God moves in malicious ways

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Free Thinker, May 4, 2012.

  1. remember the thread about thinking will set you free from religion. this is the kind of thinking that should set creationists free:

    Cholera is an ugly little beast loaded with all kinds of nasty optimizations to kill human beings. Read this post for a nice summary of all the gory details, and then after explaining all the specific elements of the cholera toxin, asks this plangent question:

    How would a Creationist or I.D. advocate explain all of this? They don’t believe that bacteria can develop significant new adaptations, so they’d have to attribute all these changes to recent surreptitious tinkering by an Intelligent Designer (who is presumably still tinkering with cholera bacteria to make it look like they’re evolving, of course). For the sake of argument, let’s assume for a minute that this unlikely explanation is true. If so, we could deduce at least three things about the Intelligent Designer (possibly more):

    1) The Intelligent Designer does not like humans. (Why else would s/he/it design lethal pathogens?)

    2) The Intelligent Designer is tricking us by surreptitiously intervening in a way that makes it look like bacteria are evolving in order to fool us.

    3) The Intelligent Designer is not very smart. If you were an all-powerful Intelligent Designer that wanted to make bacteria that would kill lots of humans, you could do a much better job, because cholera bacteria don’t survive very well in highly acidic conditions. The vast majority of the cholera bacteria you ingest when you drink contaminated water will perish in your stomach acid. From an evolutionary perspective this makes perfect sense, because we know that cholera became a killer through a blind process of evolution by natural selection. From a Creationist or I.D. perspective, however, it makes no sense at all. Indeed, the only way a Creationist or I.D. advocate can explain cholera is to shrug and say that “God moves in mysterious ways”, which is just dodging the question altogether.
    Some recognize the problem. I’ll recommend (!) Michael Behe’s book, The Edge of Evolution, which isn’t very good science but at least he comes right up to this problem of the parasites and nasty-man killing nature of Nature, and comes right out and says it: his Intelligent Designer had to have gone in to specifically engineer every brutal feature of every hostile microbe and protist. Further, his Designer is pursuing an ongoing project, and is intentionally introducing almost every significant set of mutations to make pathogens more lethal right now.



    There is no shortcut to intellectual honesty. Atheism requires sacrifice, in that you sacrifice the illusion of immortality and the sense of transcendent purpose. But, religion requires the sacrifice of critical thinking, self determination, your time, your money, and logic. (Kate)
  2. Catholics: critical thinkers.

    Judges and justicesSamuel Alito[27] – Associate Justice of the Supreme Court (2006 – present)
    Anthony Kennedy[28] – Associate Justice of the Supreme Court (1988 – present)
    William H. Pryor, Jr., Associate Justice of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (2004–present), Attorney General of Alabama (1997–2004)
    John Roberts[29] – Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (2005 – present)
    Antonin Scalia[30] – Associate Justice of the Supreme Court (1986 – present)
    Sonia Sotomayor[31] – Associate Justice of the Supreme Court (2009 – present)
    Clarence Thomas[32] – Associate Justice of the Supreme Court (1991 – present)
  3. Lucrum


    You also get to assume there is no Hell.
  4. interesting considering the fact that if the question "does god exist based on the evidence" came before the court they would have to rule that the answer is no.
    recently the court ruled that it is not illegal to ask god to harm someone else because there is no one who will actually do harm.

    it just proves even judges suffer from cognitive dissonance
  5. Quite simply the creator is not bound by your morals (or perspective) GET OVER IT.

    To bitch at us about it is rather useless.
  6. To evangelize about some ephemeral undefine-able 'old school' father figure that dozens of civilizations deified 20+ centuries ago (and at least another 80 centuries before that) is akin to burying one's head in the sand--and blows my mind!

    Ancient mythology is a 'bitch'--eh?

    We in the west don't think much about Eastern Mythology. It really doesn't matter if one is atheist or orthodox religious--shouldn't be how we define ourselves nor what we base our lifestyle/behaviors/cultural stuff on.

    I believe once you are an adult you should honor your own personality and urges--stay in the now. Blaze a new path rather than looking back.


    Vice-chancellor Hedvig Von Dikkeman V
  7. i see the article was a little bit too deep for you to grasp but i take it you are conceding that your god has no morals.
  8. I'm not having problems with your stupid cut n paste story, you simply fail to realize judging the Creator by our standards is an inappropriate one.
  9. what standard should you judge him on,if he exists? would you vote for a person who created pathogens that killed people?
  10. Irrelevant question we don't appear to have a direct vote on the creator nor the nature of the universe: GROW UP.
    #10     May 4, 2012