Science isn't about following the exact same method as everyone else, it's about the pursuit of knowledge and a better understanding of ourselves and the world around us.
Exactly.
And just because evolution is a theory like gravity, doesn't mean it holds as much weight (pun not intended). If I were to ask you on which theory you would risk your life (having a chance that one might fail you), would you choose gravity or evolution? Even further, would you bet your life on the evolution of the eye or on the concept that two objects (marbles) placed within an inch of each other in space would eventually attract one another even with other cosmic interference? Keep in mind what each proposes.
I think a good point to make with us Christians, though, is to ask the question: If you had the choice between supposed immortality through the efforts of men (some everlasting life rejuvenation process discovered) or guaranteed physical death and supposed immortality by believing in God - if you had to reject one or the other - which one would you choose?
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Second, nobody said that just because these things were theory that it makes them untrue, at least I didn't, I simply said that we need to stop teaching things that are mere theory as fact...I'm talking about things that have not or cannot be proven. You want to talk about evolution in school, fine, I don't care...but if you are going to do it in a science class then you need to make it fully known that evolution is not considered to be fact in the science community, just like global warming and the big bang theory. Teach science as science, religion as religion, and theory as theory, that's all I am saying...it is not the educational system's job to attempt to disprove religious views in favor of their own agenda.
Third, calm down some more, because your post was completely uncalled for...no I'm not going to report it, because I'm not that type of person, but you need to realize that what you just said is absolutely idiotic.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
...Is the Germ Theory REALLY a theory anymore? I mean...its kidna ben proven up the wazoo.
And Draenor is right, you need to take a chill pill, Evolution IS just a theory, though so is Intelligent Design, and it gets bashed into oblivion most of the time.
I think it's the objective of your past self to make you cringe.
Originally posted by Kuzzle *Edited to make the mods job easier*
First of all, you need to calm down.
Second, nobody said that just because these things were theory that it makes them untrue, at least I didn't, I simply said that we need to stop teaching things that are mere theory as fact...I'm talking about things that have not or cannot be proven. You want to talk about evolution in school, fine, I don't care...but if you are going to do it in a science class then you need to make it fully known that evolution is not considered to be fact in the science community, just like global warming and the big bang theory. Teach science as science, religion as religion, and theory as theory, that's all I am saying...it is not the educational system's job to attempt to disprove religious views in favor of their own agenda.
Third, calm down some more, because your post was completely uncalled for...no I'm not going to report it, because I'm not that type of person, but you need to realize that what you just said is absolutely idiotic.
Yeah, my post was rude. I got that. I don't think it was "idiotic", though.
It was basicly an overly-crass version of my thoughts. I was annoyed that I had to listen to a ten minute speech in Science class once where the teacher all but begged religious students not to get offended by a video we were watching. Frankly, it was disgusting. If people that supported science were as publicly anti-religion as many(Not: Not all) religious people are anti-science, we'd have all sorts of conflicts on our hands.
I predict that that will be a big war sometime in the future. Like, a World War... and science will, unfortuneately, almost assuredly lose. That is, if religious people can put aside their differences and band together properly.
Anyway, yeah, my last post was rude. I get that, but I won't apologize. Why? I don't know, it's not in my character, I guess. Plus, I still think I was right. Seriously, we need a science-minded president...
Originally posted by Gamewize ...Is the Germ Theory REALLY a theory anymore? I mean...its kidna ben proven up the wazoo. And Draenor is right, you need to take a chill pill, Evolution IS just a theory, though so is Intelligent Design, and it gets bashed into oblivion most of the time.
Exactly... Uh, just wondering, but when exactly does a theory get declared a law? Also, I wasn't saying that it was still a theory, because I honestly don't know, just citing an example of one that most people were against, and that only made it because the evidence was so overwhelming. Ew, vinegar...
... if it's taught at all... which it generally isn't in public schools. But I suppose that's fine on the part of human government. They can teach whatever they want. Let physical nations have their little monopolies over their brand of idealism, for we as Christians have our own ideals and will endeavor - God help us - to teach the truth. I speak, of course, for those who believe that God is a God of truth. Afterall, Christianity is a kingdom itself; it was the poor mistake of 'Christians' long ago to fight for this kingdom physically rather than spiritually.
When a religion such as Christianity can present to me any evidence of their belief that will stand up to scientific scrutiny, then I will consider what they have to say.
A fair amount to take in, but certainly not everything out there.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
where the teacher all but begged religious students not to get offended by a video we were watching
Lol. What was the video about?
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Originally posted by Adreal where the teacher all but begged religious students not to get offended by a video we were watching Lol. What was the video about?
It has gotten pethetic nowadays.. The teachers have to do this all the time because people are stupid.
Originally posted by Draenor Case in point: fetile stem cell research...the "reglious right" has attempted to put a stop to this, not because they are against scientific progress, but because it uses unborn fetuses to do, something considered by some to be unethical.
FYP. The religious right needs to stop being the moral police for this country.
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
It has gotten pethetic nowadays.. The teachers have to do this all the time because people are stupid.
Well, I don't particularly like being 'politically correct' (if that's the right term) to the extreme like the trend seems to be today. I mean, people are people - they're stronger than one might think (or else more stubborn than one would anticipate ). Personally, I've been blessed by not having to endure the endless apologies of teachers for allowing their own opinions to get out. If people are so insecure in their beliefs as to take offense at the first objection, they should do a little more research to either change their beliefs or reinforce them (wherever truth should lead them). I have noticed teachers side-step the issue though. Like one might add, "... if you believe that," or they might go the path of 'faith is good' and 'whatever you want to believe is alright by me.' ::shrug::
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather "Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
Originally posted by ConverseSC So basically, you threw your vote away saydur.
Okay, I think I get what you're saying reavo, but your complaint isn't really about religion at this point. I don't think anyone is against stem cell research because they're Christian directly. It's because they see it as murder, and they believe murder to be morally wrong. I'm sure there are atheist that feel the same way, although I haven't personally ever heard anything of the such.
I do believe that personal morals should be able to dictate what science can legally due though. I don't want any "Weapon X" programs going on.
Are you against the testing of new medicines on human beings? More than occasionally this testing can lead to death or long term problems. That's why the drug companies have participants sign a waver. If a drug company tests a new drug on a person (even with their consent) and they die, is that considered murder? If you say no because the person gave their consent, then how do you feel about assisted suicide?
These embryos that they use are going to be destroyed anyways. If they were to be used to save a million lives or more and one embryo had to be used (which, like I said was going to be destroyed anyway) then wasn't it worth it?
And if you don't think it is worth it, then let's say they do it anyways and find a cure for a disease you or one of your children develop. Are you going to refuse the treatment on moral grounds?
Originally posted by Draenor Case in point: fetile stem cell research...the "reglious right" has attempted to put a stop to this, not because they are against scientific progress, but because it uses unborn fetuses to do, something considered by some to be unethical.
FYP. The religious right needs to stop being the moral police for this country.
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
Unfortunately, somebody has to do it, and since liberals are too busy trying to let everyone know how big of a fuck up George Bush is.......
You take away all morality, all sense of right and wrong, what do you think you will have? Honestly, I would like to hear what you would think would happen to the world if we completely abandoned our sense of right and wrong. This is not sensationalism, this is not me saying that Christians are right because we believe in jesus, this is me asking you a legitimate question.
So where do we draw the line on what is ethical? Surely there has to be a line, otherwise science could do whatever it wanted in the name of science, something that I am not willing to sit by and let happen.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
No, somebody does not need to be the moral police. That is not the responsibility of ANY government. That is the most ignorant thing I have ever heard, seriously.
Originally posted by Draenor Case in point: fetile stem cell research...the "reglious right" has attempted to put a stop to this, not because they are against scientific progress, but because it uses unborn fetuses to do, something considered by some to be unethical.
FYP. The religious right needs to stop being the moral police for this country.
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
Unfortunately, somebody has to do it, and since liberals are too busy trying to let everyone know how big of a fuck up George Bush is.......
You take away all morality, all sense of right and wrong, what do you think you will have? Honestly, I would like to hear what you would think would happen to the world if we completely abandoned our sense of right and wrong. This is not sensationalism, this is not me saying that Christians are right because we believe in jesus, this is me asking you a legitimate question.
So where do we draw the line on what is ethical? Surely there has to be a line, otherwise science could do whatever it wanted in the name of science, something that I am not willing to sit by and let happen.
Eh, if morals were tossed out the window, scientists would be among the least of our concerns. However, it is absolutely the case that a line must be kept. Personally, I'm not sure religious groups are the best judge of where that line must be, but that is beside the point.
As far as stem cell research goes, I continue to be surprised that it recieves more criticism than for example abortion. Same basic objection, but in the first case, its saving lives, at the cost of a nearly microscopic ball of cells that would never have existed in the first place.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. Hemingway
Originally posted by Draenor Originally posted by RPGNerd Originally posted by Draenor Case in point: fetile stem cell research...the "reglious right" has attempted to put a stop to this, not because they are against scientific progress, but because it uses unborn fetuses to do, something considered by some to be unethical.
FYP. The religious right needs to stop being the moral police for this country.
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
Unfortunately, somebody has to do it, and since liberals are too busy trying to let everyone know how big of a fuck up George Bush is.......
You take away all morality, all sense of right and wrong, what do you think you will have? Honestly, I would like to hear what you would think would happen to the world if we completely abandoned our sense of right and wrong. This is not sensationalism, this is not me saying that Christians are right because we believe in jesus, this is me asking you a legitimate question.
So where do we draw the line on what is ethical? Surely there has to be a line, otherwise science could do whatever it wanted in the name of science, something that I am not willing to sit by and let happen.
And to answer your question, obviously the citizens of our country need morals, but it is not ANYBODY's responsibility to decide what those should be, except in the case of parents, because that IS their job.
Some would argue that it isn't the parent's job to instill morals either...it's the direction we are heading, sadly...Less parent involvement, more personal thought at an age where personal thought isn't developed or educated enough...but that's good for some, because young people are more vulnerable to believe the first thing that they hear, get em while they are young, eh Hitler Youth?
I don't think it's so much a matter or the religious right pushing its beliefs on others, it's more a matter of them objecting to something that they don't believe in...many groups do it, but christians are an easy target to go "look they are being poo heads!" simply because of the fact that they are christians.
I'm not sure what you mean about the stem cell research thing either though, abortion recieves far more criticism than stem cell research does...it's natural to occur that way though, since abortion came first, and embryonic stem cells come from dead fetuses...you can't have one without the other, but not vice versa.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Originally posted by Aelfinn Eh, if morals were tossed out the window, scientists would be among the least of our concerns. However, it is absolutely the case that a line must be kept. Personally, I'm not sure religious groups are the best judge of where that line must be, but that is beside the point. As far as stem cell research goes, I continue to be surprised that it recieves more criticism than for example abortion. Same basic objection, but in the first case, its saving lives, at the cost of a nearly microscopic ball of cells that would never have existed in the first place.
If morals are thrown out the window there wouldn't be a society.
And if scientists some how came to exist in a immoral world. People probably wouldn't exist either. We would have all gotten a healthy dose of some new weapon of some kind, and slid into extinction.
What's your Wu Name? Donovan --> Wu Name = Violent Knight Methane47 --> Wu Name = Thunderous Leader "Some people call me the walking plank, 'cuz any where you go... Death is right behind you.." <i>ME<i>
Originally posted by RPGNerd Originally posted by Draenor Originally posted by RPGNerd Originally posted by Draenor Case in point: fetile stem cell research...the "reglious right" has attempted to put a stop to this, not because they are against scientific progress, but because it uses unborn fetuses to do, something considered by some to be unethical.
FYP. The religious right needs to stop being the moral police for this country.
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
Unfortunately, somebody has to do it, and since liberals are too busy trying to let everyone know how big of a fuck up George Bush is.......
You take away all morality, all sense of right and wrong, what do you think you will have? Honestly, I would like to hear what you would think would happen to the world if we completely abandoned our sense of right and wrong. This is not sensationalism, this is not me saying that Christians are right because we believe in jesus, this is me asking you a legitimate question.
So where do we draw the line on what is ethical? Surely there has to be a line, otherwise science could do whatever it wanted in the name of science, something that I am not willing to sit by and let happen.
And to answer your question, obviously the citizens of our country need morals, but it is not ANYBODY's responsibility to decide what those should be, except in the case of parents, because that IS their job.
What is the job of the government then? If they come up with the laws, then it seems perfectly fine for them declare what's right and wrong. I mean, I'm not sure what it is that you want the government to do or represent. Basically, by your logic, it's not the government's place to decide that murder is wrong. As long as we're fine with it, then we can go on a killing spree for all you care. Now, of course you don't mean this, but that's exactly what your words convey.
The morals of the government are chosen by the people. The people vote government officials into office, who then appoint other officials and make laws based on their own morals. Vote for the guy whose morals you like. If the other guy wins, then more people like the other guys morals better, and he gets to be in control. This is how the 'democratic' part of the governmental system comes in.
The reason why Christian morals are the guiding morals of American society is because, and I'm sorry if this is a shock to any of you, but the US is a Christian country. The majority of americans are Christian, and therefore vote according to their Christian morals. This leads to officials with Christian morals, who will make Christian decisions.
Either way, I think we've thoroughly torn the original article to shreds. It's clearly just a thinly veiled political attack with very little if any facts to back it up at all.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Comments
Science defends itself.
Well said.
Science isn't about following the exact same method as everyone else, it's about the pursuit of knowledge and a better understanding of ourselves and the world around us.
Exactly.
And just because evolution is a theory like gravity, doesn't mean it holds as much weight (pun not intended). If I were to ask you on which theory you would risk your life (having a chance that one might fail you), would you choose gravity or evolution? Even further, would you bet your life on the evolution of the eye or on the concept that two objects (marbles) placed within an inch of each other in space would eventually attract one another even with other cosmic interference? Keep in mind what each proposes.
I think a good point to make with us Christians, though, is to ask the question: If you had the choice between supposed immortality through the efforts of men (some everlasting life rejuvenation process discovered) or guaranteed physical death and supposed immortality by believing in God - if you had to reject one or the other - which one would you choose?
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
First of all, you need to calm down.
Second, nobody said that just because these things were theory that it makes them untrue, at least I didn't, I simply said that we need to stop teaching things that are mere theory as fact...I'm talking about things that have not or cannot be proven. You want to talk about evolution in school, fine, I don't care...but if you are going to do it in a science class then you need to make it fully known that evolution is not considered to be fact in the science community, just like global warming and the big bang theory. Teach science as science, religion as religion, and theory as theory, that's all I am saying...it is not the educational system's job to attempt to disprove religious views in favor of their own agenda.
Third, calm down some more, because your post was completely uncalled for...no I'm not going to report it, because I'm not that type of person, but you need to realize that what you just said is absolutely idiotic.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
...Is the Germ Theory REALLY a theory anymore? I mean...its kidna ben proven up the wazoo.
And Draenor is right, you need to take a chill pill, Evolution IS just a theory, though so is Intelligent Design, and it gets bashed into oblivion most of the time.
I think it's the objective of your past self to make you cringe.
First of all, you need to calm down.
Second, nobody said that just because these things were theory that it makes them untrue, at least I didn't, I simply said that we need to stop teaching things that are mere theory as fact...I'm talking about things that have not or cannot be proven. You want to talk about evolution in school, fine, I don't care...but if you are going to do it in a science class then you need to make it fully known that evolution is not considered to be fact in the science community, just like global warming and the big bang theory. Teach science as science, religion as religion, and theory as theory, that's all I am saying...it is not the educational system's job to attempt to disprove religious views in favor of their own agenda.
Third, calm down some more, because your post was completely uncalled for...no I'm not going to report it, because I'm not that type of person, but you need to realize that what you just said is absolutely idiotic.
Yeah, my post was rude. I got that. I don't think it was "idiotic", though.
It was basicly an overly-crass version of my thoughts. I was annoyed that I had to listen to a ten minute speech in Science class once where the teacher all but begged religious students not to get offended by a video we were watching. Frankly, it was disgusting. If people that supported science were as publicly anti-religion as many(Not: Not all) religious people are anti-science, we'd have all sorts of conflicts on our hands.
I predict that that will be a big war sometime in the future. Like, a World War... and science will, unfortuneately, almost assuredly lose. That is, if religious people can put aside their differences and band together properly.
Anyway, yeah, my last post was rude. I get that, but I won't apologize. Why? I don't know, it's not in my character, I guess. Plus, I still think I was right. Seriously, we need a science-minded president...
whereas Creationism is taught as just faith.
... if it's taught at all... which it generally isn't in public schools. But I suppose that's fine on the part of human government. They can teach whatever they want. Let physical nations have their little monopolies over their brand of idealism, for we as Christians have our own ideals and will endeavor - God help us - to teach the truth. I speak, of course, for those who believe that God is a God of truth. Afterall, Christianity is a kingdom itself; it was the poor mistake of 'Christians' long ago to fight for this kingdom physically rather than spiritually.
When a religion such as Christianity can present to me any evidence of their belief that will stand up to scientific scrutiny, then I will consider what they have to say.
A fair amount to take in, but certainly not everything out there.
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
where the teacher all but begged religious students not to get offended by a video we were watching
Lol. What was the video about?
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
FYP. The religious right needs to stop being the moral police for this country.
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
It has gotten pethetic nowadays.. The teachers have to do this all the time because people are stupid.
Well, I don't particularly like being 'politically correct' (if that's the right term) to the extreme like the trend seems to be today. I mean, people are people - they're stronger than one might think (or else more stubborn than one would anticipate
). Personally, I've been blessed by not having to endure the endless apologies of teachers for allowing their own opinions to get out. If people are so insecure in their beliefs as to take offense at the first objection, they should do a little more research to either change their beliefs or reinforce them (wherever truth should lead them). I have noticed teachers side-step the issue though. Like one might add, "... if you believe that," or they might go the path of 'faith is good' and 'whatever you want to believe is alright by me.' ::shrug::
"Put your foot where your mouth is." - Wisdom from my grandfather
"Paper or plastic? ... because I'm afraid I'll have to suffocate you unless you put this bag on your head..." - Ethnitrek
AC1: Wierding from Harvestgain
These embryos that they use are going to be destroyed anyways. If they were to be used to save a million lives or more and one embryo had to be used (which, like I said was going to be destroyed anyway) then wasn't it worth it?
And if you don't think it is worth it, then let's say they do it anyways and find a cure for a disease you or one of your children develop. Are you going to refuse the treatment on moral grounds?
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
Unfortunately, somebody has to do it, and since liberals are too busy trying to let everyone know how big of a fuck up George Bush is.......
You take away all morality, all sense of right and wrong, what do you think you will have? Honestly, I would like to hear what you would think would happen to the world if we completely abandoned our sense of right and wrong. This is not sensationalism, this is not me saying that Christians are right because we believe in jesus, this is me asking you a legitimate question.
So where do we draw the line on what is ethical? Surely there has to be a line, otherwise science could do whatever it wanted in the name of science, something that I am not willing to sit by and let happen.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
Unfortunately, somebody has to do it, and since liberals are too busy trying to let everyone know how big of a fuck up George Bush is.......
You take away all morality, all sense of right and wrong, what do you think you will have? Honestly, I would like to hear what you would think would happen to the world if we completely abandoned our sense of right and wrong. This is not sensationalism, this is not me saying that Christians are right because we believe in jesus, this is me asking you a legitimate question.
So where do we draw the line on what is ethical? Surely there has to be a line, otherwise science could do whatever it wanted in the name of science, something that I am not willing to sit by and let happen.
Eh, if morals were tossed out the window, scientists would be among the least of our concerns. However, it is absolutely the case that a line must be kept. Personally, I'm not sure religious groups are the best judge of where that line must be, but that is beside the point.
As far as stem cell research goes, I continue to be surprised that it recieves more criticism than for example abortion. Same basic objection, but in the first case, its saving lives, at the cost of a nearly microscopic ball of cells that would never have existed in the first place.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
Unfortunately, somebody has to do it, and since liberals are too busy trying to let everyone know how big of a fuck up George Bush is.......
You take away all morality, all sense of right and wrong, what do you think you will have? Honestly, I would like to hear what you would think would happen to the world if we completely abandoned our sense of right and wrong. This is not sensationalism, this is not me saying that Christians are right because we believe in jesus, this is me asking you a legitimate question.
So where do we draw the line on what is ethical? Surely there has to be a line, otherwise science could do whatever it wanted in the name of science, something that I am not willing to sit by and let happen.
And to answer your question, obviously the citizens of our country need morals, but it is not ANYBODY's responsibility to decide what those should be, except in the case of parents, because that IS their job.
Some would argue that it isn't the parent's job to instill morals either...it's the direction we are heading, sadly...Less parent involvement, more personal thought at an age where personal thought isn't developed or educated enough...but that's good for some, because young people are more vulnerable to believe the first thing that they hear, get em while they are young, eh Hitler Youth?
I don't think it's so much a matter or the religious right pushing its beliefs on others, it's more a matter of them objecting to something that they don't believe in...many groups do it, but christians are an easy target to go "look they are being poo heads!" simply because of the fact that they are christians.
I'm not sure what you mean about the stem cell research thing either though, abortion recieves far more criticism than stem cell research does...it's natural to occur that way though, since abortion came first, and embryonic stem cells come from dead fetuses...you can't have one without the other, but not vice versa.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
And if scientists some how came to exist in a immoral world. People probably wouldn't exist either. We would have all gotten a healthy dose of some new weapon of some kind, and slid into extinction.
What's your Wu Name?
Donovan --> Wu Name = Violent Knight
Methane47 --> Wu Name = Thunderous Leader
"Some people call me the walking plank, 'cuz any where you go... Death is right behind you.."
<i>ME<i>
And to the OP: You are 100% correct. Post of the F*cking Year.
Unfortunately, somebody has to do it, and since liberals are too busy trying to let everyone know how big of a fuck up George Bush is.......
You take away all morality, all sense of right and wrong, what do you think you will have? Honestly, I would like to hear what you would think would happen to the world if we completely abandoned our sense of right and wrong. This is not sensationalism, this is not me saying that Christians are right because we believe in jesus, this is me asking you a legitimate question.
So where do we draw the line on what is ethical? Surely there has to be a line, otherwise science could do whatever it wanted in the name of science, something that I am not willing to sit by and let happen.
And to answer your question, obviously the citizens of our country need morals, but it is not ANYBODY's responsibility to decide what those should be, except in the case of parents, because that IS their job.
What is the job of the government then? If they come up with the laws, then it seems perfectly fine for them declare what's right and wrong. I mean, I'm not sure what it is that you want the government to do or represent. Basically, by your logic, it's not the government's place to decide that murder is wrong. As long as we're fine with it, then we can go on a killing spree for all you care. Now, of course you don't mean this, but that's exactly what your words convey.
The morals of the government are chosen by the people. The people vote government officials into office, who then appoint other officials and make laws based on their own morals. Vote for the guy whose morals you like. If the other guy wins, then more people like the other guys morals better, and he gets to be in control. This is how the 'democratic' part of the governmental system comes in.
The reason why Christian morals are the guiding morals of American society is because, and I'm sorry if this is a shock to any of you, but the US is a Christian country. The majority of americans are Christian, and therefore vote according to their Christian morals. This leads to officials with Christian morals, who will make Christian decisions.
Either way, I think we've thoroughly torn the original article to shreds. It's clearly just a thinly veiled political attack with very little if any facts to back it up at all.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000