ public school science education. And it’s bad enough that it damages the kids, but it also damages America.

[Link: www.animal-rights-library.com…]

I find the creationists a bit tardy on scientific paradigm change but certainly much more stable than the zombies at PETA.

Just because one thinks that vomit nauseates doesn’t mean that rotting meat smells like roses.

And then or course there’s the problem of reproduction: creationists throughout the world reproduce and evolutionist throughout the world do not. So which is nature selecting for?

And don’t bore me challenging the last statement: 19 of the 20 countries with the lowest birthrates, a rate HALF of that needed to sustain a population, are in Western Europe.

Actually, that’s not nature selecting; it’s a memetic command that is inserted in religious faiths as a means of demographic warfare, to prompt its adherents to out-breed their competition. The religious denomination with by far the highest reproduction rate is Islam; by your logic you must think that they’re closest to the cosmic truth.