I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Monday, December 22, 2008

Choice of creationist to give inaugural invocation is condemned

The Darwinists are constantly crowing about popes, archbishops, ayatollahs, lubavitcher rebbes, witch doctors, sermons, encyclicals, fatwas, etc. that say that there is no conflict between evolution and religion. But now the hypocritical, intolerant Darwinists are trying to deny religious leaders complete freedom of expression about evolution by calling for discrimination against creationist religious leaders. Darwinists are condemning Obama's choice of a creationist pastor, Rick Warren, to deliver an invocation at Obama's inaugural ceremonies [1] [2] (the choice is also being criticized because of Warren's opposition to same-sex marriage). If Obama had chosen a Darwinist religious leader, would critics of evolution be complaining? I doubt it.

William Dembski said that theistic evolutionists are Intelligent Design's most implacable foes. Atheists don't have to "prove" that they believe in evolution -- it's expected of them. However, some theistic evolutionists feel the need to appease the Darwinist establishment by "proving" that they really believe in evolution, and they do so by persecuting critics of evolution theory. Ken Miller, the plaintiffs' lead expert witness at the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, is the poster child of such theistic evolutionists. Winston Churchill defined an "appeaser" as "one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." Why should religious people show support for Darwinism when the Darwinists show such intolerance for religious people who do not support Darwinism?

2 Comments:

Blogger Erin said...

Larry, do you see how boring you've made your blog by enabling (and then censoring using) comment moderation?

How long (not including this) has it been since someone has even /tried/ to comment?

Monday, December 22, 2008 10:35:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

>>>>>> Larry, do you see how boring you've made your blog by enabling (and then censoring using) comment moderation? <<<<<<<

Better to be a little "boring" than to have this blog cluttered up with worthless crap.

Some blogs use comment moderation, some blogs don't, and some blogs don't accept any comments. I hoped to get by without comment moderation, but I found that impossible because some trolls who see this blog as a big threat to dogma about evolution, the holocaust, etc. were determined to sabotage this blog.

Plus, Erin, you are a big hypocrite with a double standard -- you don't criticize the arbitrary censorship of other bloggers.

>>>>> How long (not including this) has it been since someone has even /tried/ to comment? <<<<<<

I get comments now and then. The important thing as that I am now getting no or fewer comments from trolls like yourself.

Tuesday, December 23, 2008 5:50:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home