shawn

I for one believe that there are many philosophical meanings to this quote. How many different interpretations can you come up with? I am curious if anyone has given it a thought.

In other words I don't try to justify my behaviors by using philosophy. I try to maintain a balance of what would I like to happen to myself if the shoe were on the other foot kind of approach. It does not mean however that I am capable/incapable of being swayed in one direction or the other. I prefer balance even though I am imbalanced from time to time. Does anyone think that this is a good philosophy? I am only human and not a god.

Does anyone know what respect is? How it is earned? How it is lost? How it is used? Can anyone answer honestly these questions? Beware of how you answer. Other people will read this and your answers will determine how you get treated. I will answer these myself but after I have read the response of others. The reason being is too see if anyone understands what respect is. I will not disrespect any answers but beware my answers may appear disrespectful or contradictory but trust me my answers will be only directed to my own questions and not to anyone else's answers. I will wait the full four days at which time I will answer them myself and allow the answers to be voted on. I only wish to be fair and hopefully we all will learn about respect.

If the argument for evolution used by people is that they have seen the flu evolve into a new strain of flu therefore it is proof of macro-evolution because it is different then it's parent flu; is the same as a mother giving birth to a baby is also proof of macro-evolution because the baby looks different then it's mother. So every person is proof of macro-evolution? So no one is really human at all including evolutionists? So isn't a baby born with a disability also proof of de-evolution also?

So if people with disabilities are proof of de-evolution should we do what Hitler did and kill them to protect those that are not? That is what we are working towards isn't it? Trying to figure out who we should kill and to justify it by saying they are not evolved? Can no one else see this problem with believing in evolution?

It is my contention that uncontrolled superiority leads to ignorance. There appears to be a lot of this when superiority is left uncontrolled. Just because you can but never asking if you should.

I would like to know how people can think believing nothing created everything can be reached logically, scientifically or even sanely? I would like to know how you can think it is proved scientifically, logically or even reasonably?

Are there people out there that really believe a cake can be made with out a baker? Children can be born with out parents? Eggs before adults? How can you believe you can safely answer these questions and honestly say evolution did it and science can prove it?

I don't believe abortion should be legal and it has nothing to do with God. I find it to be murder. How is it that our government has passed a law to allow murder? Please try and convince me abortion is not murder plain and simple? How can people live with themselves after having murdered another being especially in such a brutal way and still feel their lives are better for having done it? I am not judging people nor do I wish to pull God into this and say what others have said. It is not my place to say those things. I do however have the right to question the validity of an argument that promotes legal murder and wish to know why would anyone want that to be legal?

What caused the singularity? Science says nothing caused the singularity. We say that God caused it. Scientists say nothing caused it. Science can't prove nothing caused nothing if it could it would be proving magic exists therefore it proves antiscience which we know is magic.

Science can't prove magic so if a singularity existed something caused it to be. To believe otherwise is not science. To believe otherwise is belief in magic.

Science can't prove nothing did something. Something caused the singularity. Scientist who believe nothing did believe in magic.

Then say because we claim He is not physical therefore science can't prove a nonphysical entity. Then claim that there is no God but we know the universe came from nothing;

How can science prove everything came from nothing and say no God when science is telling them nothing created everything and we say God is nonphysical which would be the nothing they are refering to that created everything therefore science/religion are correct just the beliefs conflict eachother. However if you look hard enough you can see which one is lying. Do you know which?

The bible is not evidence because its a book written by men and then quote books written by men and say its evidence?

How is a book evidence for anything other then evidence of a persons beliefs?

If evolution works based upon changes in the enviroment then the more drastic the change the greater change towards a viable life in the enviroment.

Then what organism is not prey to anything? They would have no predators if evolution is true. They would be the predator everything else would be food they would dominate every aspect of life. They would be smarter then the prey. They would go extinct because the balance would be in their favor. Its the same as wishing for all the money in the world. It would make money worthless just as evolution does it makes life worthless.

And the reason they grew wings to fly was to escape predators why don't all birds fly? Shouldn't they all if the reason for wings was to escape predators? Some obviously didn't need wings to escape cause they exist so why develope wings at all. They still get preyed upon?

According to an answer I received a computer is proof for evolution since its beginnings can be traced back to an abbacus. Is this true or should it be just a belief that needs a lot of faith?

I asked a question similar to this and had an answer that it is evolution because to create a life you have to start with nothing. Is this logical, scientific or magic?

I asked a question similar to this and had an answer that it is evolution because to create a life you have to start with nothing. Is this logical, scientific or magic?