[_ Old Earth _] Are there consequences to believeing in evolution?

[GojuBrian]

Are there consequences to believeing in evolution?

 

[Guest]

Are there consequences to believeing in evolution?

Yes. A better question, what are those consequences?

 

[GojuBrian]

Are there consequences to believeing in evolution?

Yes. A better question, what are those consequences?

Yes, that is a better question. I believe we can look at the world around us, full of strife, and clearly see the consequences.

 

[lordkalvan]

Are there consequences to believeing in evolution?

Yes. A better question, what are those consequences?

Yes, that is a better question. I believe we can look at the world around us, full of strife, and clearly see the consequences.

I presume that what you are referring to is the theory of evolution. Was the world free of strife before the development of the theory of evolution? Strife is not a consequence of evolutionary theory; it is a consequence of the structure of human society.

 

[GojuBrian]

I'm talking about the social issues.

Why do evolutionists marry?

 

[Barbarian]

I'm talking about the social issues.

Why do evolutionists marry?

Most of us are Christians. That's what we do. But I think a lot of atheists believe marriage is a good thing, too. The last data from the Barna group shows atheists have lower divorce rates than evangelicals.

A recent study by the Barna Research Group throws extreme doubt on these estimates. Barna released the results of their poll about divorce on 1999-DEC-21. 1 They had interviewed 3,854 adults from the 48 contiguous states. The margin of error is ±2 percentage points. The survey found:
11% of the adult population is currently divorced.
25% of adults have had at least one divorce during their lifetime.
Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm

 

[Crying Rock]

The last data from the Barna group shows atheists have lower divorce rates than evangelicals.

I don't know the answer to this question, so perhaps someone can help me out: what is the difference between Christians and Atheists/ Agnostics when it comes to "living with someone" versus "marrying them" (same thing in my mind)? If you live with someone and it doesn't work out it's not counted as divorce. Is this a potential source of bias?

 

[Barbarian]

I don't know the answer to this question, so perhaps someone can help me out: what is the difference between Christians and Atheists/ Agnostics when it comes to "living with someone" versus "marrying them" (same thing in my mind)? If you live with someone and it doesn't work out it's not counted as divorce. Is this a potential source of bias?

Hard to say. Barna only counted married people. Atheists who do marry, tend to stay married. Almost as much as Catholics. Why evangelicals have such a high divorce rate is unclear.

 

[GojuBrian]

I don't know the answer to this question, so perhaps someone can help me out: what is the difference between Christians and Atheists/ Agnostics when it comes to "living with someone" versus "marrying them" (same thing in my mind)? If you live with someone and it doesn't work out it's not counted as divorce. Is this a potential source of bias?

Hard to say. Barna only counted married people. Atheists who do marry, tend to stay married. Almost as much as Catholics. Why evangelicals have such a high divorce rate is unclear.

LOL! How is it unclear? Just because someone claims to be evangelical does not mean they are,clearly. :D

 

[Barbarian]

No true Scotsman, um?

Here's the numbers:

Barna report: Variation in divorce rates among Christian faith groups:
Denomination (in order of decreasing divorce rate)

% who have been divorced
Non-denominational ** 34%
Baptists 29%
Mainline Protestants 25%
Mormons 24%
Catholics 21%
Lutherans 21%

Variation in divorce rates by religion:
Religion % have been divorced
Jews 30%
Born-again Christians 27%
Other Christians 24%
Atheists, Agnostics 21%

Note that atheists do as well as Catholics or Lutherans. Remember, the Barna Group is made up of evangelicals. Some critics suggest that since income and educational level are important predictors of a stable marriage, that might account for the relatively high rate of divorce among evangelicals. But there is no data on that, as yet.

My personal observation is that 21% divorce rate comes out to about one in five, which is nothing to brag about. But one in three is even less acceptable.

 

[Gabe]

No true Scotsman, um?

:rolling You beat me to it.

 

[Crying Rock]

Note that atheists do as well as Catholics or Lutherans. Remember, the Barna Group is made up of evangelicals. Some critics suggest that since income and educational level are important predictors of a stable marriage, that might account for the relatively high rate of divorce among evangelicals. But there is no data on that, as yet.

I'm not trying to bash any particular belief system here. The divorce rate among the general population and Christians is probably not much different. I just wonder if the lower rates for Atheists/ Agnostics are due to semantics. A Christian that is significantly engaged with a particular church might be less likely to live with someone prior to marriage.

Thoughts?

 

[Barbarian]

You're suggesting living with someone first contributes to a solid marriage? I'm not sure, but I think I saw some data that suggested just the opposite.

At any rate, we can only draw conclusions about those who actually marry, as far as this study goes. And Catholics, Lutherans, and Atheists do a lot better than evangelicals in that regard. For Catholics, that's not so surprising, because they think marriage is final and forever. But Lutherans? Don't know. And I don't know why the rate is so high for evangelicals.

Maybe atheists have to be really, really committed if they bother to get married. I don't know. But I have to say keeping a marriage together is an admirable accomplishment.

 

[GojuBrian]

How serious are the consequences fro believing in evolution? Chpt 124 pg 377

More consequences for society hinge on the cosmogenic muth of evolution than on any other. Among them are the sovreignty of self, the sexual revolution,and the survivla of the fittest.

First, the supposed death of God in the ninteenth century ushered in an era in which humans proclaimed themselves sovreigns of the universe. Humanity's perception of autonomy led to sacrificing truth on the altar of subjectivism. Ethics and morals were no longer determined on the basis of objective standards but rather by the size and strength of the latest lobbying group. With no enduring reference point,social norms were reduced to mere matters of preference.
Furthermore, the evolutionary dogma saddled society with devastating consequences of the sexual revolution. We got rid of the Almighty and in return got adultery,abortion,and AIDS. Adultery has become commonplace as evolutionary man fixates on feelings rather than fidelity. Abortion has become epidemic as people embrace expediency over ethics. And AIDS has become pandemic as people clamor for condoms apart from commitment. Tragically, more people have died of AIDS than America has lost in all its wars combined. Despite the consequences, promiscuous sex continues to be glorified in the media,in movies, through music,and by Madison Avenue. Only one rule seems to endure:life has no rules.
Finally, evolutionism has popularized such racist clich'es as"survival of the fittest." In The Decent of Man, Darwin speculated " at some future period ,not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate,and replace, the savage races throughout the world." In addition, Darwin subtitled his magnum opus The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. Indeed, for evolution to succeed, it as crucial that the unfit die as that of the fittest survive. Nowhere were the far-reaching consequences of such cosmogenic mythology more evident than in the pseudoscience of eugenics. Eugenics hypothesized that the gene pool was being corrupted by the less fit genes of inferior people.As a result,segments of our society-including jews and blacks-were subjected to state-sanctioned strrilization. Thankfully eugenics has faded into the shadowy recesses of history for now. The tragic consequences of the evolutionary dogma that birthed it, however, are yet with us today.

The bible Answer Book by Hank Hanegraaff

 

[Barbarian]

If Hank has it right, then evangelicals would have the lowest divorce rates, not the highest.

So, his thesis is blindsided by reality from the start. Also, the 19th century was far more religious than the 18th, where licentiousness was widely practiced by the upper and middle classes.

 

[VaultZero4Me]

What a load of garbage that book seems to be.

I feel less educated from reading that excerpt.

TOE caused HIV?

 

[John]

ToE = HIV? i do not believe that. HIV was manufactured.

 

[coelacanth]

ToE = HIV? i do not believe that. HIV was manufactured.

What in the world would make you think it is manufactured?

 

[coelacanth]

How serious are the consequences fro believing in evolution? Chpt 124 pg 377

More consequences for society hinge on the cosmogenic muth of evolution than on any other. Among them are the sovreignty of self, the sexual revolution,and the survivla of the fittest.

First, the supposed death of God in the ninteenth century ushered in an era in which humans proclaimed themselves sovreigns of the universe. Humanity's perception of autonomy led to sacrificing truth on the altar of subjectivism. Ethics and morals were no longer determined on the basis of objective standards but rather by the size and strength of the latest lobbying group. With no enduring reference point,social norms were reduced to mere matters of preference.
Furthermore, the evolutionary dogma saddled society with devastating consequences of the sexual revolution. We got rid of the Almighty and in return got adultery,abortion,and AIDS. Adultery has become commonplace as evolutionary man fixates on feelings rather than fidelity. Abortion has become epidemic as people embrace expediency over ethics. And AIDS has become pandemic as people clamor for condoms apart from commitment. Tragically, more people have died of AIDS than America has lost in all its wars combined. Despite the consequences, promiscuous sex continues to be glorified in the media,in movies, through music,and by Madison Avenue. Only one rule seems to endure:life has no rules.
Finally, evolutionism has popularized such racist clich'es as"survival of the fittest." In The Decent of Man, Darwin speculated " at some future period ,not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate,and replace, the savage races throughout the world." In addition, Darwin subtitled his magnum opus The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. Indeed, for evolution to succeed, it as crucial that the unfit die as that of the fittest survive. Nowhere were the far-reaching consequences of such cosmogenic mythology more evident than in the pseudoscience of eugenics. Eugenics hypothesized that the gene pool was being corrupted by the less fit genes of inferior people.As a result,segments of our society-including jews and blacks-were subjected to state-sanctioned strrilization. Thankfully eugenics has faded into the shadowy recesses of history for now. The tragic consequences of the evolutionary dogma that birthed it, however, are yet with us today.

The bible Answer Book by Hank Hanegraaff

Wow, that is riddled with specious and unsupported assertions as well as logical fallacies. Furthermore, it doesn't show much understanding of history, morality, or science... I certainly hope that quote was originally accompanied by a better argument than what is evident there.

 

[John]

ToE = HIV? i do not believe that. HIV was manufactured.

What in the world would make you think it is manufactured?

I do not wish to derail too much, A new thread can be created if this drags on.

I believe in Robert Strecker's theory. Robert Strecker's theory is that HIV was formed from visna and BLV (Bovine Leukemia Virus) by the US in the 1970's after 30-40 years of work. The virus was supposedly tested on populations in Africa and was deliberately introduced into the US homosexual community through the hepatitis B vaccination program.

http://www.righto.com/theories/strecker.html