Adam wrote: > It was all very amusing for awhile, until we figured out, hey, Chick is being serious....but even we heathen pretend-Catholics could be offended by him, and that was before we got to the tracts about heathens! Sigh. And we won't get into the things he writes about kindly old rabbis .... BTW, for those wondering, here's my personal disclaimer: I'm both an evolutionary biology student and an ultra-liberal Unitarian Universalist. I personally don't believe in the literal truth of supernatural things, but I accept them allegorically and understand that these beliefs are vitally important to many people. I grew up Catholic and about half of my relatives are at least moderately devout. I'm sorry if my use of terms such as "fundie" were offensive to anyone here, and will not use them on the newsgroup in the future (please e-slap me upside the head if I do). What I do find offensive is the use of lies and half-truths to promote any agendas, "religious" or otherwise. Jack Chick and many other prominent creationist spokespeople do exactly that. Also please note that I'm using the term "creationist" in a specific, and most American, way, meaning people who promote (among other things) the teaching of a literal interpretation of Genesis as fact in science classes. While I don't take supernatural explanations literally, I see absolutely no contradiction between believing in one or more deities and accepting that the universe, and humans, came to be by way of natural processes. The latter can be elucidated via the scientific method. The former cannot. Claiming that those two ideas are mutually exclusive makes for both poor science and poor theology. Julie
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:44 AM EST EST