Re: The YEC's have won

At 10:50 AM 3/25/2005, John and Carol Burgeson wrote:
>Consolidating several comments:
>
>"""Social Security is founded on the principle, that, because some people
>
>won't save for retirement, all must be punished." -- FrankJ (imao.us)""
>
>That's a silly statement. One may hold various positions on SS without
>making silly statements.
>
>One thing about SS -- it is not and was not only saving for retirement.
>It is and was designed to provide a safety net for those who might be
>disabled.
>
>That being said, I find Bush's arguments that some sort of private
>accounts might make sense.

I don't understand this sentence.

> >> I don't underestimate the seriousness of the YEC problem but
>"consolidate their victory" language is counterproductive - besides being
>
>untrue. >>
>
>Why is it counterproductive to say what is so clearly a fact?

Again: what does this mean. That YEC is true?

> >> (If it were correct, YEC stuff would be legally taught as science
>in public schools, which is not the case.)>>

I don't understand this reasoning. Is everything taught in public schools
true? Is that the measurement of "truth"?

I do think anyway, that Christian school are a necessity. But even then:
it should be clear that even if a Christian says it, even if the majority
of Christians say it, it is therefor not "true."
I hope that it will not be so that a government, or even a community,
decides what is "Truth." is.

Jan de Koning.
Received on Fri Mar 25 16:00:09 2005