Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Capone Goes To JESUS CAMP!!

Hey, everyone. ”Moriarty” here. I’m going to be writing about this one and DELIVER US FROM EVIL together this weekend, but I’m excited to hear what Capone has to say about one of the more intense things I’ve seen in a theater all year:

Jesus Camp Hey, my lambs. Pastor Capone in Chicago here, with the most terrifying horror movie I’ve seen all year, in many years. It's not a film with otherworldly monsters or teens getting hacked to death or special effects or the walking undead. Oh, no. The movie that scared the pellets out of my anus and stole the breath out from my lungs the most in 2006 is a little documentary called Jesus Camp, an unexpected sucker-punch to the heart and soul of everything you believe about faith, children, and those we put our faith in to teach our children. I know and expect I’ll get a lot of talkback and e-mails on this film, and I’m not going to hide from it. You cannot keep emotions out of discussion of a film like this; it’s just not humanly possible. I pride myself on not being a “faith hater,” as some refer to those who will bash something with religious under- or overtones. There are simply too many people I know and who are close to me to take these things very serious, and I would not disrespect their beliefs. But the practices Jesus Camp reveals are deplorable and unforgivable. I won’t even knock the intentions of Evangelical ministries in general and Pastor Becky Fischer in particular. But her methods in training and fortifying young children (mostly preteens) in the ways and teachings of God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and George W. Bush is tantamount to child abuse and brainwashing. And you get to watch it unfold right before your horrified eyes. Co-directors Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady (who made the excellent The Boys of Baraka last year) were granted unlimited access to the practices of Pastor Becky both in her day-to-day work in the Midwest and as head of the (I’m not making this up) “Kids on Fire” summer camp in Devil’s Lake, North Dakota. Her clearly stated objective is to take back America for Christ by creating Christian soldiers in God’s Army out of young children. Her argument is that “our enemies’” children are being taught at a young age to shoot guns, build bombs, and commit acts of terror in the name of Allah. According to her, we as Americans need to combat this however we can by bringing God back to America and its government (the founding fathers be damned, I guess). The camp features confessions, speaking in tongues, writhing on the floor, as well as daylong lessons on abortion and how to combat the doctors that perform them, creationism, and missionary work. And that’s just the beginning. Nearly every lesson/performance ends with dozens of kids crying their eyes out, simply feeling the spirit of God in them. I’m not talking a tear or two here and there; I’m talking about outright bawling. But the lessons don’t stop at the camp. Jesus Camp also shows examples of some of the kids’ lives before going to camp. Pastor Becky even attacks Harry Potter with as much ferocity as she does when teaching the kids about the evils of Satan. According to the film, 75 percent of home-schooled kids are Evangelical Christians, and it shouldn’t surprise you that they are all being taught to dismiss evolution. What you may not be aware of is that they are also being taught that global warming doesn’t exist because scientists can’t prove it (these would be the same scientists who believe in evolution, I assume). If you think some of these teachings are politically motivated, you’d be one sharp tack. Perhaps the most soul-crushing moment in Jesus Camp occurs at the camp when the organizers bring out a life-size cardboard cutout of the George W. Bush. The kids don’t just look at it; they are told to worship it; they cower up next to it and lay hands on it. It is at this moment that you realize that many of these people don’t look at Bush as simply a political leader; he is there absolute religious leader, ordained from above to lead Americans into the Promised Land. The sole voice of dissention in the film belongs to Christian talk show host Mike Papantonio, who is deeply disturbed at the direction the country is going toward a more faith-based government. His exhausting interview with Pastor Becky must be heard to be believed. The other central figure in the film is a boy named Levi, who wears his hair in a rattail style and happens to deliver a mean sermon when asked. He’s a good kid whose beliefs are strong and uncompromised, and his mind and thoughts are still being formed, and he is being force fed doctrine day and night without any chance at making up his mind for himself about his path in life. It will break your heart to watch him. What struck me as odd about Jesus Camp is the use of ultra-spooky music couple with insert shots of tilted scarecrows poised ominously in the barren fields of North Dakota. Clearly the filmmakers are attempting (none to subtly) to demonize some of what we’re seeing, as if we need the extra encouragement to think that. So much of what is being taught in the camp and being preached by Pastor Becky and those like her boils down to “Us vs. Them,” whether the “Them” be Muslims or just those who don’t buy what they’re selling. In attempting to sell their brand of love and joy, they encourage hatred, prejudice, paranoia, and outright fear. Filmmakers Ewing and Grady have a ball of fire in their hands, or maybe it’s a ticking time bomb (choose your metaphor). Either way, this is dangerous filmmaking, and we need to see more of it. A double feature of this film and the 2005 documentary With God on Our Side should put the fear of God in you, folks. If they don’t, nothing will. Jesus save us. Amen. Capone
Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Sept. 29, 2006, 6:45 a.m. CST

    I hate all of you Carpenter worshipping subhumans

    by JimBelushi

    I mean the Carpenters sucked! Although Karen was kinda hot. And that song “Close to You” was pretty kickass.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 6:49 a.m. CST


    by BabatuFerguson

    thing I thought of when I heard that title was the Tenacious D song...

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 6:49 a.m. CST

    That's Jesus Ranch

    by JimBelushi


  • Sept. 29, 2006, 6:57 a.m. CST

    I shit when I First saw the Trailer.

    by Drworm2002

    At first I thought it was an Al-Qaida Doc. Scary Shit!!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:01 a.m. CST

    Pointed view

    by theBigE

    I haven't seen this yet, but a good friend did and said that it seemed awfully biased and slanted. Sure, most of the kids involved at this camp are probably too young for this stuff, but is sending a kid to this camp any worse than letting your child watch uncensored TV all day long with guidance? Hadn't heard about the "worshipping Bush" scene, however. I'm curious how much of this movie is in context.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:05 a.m. CST

    YAY! Here comes another political Talkback!

    by solartaco3

    Let the bitching begin!!!!!!!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:14 a.m. CST

    WITHOUT guidance

    by theBigE

    obviously, in my post above. Darn my typing skills. I'm supporting the campers. Bring on the flamers!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:19 a.m. CST

    Let's mock those we disagree with!

    by theBigE

    Let's criticize those with beliefs different than ours! Let's be afraid of those whose thoughts don't conform to our version of what's acceptable! Am I referring to the campers, or to the talkbackers who are abhorred by their behavior and beliefs? It goes both ways, people!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Pointed View

    by JimBelushi

    The answer is yes. Sending your kid to a camp where he is taught to respect religous violence and Bush worship is worse than letting him watch television.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:21 a.m. CST

    That's it...

    by Huffy_Henry

    I'm moving to Canada. Between crazy Muslims and crazy Christians, this place had gotten a little weird.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:25 a.m. CST


    by raw_bean

    ...difference is, Talkbackers are all mature grown-ups capable of reasonable deabte and making their own minds up, not impressionable immarture kids. Hehehe, knew I couldn't say that without keeping a straight face! :^)

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:28 a.m. CST

    Context schmontext

    by Anakin Whoopass

    I've only seen the trailer at, but regarding the filmmakers' bias, I don't think it matters if the film covers its subject honestly. If the filmmakers developed an opinion while covering this, it would be dishonest to hide it. Some ideas are so extreme, it's a distortion to present them neutrally. Viewers of any media have a responsibility to find context in their own life experience.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:32 a.m. CST

    Good Double Feature

    by nuetro

    Al Franken's movie and this one. It'll be great! Trust me on this.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:39 a.m. CST

    Religion is evil!

    by DerLanghaarige

    Any kind of it!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:40 a.m. CST

    Meh...I still bet The Descent is scarier...

    by The Wrong Guy

    Seriously...that film was all sorts of awesome.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:46 a.m. CST

    Oh dear!!

    by Kristian66

    What are you bloody Americans doing to our religion?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:48 a.m. CST

    I'm an evangelical Christian and a pastor, and...

    by zacdilone

    ...I can't wait to see this movie. People need to find out how insidious, how dangerous, and how out of touch with reality the Christian right really is. It's scary beyond belief. They have taken a faith that was meant to be built around compassion for the outcast and service to the "least of these" (the poor and the oppressed) and turned it into a power play of self-fulfillment and agenda pushing. I think every American should 1) see this film to recognize the danger, and 2) read Jim Wallis' "God's Politics" to understand that there are Christians out there who still get it.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:49 a.m. CST

    theBigE seems to be sticking up for the film

    by Bean_

    Before anyone was saying anything about it. The people who this doc is about have said it is not biased and portrays them in an acceptable light. If that light is that they are totally, completely insane and being brainwashed to fight a percieved war... then I think I can say, Jesus Camp is way, WAY WAY WAY worse than letting your kid watch "uncensored TV all day long with[out] guidance" Oh and the scene of the kids worshipping George W. Bush? Yeah it's in the trailer. These guys are dangerous, shouldn't brainwashing be illegal?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:51 a.m. CST

    George Bush Worship

    by antonphd

    They were praying for George Bush. They were 'worshiping' god while praying for the president. It's this thing where the bible says to pray for goverment officials to be good and fair. i've seen this for Clinton too. it's batshit crazy alright, but to be fair, it's not worshiping George Bush. Bush is a tool to them. not in the way he's a tool to us. oh. you know what i mean. :P

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:56 a.m. CST

    yeah, most christians are like anyone else

    by antonphd

    they go to their church on sunday and act like they are into it, but come monday, they are everyday joes. the crazies are like any other fanatics. they are the minority. but consider people at a concert going crazy. come monday they go back to work or school and they don't let any and every stranger catch of feel of their tits or ass. so, keep that in mind. it's a musical concert type feel to these church events. in fact... they are done just like concerts.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:58 a.m. CST

    Unplug the Matrix

    by stvnhthr

    Remember these kids must be learning lies because it differs from the accepted indoctrination you yourself received as a child. If you yourself are brainwashed you would never know it. For instance evolution is accepted as true because people you trusted at school taught you it was true. Teachers were told it was true by scientists they trusted. Scientists are taught to accept the work of other scientists at face value when it comes to evolution. Look at the facts of the Cambrian explosion, the fossil record, irreducible complexity, the biochemical structure, and the lack of evolutionary mechanisms. Examine any of these away from the lens of a pro-evolutionary biology book and you will be examining actual facts, if you only read the interpretation as presented by the pro evolutionary crowd, guess what-you’ve been indoctrinated. Learn to think for yourself;don’t believe blindly without examining the facts, heck even Christians are taught that one. ( Thess 5.21: " Test everything. Hold on to the good.")

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8 a.m. CST


    by richier123

    I'm a Christian, and at leatst he stuff I saw in the trailer was crazy! I think that obviously the camps that are this extreme are few and far between... which is why the filmmakers picked this one. I know that there are camps like this everywhere in the US, but none of them are to this "Bush-worshiping" extreme. Most of them are just like regular summer-camps, just with sermons and praying. NOW, I of course have to make one comment that will induce flaming, but oh well. Global warming is a total sham. If people would actually look at the scientific results of things over the LONG TERM, they will see that what is happening is what has always happened on Earth. And yes, it is scientific, and there is much evidence to support it. Unfortunately since it has turned into a political issue, no matter what either side says, it is near impossible to convince either side of the opposite case.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:07 a.m. CST

    Fanatic Christian Leaders

    by antonphd

    The biggest problem with these fanatic Christian 'leaders' like the ones who run this camp... is that they are mentally disturbed. and, i mean that literally. i grew up in this world of christian camp shit. the funny youth pastors are harmless and mean well. but these people like this crazy couple... they should be on medication for being fucking crazy. you wouldn't believe how many mentally disturbed people are 'leaders' in these types of churches. there are a lot of really stable and sincere christians and miniters. then there are people who are mentally disturbed and who lie about extreme religious experiences or who just live in a fantasy world where they think they talk to god when they are probably paranoid paraniod schizophrenic. i am not kidding. i've met and know people like this from all over the US. it's really disturbing. but. see. normal people just attend church. it's these crazy people who need a hobby and some medication that take it extreme and who don't know what the fuck they are talking about and who make a lot of noise. of course, normal people don't give two shits about who teaches their kids, so long as they can dump them at church and sleep in on sunday mornings, so, the crazy ass people take the job of 'teaching' the kiddos. and they teach them the biggest bunch of bullshit made up on the spot crap... you may not agree with the bible... but what these people teach is NOT the bible. i've met too many of these people who can't ever barely read and are responsible for 'teaching' children about god. me. i'm more scared about the percentage of kids being molested by these nutfucks. in Spokane, WA the most exciting church to take your kid had the girls doing strip teases for him on his office desk. that's the shit that is really scary to me. these people's bullshit gets forgotten when these kids grow up and live their own life and like me they just look back and cringe... except of course the ones who are really hurt by these type of crazy fucks.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:11 a.m. CST


    by JimBelushi

    You cannot be very intelligent if you don’t know the difference between being “taught” something and being “told” something. I can look at scientific evidence to see that species change over time and that those changes correspond to environmental factors. That is learning. Being told that there is a god who loves me but hates gays and democrats is not learning. It’s indoctrination. Science values inquiry and testing. Religion regards inquiry and introspection as blasphemy. It is the 21st century. You need to evolve. All religion has ever been is a way to explain the things that science couldn’t. Science has come a long way since the Middle Ages, you should too. Now all religion does is make the stupid and insecure feel better about living in a world that they are only marginally equipped to understand.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:23 a.m. CST

    Religious fanatics could bring this world to an end

    by Orionsangels

    Is anyone else scared?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:23 a.m. CST

    This saddens me...

    by sithlard

    Every time I see or hear about Christians being like this, it hurts. It hurts me because I call myself a Christian and here are these so-called "believers" who insert their own thoughts and beliefs into the Bible/Christianity. If they would just interpret the Bible normally, with humility, they'd find that most of what they're teaching these kids, including worshiping George W. Bush, is not Biblical. It's false idol worshipping, false teaching, and plain insanity. Most of the time these days, the the biggest thing turning people away from Christianity is Christians. So if there are people on this board who think that this is Christianity, they are looking in the wrong place. They do not represent what Christianity is supposed to be. The Bible is the best explanation for what Christianity is, and from what I'm hearing, this film just doesn't have it. Reading the words of Paul, Titus, Peter, etc., and, of course Jesus Himself, is a much better indicator of what Christianity is all about. I think you'll find that it is the exact opposite of what this "Jesus Camp" film teaches. Jesus, help these "Jesus Camp" people see Your light, and let not others be mislead by them. Amen.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:27 a.m. CST

    All hail Lord Xenu!!!

    by brycemonkey

    Blind faith and any form of extremism is bad for your health.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:31 a.m. CST

    I rather be a Jew in Iraq then a Jew in the US.

    by Drworm2002

    And yes I am Jewish

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:37 a.m. CST

    Yeah...this freaks out Christians too...

    by damagedinc

    You're going to have folks all over the place saying that this isn't right. I just want to clear that up. Most Christians will take issue with this, at least in the circles I run around in.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:43 a.m. CST

    Extremist Anything is scary.

    by Goatboy

    Doesn't matter whether it's Christian or Muslim, extremist behaviour taints the moderates who don't wish to foist their views upon the world shouting "THIS IS THE ONLY TRUTH!!!!". I know Christians and I know Muslims, neither group are glassy-eyed fanatics intent on domination. We need to be careful, these are polarising times when we are being sheperded into one camp or the other. On the left "JESUS", nice white folk who love flowers and puppies. On the right "ALLAH", dangerous darkies who want to rape your pets and eat your granny. Except that simplification is retarded and anybody in their right mind will scoff. Yet mainstream media is intent on forcing us into one or the other, casting steely-glances at Muslims whilst not reporting on extremist Christians firebombing abortion clinics and denouncing evolution. It's scary to take a step back and watch this in action. Not a day goes by where we're not told that immigrants want to live in your basement with their strange gods and terrorist ways, intent on converting your children to witchcraft and "Saytan" etc etc. Evolved, logical people are able to dissassociate from this rabid scaremongering and refuse to be indoctrinated to think "White Christians good, Ethnic Muslims evil". I'm appalled and saddened watching our society gradually being turned into frightened, door-locking racists who clutch our family to our chest and beg for the govmint to protect us from these evil ways. Fuck that, think for yourself. Oh, and I'm not all that interested in that Transformers movie. Does this make me a bad man?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:41 a.m. CST

    LOL, why us that Drworm2002?

    by CTU Mole

    I think people are freaking out about this a little mor ethan they need to. There have always been religious nut jobs in the US. There are most likely less now than in the past. This is hardly representative of the whole nation.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:47 a.m. CST


    by Jotham

    Al-Qaeda is not the representitive of mose Muslims. Most people know that....PLEASE don't assume that these wack jobs represent the billions of Christians out there

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:47 a.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    Jim you said "I can look at scientific evidence to see that species change over time and that those changes correspond to environmental factors." Have you done so? This would require you to do the field work, not simply pick up a science book and read what someone else has done. If you have I applaud you. Most simply read what evolutionists spoon feed them and regurigitate it as fact, they confuse this "fact"-vomitting for intelligence. I'm glad you are not just repeating what you learned in science class but you've actually taken the time to do the field work and visit a few fossil digs to come to your own conclusions.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:52 a.m. CST

    Kind of encouraged by this TB

    by Shigeru

    #1: CAPONE: About the GW worshipping scene... if you were paying attention, you would have seen that they are NOT worshipping GW. The leaders bring a cut-out of him so the young children can recognize him. And then they pray FOR him, not TO him. Which is biblical. I can't stand Bush, he's terrible, but I still pray for him (pray for your enemies). #2: I've seen this film, and while I don't subscribe to almost anything the campers/leaders portrayed do, it's NOT a good film. It's blatantly biased, mocking, poorly paced, and manipulatively edited. #3: PLEASE PEOPLE, this does not represent Christianity in its whole. Do not judge the belief or the religion or the man (Jesus of Nazareth) based on people like this!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:59 a.m. CST

    "Al-Qaeda is not the

    by jnickerson27

    "Al-Qaeda is not the representitive of mose Muslims. Most people know that....PLEASE don't assume that these wack jobs represent the billions of Christians out there." You are correct, they probably do not - but they do have the Presidents ear - and that is what is so frightening about this phenomenon, and I fear their influence will only continue to grow and prosper. And that is something those of us in the reality based community should fear and work to prevent. These people are truly the American Al Qaeda.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:02 a.m. CST

    Hey "stvnhthr" -- you're a dolt.

    by Huffy_Henry

    So your theory is that to really know anything, you can't just trust the contents of BOOKS. Hmmmm. What's that thing? That thing your religion is based on? That thing you wacky Christians base your denials regarding evolution on? You know, the thing about how somebody made the world in 7 days, with the sequel about a Jew who starts bringing people back from the dead and walking on water. Geez, what is it. It'll come to me. Oh yeah, the Bible. That's a book, isn't it?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:03 a.m. CST

    us against them

    by stvnhthr

    If Christians do draw distinctions between the saved and unsaved, this is not the same as an "us against them" mentality. But if the fact that Christians do make moral judgements angers you and causes you to write hateful things about Christians, guess what? You are now engaging in "Us vs. Them" thought patterns. Remember Christians are taught to pray for their enemies and not take the path of the sword. Also the fact this film was produced by a self proclaimed liberal agnostic feminist may make it a teensie weensie bit biased.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:05 a.m. CST

    "These people are truly the American Al Qaeda."

    by Shigeru

    You're stretching this pretty thin, don't you think? The evangelical movement has governmental influence and is fundamentalist and some might say fanatic. But to compare them to an organization who's sole purpose is to KILL PEOPLE in order to spread their religion... well, that's just retarded. When's the last time an evangelical housewife from Delaware blew up her local K-Mart?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:10 a.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    Exactly! The Bible teaches to live by faith, but not blind faith. Dozens of times God says "test this, see if it is true." The Bible is the only religous book that says, hey it is okay to doubt (remember Thomas, Moses, Abraham, Peter,Paul etc. all classic doubters) The Bible says read it and then try it out, if it doesn't work then it is false. God has no problem with people doing a background check or trying a little comparative shopping. The truth stands up to scrutiny suprisingly well.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:13 a.m. CST


    by JimBelushi

    Fundamentalists don’t go out and kill people personally, but they influence foreign policy that results in the demise of thousands of Muslims each day. George Bush prays before he invades countries and apparently his god gives him the go ahead. Israelis claim that god gave them the right to displace and kill Palestinians. The fundamentalists support Israel and Bush’s war on Muslims because they believe that Israel has to exist before the Rapture comes. It’s one big fucking crazy end of the world party for these freaks and only the small minded and insecure are invited.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:15 a.m. CST

    So Capone....

    by Fryman86

    I come here for movie news. That after all, is easily implied by the name of the website. So why is it that when I click on an article, I rarely get "Cool News", but usually get someone flapping their jaws about their own personal feelings and beliefs. I assume that this little article is a feeble attempt at a review. Am I correct in assuming this? I must assume that this was a review because it reads nothing like one. The only thing that we were told about the film is that you didn't like it, simply because you don't like christianity. Oh wow, great review. Your so talented, that you can simply state your personal views and opinions, and use it as a film review! Congratulations! In all actuality, you, as is the case with most of the AICN writers, have the litterary knowledge and writing skills of a third grader. Oh, and the whole thing about "worshipping" George Bush. From what you discribed, it seems as if they were simply praying for him. Everyone knows that the AICN staff is heavily, if not all, Liberal, so of course you don't like Bush, but don't try to pin this down as if they are worshipping him. This further proves your lack of journalistic integrity. Shame on you for trying to misrepresent something by taking it out of context! Prehaps you should actually know about the thing you are negatively portraying. Now, on to my argument. You as well as a large amount of the talkbackers, are simply bashing this becasue it seems as if it promotes christianity. You simply don't like it because it involves christianity. You curse and downgrade christianity and make claims that "christians don't accept other cultures or people", "christians judge others", "christians are brainwashing their children and force feeding them religion". Well let me ask you this. You make the claim that christians judge other people, and then talk about how stupid christians are. Are you not judging? Are you not doing the very same thing that you claim to be upset with christians for doing? You claim that christians brainwash their children and force feed them religion. Is it not true that every parent molds and shapes their childs mind, but that ultimately the child makes decisions for themselves? Can it not be said that by not being involved in religion, you are brainwashing your children? I'm sure you would make the argument that "If they wanted to, they could". Well then can't you flip that around and accept the fact that if a child doesn't want religion/believe in religion they don't have to have it? It works both ways my friend. My mother is not a christian but I am! Seems like the brainwashing didn't stick! Opinions are like butt holes, everyone has them, so how about posting an actual film review and save your opinions for your blog.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:19 a.m. CST

    "You're stretching this

    by jnickerson27

    "You're stretching this pretty thin, don't you think? The evangelical movement has governmental influence and is fundamentalist and some might say fanatic. But to compare them to an organization who's sole purpose is to KILL PEOPLE in order to spread their religion... well, that's just retarded. When's the last time an evangelical housewife from Delaware blew up her local K-Mart?" Ummm….those are their words not mine. The head of the summer camp went so far as to compare her “students” to Muslims that indoctrinate their children to kill in the name of Allah – that is a fact. Watch the trailer – read the reviews. Their religious and political philosophies sound strikingly similar to Al Qaeda's -there methodologies may be different - but the message sounds the same to these ears.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:23 a.m. CST


    by Shigeru

    Okay fair enough. But I believe that there is a large difference between a group of people that have some influence over a political party that puts a man in charge, and that man makes poor decisions about war, causing loss of life.... and getting up in the morning, loading your kalishnakov and firing into a crowd at the local market. The neo-cons were foaming at the mouth to invade Iraq before Bush ever used abortion to motive the evangelicals into helping him get enough votes to get into office. Run-on setence but does that make sense?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:21 a.m. CST

    Of course the Bible teaches blind faith, stvnhthr

    by CTU Mole

    Thart's all religion is. Science on the other hand, openly invites all attemts to discredit it. That what science is and it's the opposite of religion. Your trying to equate believing in something read in a textbook with something read in the Bible is absurd. Scientific theories such as evolution have been tested and have evidence to back it up. Creationism, not so much.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:27 a.m. CST


    by JimBelushi

    "christians don't accept other cultures or people", "christians judge others", "christians are brainwashing their children and force feeding them religion". Where did you get these quotes? Did we read two different reviews? I assumed that sense you put quotation marks around them they might be actual quotes from the article. They aren’t? You and your ilk are just a bunch of lying hypocrites? Wow, that’s really disappointing. Your beliefs are based on lies, bad history, and deception. You can't even avoid lying when tyring to defend your faith.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:29 a.m. CST


    by JimBelushi

    Obviously there is a difference between murder and giving political and monetary support to murder. I just don’t think that there is any kind of moral difference.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:33 a.m. CST


    by Shigeru

    I've seen the film. Have you? The head pastor lady does indeed describe islamic extremist camps where they train children to murder and kill. She does not go on to say that we must use this same training on our white children. I think she was making a point about how the children of today will influence the world of tomorrow, and how very valuable their upbringing is. These children or their parents were not forced to go to this camp. I would not raise my children in such an extremely fundamentalist state, but who am I to judge how these people live or raise their children. On one hand yes some might grow up to be right-wing nutjobs... but on the other hand is Rachel, the little girl in the film who simply, bravely, walks up to complete strangers and nervously tells them that God loves them and that she will pray for them and to have a nice day. I know, what a fucking terrible brainwashing that girl has endured...

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:35 a.m. CST


    by bollhatergc

    Xenu Camp: Kids for Scientology

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:34 a.m. CST

    Capone, you're making assumptions

    by Cheapskate

    Capone, I won't argue with your critique of the movie, because I agree that the politicizing of Christianity has a lot to answer for. I do however, want to point out a logical error in your review. I don't understand what "confessions, speaking in tongues, writhing on the floor, creationism, and missionary work, and bawling" has to do with encouraging "hatred, prejudice, paranoia, and outright fear." Ritual and hatred are not synonymous. Most of the things you listed as being repugnant to you are simply outward expressions of people who are struck by the beauty of a spiritual encounter, as anyone having a mystical experience of any world faith might undergo. These experiences usually do NOT lead to blowing up abortion clinics or burning science textbooks, but actually lead to having a greater appreciation for the life God gave you. I've never spoken in tongues and I don't believe the earth is 5000 years old, but I definitely have seen people find peace and joy in their lives from an encounter with the Holy Spirit.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:36 a.m. CST

    Saw the Trailer...

    by PietjePuk

    ...and it looked like the perfect Halloween movie: scary as shit! I'm so grateful I don't live in the U.S. and that I don't get confronted by things like this! Thank god for non-religion (I know, that sounds a bit weird...)

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:37 a.m. CST

    "Okay fair enough. But I

    by jnickerson27

    "Okay fair enough. But I believe that there is a large difference between a group of people that have some influence over a political party that puts a man in charge, and that man makes poor decisions about war, causing loss of life.... and getting up in the morning, loading your kalishnakov and firing into a crowd at the local market. The neo-cons were foaming at the mouth to invade Iraq before Bush ever used abortion to motive the evangelicals into helping him get enough votes to get into office. Run-on setence but does that make sense?" I agree – my comparison is a bit hyperbolic – however – the threat posed by these types of movements can seem fairly innocuous at first, as did many of the political parties the eventually led to the Nazis, Al Qaeda, Maoists, etc. As and agnostic, I take offense to any group that is actively wishing and in some cases, acting, to bring about the end of the world. Especially when the President of the most powerful nation of the world happens to share their philosophy. Religion and politics never make good bedfellows. I also find it odd that these “Christians” are not on the front lines of the anti-war movement, but instead have aligned themselves with a President that is directly responsible for the deaths of untold numbers of innocent children and civilians – not to mention the US soldiers. Ask yourself – in all seriousness – would Jesus be backing the policies of GW – would he stand by as hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians die – do you think he would support the death penalty as the President does – or would he be working to stop these abuses of power? Oh, and lest I forget – where do you think Jesus would stand on the torture debate? Having been a victim at one time.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:41 a.m. CST

    Why I'm glad...

    by Tomaka

    I live in Canada. I only saw the trailer and already I scared out of my mind. I'm soooo happy my parents never got into the whole religious thing. Evolution and global warming are REAL!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:39 a.m. CST

    "rather be a Jew in Iraq then a Jew in the US"

    by m2298

    Ever ask an Iraqi Jew? (If you can find one, almost all left the country over the past 60 years).

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:42 a.m. CST


    by Shigeru

    Yeah I see your point. So if someone voted for Bush, and because Bush ordered this idiotic war, civilians were (assumedly unintentionally) killed... then the voter has murder on their conscience? I don't know... it's debatle. Thanks for being civil, btw.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:42 a.m. CST

    For those who think Christianity does not breed...

    by rbatty024

    the same kind of fanatacism as Islam, I have one name for you: Eric Robert Rudolph. You may remember him from his terrorist attack on Atlanta while they were hosting the Olympics as well as a string of abortion clinic bombings. Another example is the Ku Klux Klan. For many years they were the pre-eminent terrorist group in the United States. Another easy example is George Bush, who may not technically be a terrorist, did allow his faith to blind him enough so that he thought invading Iraq was a good idea. Recently, over three-thousand people a month are dying in Iraq. There are also many Christians who are not fanatics, and are decent people (just like there are plenty of decent Muslims), but extremes from any religion can create fanatics.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:42 a.m. CST

    I'm glad I'm English

    by Babyshamble

    the trailer scared the shit out of me

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:44 a.m. CST

    The Evangelical Movement is ALSO VERY divided.

    by BorinquenSon

    I am not an evangelical by any stretch of the imagination, but I do consider this kind of filmmaking biased by nature. There is a good article that was posted in time Magazine called "Does God Want You To Be Rich? " (,9171,1533448,00.html) That presents very clearly the divisions of Christianity (in this case fundamentalist Christians) are divided in this country. The same way that is it unfair to lump all Muslims into one group, based on the actions of a small minority of nuts, the Christian movement should get that same courtesy. -R

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:49 a.m. CST


    by JimBelushi

    I wasn’t implying that simply voting for Bush was the moral equivalent of murder. I do think that supporting Bush because he supports Israel at the expense of Muslim is morally reprehensible. The same goes for the invasion of Iraq. The fundamentalist and evangelical “Christians” put pressure on the American body politic to support Israel and fundamentalist agendas at the expense of the lives of poor brown people. That, in my estimation, is no better than terrorism.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:53 a.m. CST


    by Shigeru

    I agree with pretty much your whole post! Jesus would not endorse Bush, War, Torture, Intollerance, ect. Thankfully there are Christian movements out there that are concentrating on truly bringing good to the world. EG: helping the world's poorest nations, the hungry and the weak, the homeless, the abandoned, the diseased, ect ect. It makes me truly and deeply sad to know that death and war are being propogated in the name of the Prince of Peace. Man will forever distort things that are Good.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:53 a.m. CST

    Wow...triple and Quadruple Flamings..

    by WickedMonster

    ...all across the talkback. This is fun. Finally, I can just sit back and see all you guys defending and attacking religion, instead of me doing it. Ahh...this feels good. BTW, I got scared shitless when I saw the trailer. Have you guys ever thought that the Anti-Christ might be these people? They are being grown to be "God's Army", soldiers in the making. Right now, its just the mindset. Few years later, Weapons. A fundamentalist mindset with weapons is not a good thing. We have several examples in our time already. *shudder*

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:54 a.m. CST

    What about the Christians that blow up abortion clincs

    by FordPerfect

    Well what about them? I am not a practicing Christian but there are some that believe abortion is murder and will murder people at clinics because they are saving babies? How can murdering people that are "murdering their fetuses" be justified. How can you say they are murderers they must die, so I will murder them and a lot of other people? I am getting sick and fucking tired of religious groups getting all pissy with each other. It is like watching children fight over toys! Lets not offend this group or they will raise hell about it. It is free speech so deal with it. Religious groups need to stay out of politics and stick to what they now...RELIGION! So religious freaks accept other people’s opinion isn't acceptance in your book? Quit persecuting other people’s beliefs! Isn't there something in your book about "he who is without sin cast the first stone" I guess you all forgot about that didn't you? So all of fanatics that can't stand anything but your religion and take what your religion says way to seriously put your Jesus fish on your car to advertise your religion because your that snotty. Everyone can just quit being nagging pussies. I am only saying this because someone needs to say it.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10 a.m. CST

    Religious people who blow shit up and kill

    by antonphd

    The people blowing up abortion clinics are people who are insane and happen to find an outlet. I grew up in church and I won't ever go back, but, saying christian churches in the US cause people to blow up abortion clinics is like saying video games cause kids to kill other kids at school. those bombers and those kids at school were fucked up already. I went to church and it was relatively extreme but when we heard of abortion bombing I never once saw anyone in church react in any other way than horror and shock for the victims and the insanity of bombing anyone. After the dust cleared and it was brought up as a topic of discussion the most common feeling besides horror was utter embaressment or anger that these people did it in the name of god or goodness. these crazy fucks DO NOT represent anyone but themselves and their own insanity.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:59 a.m. CST

    Keep Religion out of Poltics

    by FordPerfect

    Religion seperate from state. I thought that was the rule right? Well keep it that way, make decisions that regard politics in politics and don't make political decision with relgion being a key factor. If you do that no one will win, we will all lose. Just look at the middle east! They can't get their religions behind them.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:01 a.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    Evolution is theory, not a law, because it has not been definitively proven, but it is still widely accepted within the scientific community as a very valid and likely possibility. To say you cannot trust anything that you haven’t done yourself is patently absurd. It’s common practice for scientists to “check each other’s work” as it were, and numerous scientists over the years, working on unrelated projects, have all come to the same conclusion. The fossil record does not allow Evolution to be proven 100% but there is ample evidence to support Evolution as a theory and nothing has ever been recorded to disprove it. That is what is taught in schools – nothing more. However, what is your alternative? That the earth is flat, it’s the center of the universe, it’s 10,000 years old, was created in 7 days, and everything else is just a global conspiracy by thousands of scientists throughout history to dupe the public into believing in biological explanations rather than an omnipotent, all-powerful, being in sky, who knows all, sees all, and loves us unconditionally? Evolution cannot be proven 100% so your better alternative is to believe in something that cannot be proven at all – a big fat 0%. Just face it, organized religion is a sham and has always been at odds with scientific and civic advancement. Its development is two-fold – first, the need of a highly-evolved and intelligent species to cope with death and second, as a control mechanism so that the elite few can maintain power. Throughout history, the vast majority of the world’s population has lived in poverty beneath the boot of the ruling elite. How do you keep them in line? You tell them the more miserable they are in this life, they better they will be in the next life. That’s exactly why more advanced, free, and wealthy cultures have drifted towards being more secular while organized religion has exploded in most third-world and oppressed countries. That’s not to say I don’t believe in a god of some sort, but to put so much faith in one particular completely unproven religion to the exclusion, degradation, fear, and hatred of all else is ridiculous. Thousands of years from now (if we don’t kill ourselves off), people will look at Christianity and Islam with the same quaint, historical attitude that we now regard Greek and Roman Mythology or the early worship of the moon goddess.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:05 a.m. CST

    Has Quint reviewed this yet?

    by OneintenMan

    That'd be awesome, we may even get some fundementalists picking a fight with him. What if Juggfuckler's a christian?! We'd be fuckled. Obviously.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:05 a.m. CST

    Has anyone seen the special on Abortion bombings on HBO

    by FordPerfect

    One city Opp, Alabama. There is crazy Abortion bomber supporter (Whom the FBI investigates and questions him during the taping) who put a billboard up outside of his house with aborted fetuses (Not Cher) all over it with the title Murder on it. That is FUCKING CRAZY!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:08 a.m. CST

    CTU Mole

    by stvnhthr

    You said, “Thart's all religion is. Science on the other hand, openly invites all attemts to discredit it.” Very interesting, could you please advise me on one instance where the problems with the evolutionary theory (and all educated evolutionist agree they exist) have been allowed to be taught? This is not pro-creationism, just simple truths like the fact body plans (the part of our genetic code which says what parts go where, what they do, and the shape they will have) are incredibly stable, that is for evolution to work the bodies structure would have to be able to be changed by the environment and then to genetically pass on those differences in the body plans. It is sort of like a model kit,even if you change what the pieces look like, but don’t alter the instruction sheet that comes with the model you either will not be able to assemble the model or the model will be structurally unstable. Were you taught this in school? Does evolution really encourage open debates about its many faults? My public school upbringing never covered this, and I was belittled by my biology teacher for having the audacity to point out the faults in the theories he was teaching. You also said “That what science is and it's the opposite of religion. Your trying to equate believing in something read in a textbook with something read in the Bible is absurd. Scientific theories such as evolution have been tested and have evidence to back it up. Creationism, not so much.” This is where you are mistaken, again the Bible teaches test to see it is true. The Bible states God created all of existence, but it does not require you to subscribe to the current description of Creationism advanced by some Christians. If you actually read the Genesis account you will find it does not contradict science, neither is it interested in explaining every detail of how it took place, almost as if God wanted us to explore our universe and discover some things for ourselves. You mistakenly equate Christianity with Creationism, they are not synonymous. The Bible says Christianity is true, it teaches if you don’t believe it, try it, study it, use all of your senses, heart, and mind to explore it and see if you find it lacking in evidence. Billions of Christians have done just that and said let our lives be the evidence, we may not get it right all the time, but God is real.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:09 a.m. CST

    to shigeru

    by jnickerson27

    And I would like to thank you for remaining civil as well. As to your question regarding the guilt of Bush voters – yes, I believe they bear a fair amount of responsibility for the way in which the war in Iraq has played out. Bush’s incompetence has been and was on full display prior to the 04 elections. I hate to say it, but Bush is the same moron he was on September 10th 2001. I agree the war on terror is a necessary evil, which is not to say the Iraq war is part of the war on terror, in reality it is a costly distraction, what I don’t agree with is that Bush and the rest of his cabinet are the right people for the job. And I hate to sound intellectually lazy, and this has become quite the cliché lately, but Bush’s innate intelligence does not engender much confidence. His press conferences performances are very sad displays of his intellectual prowess. His inability to articulate his ideas and policies is, to me, evidence of his lack of a deep understanding of these issues – at times it appears as though he really has no idea what he is talking about. His one redeeming value in the eyes of most of his supporters, and the republican supporters in general, is his tough stance regarding terrorism. His claim that he has protected us from further attacks ranges anywhere from 0 – 100% true – we just don’t know. What we do know, is how he handled the aftermath of hurricane Katrina – an event that he had prior warning of – ask yourself – what if in place of Katrina, the devestation wrought on New Orleans came by way of a suitcase nuke – an event in which we will receive zero prior warning. I submit to you that Katrina was our next terrorist attack, and what we can expect from his government in the tragic event that this ever comes to pass. Also – why are Christians actively trying to debunk global warming – shouldn’t they be incensed that we are destroying gods creation? No, these people are equivalent to the flat earth society – they are dispute global warming because they fear science. I offer this challenge to all devout Christians who share the views of those in this documentary. If you ever find yourself critically ill, please, forgo medical attention, stay home and pray for a cure to your illness, have real strength in your convictions – after all, what is medicine if not science? I apologize for the wall of text.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:17 a.m. CST

    Jesus Camp II: Electric Boogaloo

    by Read and Shut Up

    Religion causes assholes to fly planes into buildings. Religion fuels wars and hatred. Religion corrupts priests, popes and presidents. Here's an idea: be SPIRITUAL, not religious.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:16 a.m. CST

    Crazy Christians

    by filmicdrummer17

    The cold fact is that Christianity, like all religions, basically cries out for an experiential test. "Try it earnestly- see if it works for you." The majority of serious Christians despair over people rejecting their way NOT because they are intent on global domination (if they were, they'd, I don't know, say they were- like all the Islamic radicals they show on the news), but because they honestly just don't want people to suffer in Hell. Also, most Christians recognize that the seperation of church and state is necessary- history has shown what happens if that's not the case. Freedom of religion is a fundamental right in this country, as opposed to, say, China, and all Christians I know are grateful for it. But there's a growing feeling of embarassment in many Christian circles, because of the lampooning we (oops, there that slipped) get in the media almost daily. And all because of the actions of some real wackos who don't really know the bible well. And the idea of natural selection isn't a problem- that's been proven time and time again. We just still aren't on board with the whole "humans descended from monkeys" thing. But with the scientific odds of a Big Bang resulting in carbon-based microbes in an atmosphere completely inhospitable to them about the same as a tornado plowing through a junkyard and assembling a perfectly working Cessna jet, it may actually require LESS faith to believe in a God who just spoke and made it so.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:20 a.m. CST

    Blade: The Series = Cancelled?!

    by Get_Me_An_18-Man_Fire_Team_In_12_Hours

    Is you, or is you not, my baby?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:22 a.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    Bizarre, you ascribe to me almost every misconception ever used to characterize Christian beliefs on Creationism, though I never stated one. Belief in a flat earth?, please. I would like to extend a civil invitation to examine the facts without all the name calling, straw men arguments, and polarizing caricatures of beliefs. Read Michael Behe’s work “Darwin's Black Box” or “Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution is Wrong” by Jonathan Wells. I’m not telling you to throw out everything you believe, just have the scientific integrity to read educated opinions from both sides.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:24 a.m. CST


    by Shigeru

    Cheers! I'm at work so I should probably do work instead of posting all day but it sounds like you have a good idea of what's going on in the world. Peace, and God bless.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:38 a.m. CST

    Faith & Science

    by Cheapskate

    I don't want to sound like a radical anything, but you guys are way off base when you talk about the conflict between religion & science. It's a perpetuating deception that doesn't match the historical record. As when King_Midas put it, "Just face it, organized religion is a sham and has always been at odds with scientific and civic advancement." That is patently false and unresearched pop sterotyping. Anyone who has done serious tracking can see that Christianity was vital to the formation of science (shocker!). Science, if we define it most simply as the method whereby you verify or refute hypotheses through continued observation and testing, had its roots in the early medieval universities, which were created by Christian scholars to analyze and criticize academic works. For all their philosophy, the Greeks did not develop science because they thought the physical world was subordinate to the world of thought. It was the Christian belief that God created the world to be knowable that first led to scientific investigation. Isaac Newton himself said his research was to understand God's creation. And if you want more proof, a survey couple years ago revealed that 60% of scientists, ppl who work in the physical sciences not social sciences, claimed to believe in God. So much for the rift of science & faith. All this was well researched in Rodney Stark's book "For the Glory of God." Which is not an evangelical work but a dense academic study. Sorry for posting something other than my own opinion. Just wanted to throw that out there.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:40 a.m. CST

    Creationism and Missionary work! Oh my god!

    by Veraxus

    Hahahaha. I know what the film is about, and I know some/most of the people presented are batshit crazy - but are you seriously trying to demonize the practice of teaching one's kids about creationism and doing missionary work? lol. Yeah, everyone should be forced to teach their kids whatever the latest politically correct fad is, individual values and beliefs be damned. While global climate change is a documented fact, macroevolution is a highly debatable theory devoid of any evidence whatsoever... making about as religious a belief as creationism. But I digress. These people are crazy, but so is your review.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:42 a.m. CST


    by Knugen

    "...that is for evolution to work the bodies structure would have to be able to be changed by the environment and then to genetically pass on those differences in the body plans." Jesus Christ man, you haven't got a clue how evolution works. No wonder your teacher thought you were retarded. You also have no concept of scientific theory and methodology. You chastice others for studying books when all your arguments come from literary works. You call upon people of reason to empiricly test every scientific principle and theory when you yourself have no means to prove anything that you base your deluded beliefs on. Truly laughable.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:44 a.m. CST

    "History is a nightmare from which none of us can awake

    by captainalphabet

    Jung said that. History is all about people killing other people over beliefs. Our ability to believe is the one true tool we have that sets us above the animals. Religion is good, because in giving people a common belief system it brings them together. Religion becomes a problem when the primary ideology perverts to "we're right and everyone else is wrong, so LET's GO SHOW EM!" and lots of people die. Believe whatever you want but don't force it on others, if what you're pitching is right for them then they'll come around naturally. An unfortunate truth that comes out of this is that the notion of a universal system of spiritual belief seems almost completely ludicrous - the chances of everybody just agreeing one day is pretty unlikely. What happens next though, as the planet gets smaller and we all intermingle, the powers that be decide that we DO need a universal system, something we can all agree upon and devote ourselves to... and we end up with MONEY. Money is the one true god on this backwards as hell planet. Kids (here)are brainwashed into believing that the most worthwhile goals in life are freedom, security and (perhaps) power - and that money will bring all these things. The USA is at war all over the world for a lot of reasons, but a big one is the reality that WAR IS GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY. "Western kids die overseas, but many jobs are created! Fair enough, things balance, fewer seniors to worry about in a few decades. What about brown people? Oh they're a great untapped market. They'll buy all our shit once we straighten em out. What? They don't want our shit? they just want us to leave em alone, get off their 'holy land'? What's so holy about land? It's JUST DESERT! FUCK EM ALL, AND FUCK THEIR FALSE GODS! We're putting an airstrip on this land and lets see em try to stop us..." read a bit on Neuro-linguistic programming, then read about politics and advertising... we're all brinawashed into something. Just about everyone is a really 'nice' person - they just become something else once the world has had a shot messing them up. The thing about this film... it seems that children are being tought, among other things, to HATE. I thought Jesus was all about the love. Fryman86, that's the impression i got from this review:opinion, not at all that Capone "...didn't like it, simply because you don't like christianity. Oh wow, great review. Your so talented ... litterary knowledge and writing skills of a third grader." And for the love of fuck, the word is "YOU'RE". YOU ARE SO TALENTED. 'Your' is possessive. and 'litterary" isn't even a word. We all know what you meant, but because what you meant was to make fun of somebody else's linguistic skills, your barb is reversed and we all laugh at you. What grade are YOU in Fryman86?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:44 a.m. CST

    "Be Spiritual, not religious"

    by DarthSnoogans

    Which usually means creating your own pseudo-religion where you decide to follow the warm and fuzzy parts and ignore anything that bothers or challenges you. Oh, and evolution is not a's not even science. If it can't be tested, it isn't a theory. Evolution is more like a cross between bad science and religion, requiring you to assume its validity and then squeezing the data to fit inside it, much how many Creationists try to fit evolution into the Genesis story (which itself was never meant to be scientifically tested).

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:52 a.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    Thank you for ridiculing me. Unfortunately you would have to explain the error in my reasoning to be taken seriously. Remember we are discussing Evolution sometimes called macro evolution, not Natural Selection or Micro Evolution which when limited to their scientific descriptions are held to be true by pretty much everyone.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:55 a.m. CST

    Where's JIHADI CAMP?

    by Sir Loin

    For some reason, I don't think they have the balls to do that. C'mon you indies, show us what ya got.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:57 a.m. CST

    They need to go really old school to be real Xians and


    Bring back human sacrifice.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:07 a.m. CST

    Well said, antonphd

    by Captain Mal

    My father was the pastor of an independent, fundamentalist church for 20 years, and I grew up in this environment. I went to spiritual summer camps where people wept, danced, spoke in tongues--the works. We sang songs in Sunday school about being in the "army of God." We listened to Petra's "This Means War" album and Stryper's "Soldiers Under Command" album. And you know what? Of the thousands of church-people I encountered over the years, I never once met anyone who hated non-believers, or who advocated violence. When some nutjob blew up an abortion clinic, everyone I knew was heartbroken. When some wacko on TV explained that God told him to assassinate so-and-so, everyone I knew was horrified. You know why? Because they understood metaphor and hyperbole. Because most evangelicals are not bug-eyed lunatics. As an adult, that brand of religion no longer appeals to me, but I am always astonished by the blatant prejudice that some “open-minded” people hold against those whose ideology differs from their own (as evidenced in this talkback). It’s disgusting. It’s not enough, apparently, to disagree with the fundamentalists’ faith—we must also demonize them. It’s not enough for them to different, they must also be evil. Amazing.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:12 a.m. CST

    The World According to Capone...

    by dagls

    hmmm. it seems that capone has become the preacher. it would have been great to just get a review of the movie, rather than his 'twist' on science and the consitution.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:11 a.m. CST

    I don't have a problem with Creationism...

    by rbatty024

    so long as it is not brought into our schools. In fact, people can believe anything they want, but when they try and shove those beliefs onto others then they are crossing the line, and when they attempt to use the government to spread those belief then it is absolutely inexcusable. The problem with most Evangelicals is that they believe they have a duty to convert others, and are therefore more prone to acting out in extreme ways in order to achieve this goal.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:15 a.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    Sorry, King Midas I forgot to address one of your key fallacies. You advance the notion all religions were created as tool to maintain power by the ruling class. You sound like you have a bit of schooling behind your posts, so would I be correct in assuming you have a basic knowledge of world history? Christianity has its foundations in Judaism which was based mainly in an Egyptian society and eventually Christianity arose in Greek-Roman cultures. Given what you know about these historical eras does this jive with your idea it was created by a ruling class or did it arise from the ranks of the powerless and those of little consequence in their societies?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:16 a.m. CST

    Well, I'm already agnostic but if I were to see this...

    by R.C. the "Wise"

    I'd probably turn into an athiest.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Oh, by the way: F*CK THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION!!!

    by R.C. the "Wise"

    We don't need an election this november, we need a revolution!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:19 a.m. CST

    "Oh, and evolution is not a theory..."

    by bralli

    What a joke. Evolution is one of the most thoroughly tested and critiqued scientific theories out there. All science relies on indirect evidence. It's not like chemists can "see" atoms reacting with one another or physicists can "see" sub atomic particles. Other historical sciences such as geology, astronomy, archeology, etc... are equally valid in that they make predictions that can be readily disproven via the the evidence we have available to us (for example if we found a human skeleton imbedded alongside a Tyrannosaurus...). I find it fascinating how the earlier theories of the interrelationships between life on this planet were really confirmed when scientists where able to actually map DNA and truly validate those branching evolutionary charts that we all grew up with.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:19 a.m. CST

    God created science...

    by alienindisguise

    and everything else that resides in all the universe. To debate science vs. God is a go no where battle. Like some have said on this post, alot of Christians choose to ignore the challenging aspects of the Bible and from the clips of this doc I've seen, that's their problem. They only teach and explore one side to the faith when their are many sides to it. The one passage in the Bible most often ignored in my opinion is Isaiah 45:7 when God says: "I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil." Exploring that passage could be a documentary unto itself.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:22 a.m. CST

    This talkback inspired me...

    by zacdilone track down Robert Smigel's classic "Fun with Real Audio" where Jesus zaps Schuller, Robertson, and some other wack-jobs, ending up with him dancing down the street like one of the Peanuts characters. That's the Jesus I know...I'm not sure who the Jesus of "Jesus Camp" is. He has as much to do with the real Jesus as Michael Bay's Optimus Prime has to do with the real OP. KA-ZING!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:24 a.m. CST

    Tongues of fire>Flames on O.P.

    by zacdilone

    It had to be said.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:26 a.m. CST


    by JuggFuckler

    I'm not a Christian. I think that religion is for people who have trouble finding their place in the world. These people, you will often find, are people who are too cowardly to pursue their dreams and goals and now need to conform to a backwards and archaic belief system in order to fool themsleves into believing that they have made some kind of sense of their lives. And yes, given the chance, I would JUGG FUCKLE every Fundamentalist and Evangelical Christian who gets in my face and asks me if I've "found Jesus". Are you guys looking for him? He is tied up in my basement with a tennis ball taped in his mouth. I sodomize him every Monday and Thursday. Don't laugh Muslims, Mohammad is next on the JUGG FUCKLE train. Don't get me started on the Jews. At least Christians and Muslims are open about what they believe. -Jason "JUGGFUCKLER" Stevens

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:34 a.m. CST

    Roman Catholic Bible - stvnhthr

    by captainalphabet

    Wasn't the Roman Catholic Bible a product of Constatine I's legalization of Christianity in 313AD? As i understand it, this was a means of controlling the masses and Constantine himself continued to worship pegan gods, converting to Christianity only on his deathbed. It's my opinion that all religions stem from one source, likely the initial spiritual experiences of the first humans, but that the present multitude of world religions (and all their variations), are more the product of industrious groups and individuals in the ruling class (that class often being religious in nature) manipulating the stories over time towards the goal of a pleasant domestictity among the working-class masses.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:35 a.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    "I find it fascinating how the earlier theories of the interrelationships between life on this planet were really confirmed when scientists where able to actually map DNA and truly validate those branching evolutionary charts that we all grew up with." Well said. It is cool to see how the similarities in DNA support both a theory of a common designer and a theory of evolution. It is the mechanism which would advance evolutionary change which is the real stickler.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:39 a.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    Sorry, you're confusing the Da Vinci Code for history. Wikipedia has a bit better description on the Canon of the Bible, and they can hardly be thought to be pro-Christian in their leanings.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:40 a.m. CST

    Well then pro-Evolutionists, kindly state for us

    by detinue

    the rate at which evolution occurs within a direct genetic line of living organisms of the same species through successive generations. If the issue is as scientifically settled as you are claiming then it shouldn't be a difficult question to answer. In fact, that is the exact question the Thoery of Evolution should be able to answer (or at least make a reasonably accurate educated guess at) if it exists. Pick any species of animal or plant you care to, and tell us, within a reasonable degree of precision, the genetic amount that species will evolve per unit of time (or per generation). Additionally, then, tell us how long an amount of time (or number of generations) it will take for the species in question to completely evolve into a genetically different species.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:40 a.m. CST

    Love thy neighbour.

    by ikkyu

    whatever you believe, love your neighbour - whatever he or she believes. otherwise, we're all truly fucked.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:44 a.m. CST

    This is my first post here.

    by wakeupbomb13

    Ok, stvnhthr quick question, you think that one should go out and test what they believe so they can prove it for themselves right? That's what you a nutshell, yes? So, have you gone out and tested everything you believe about the Bible? I'm just saying, as has been stated your beliefs are based solely on a book that has some good stories, but where is the proof of God? I'm not talking about beautiful trees, and a child's laughter and all that shit, I'm talking about hard, testable evidence of the existance of a man in the sky? You have none. There are problems with the theory of evolution that's true, but there are testable facts. The only problem I have with Christians is their willingness to ignore parts of the Bible in favor of other parts. Gays are bad, the Bible says that, so you should dislike the gay lifestyle, that's fine. What about all the bad things the bible tells you to do? Like Exodus for example, it basically says it's ok to sell your daughter into slavery, and if her new master betroths her to himself and she doesn't like it, he'll sell her to someone in a far off land. That's ok too right? Gays are bad, the bible says so. Sell your daughters into slavery. The bible says it's ok. Or...let's say...whoever works on the Sabbath should be put to death, because as everyone knows it's an affront to god to work on the sabbath. Exodus 31:15 "Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death." That's the problem I have with Christians, the picking and choosing of what to follow. Why can the Christians pick and choose? It makes no sense to me.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:48 a.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    No name calling here. Perhaps I worded that poorly – I don’t believe that religions were created by the ruling class as a tool to suppress the masses. The search for some meaning in life is an innately personal and human concept – as evidenced by the fact that historic civilizations all over the globe with little or no contact developed startlingly similar belief systems over thousands of years. However, even if it wasn’t developed as a tool, organized religion has certainly been used as a tool by the ruling class to achieve political ends. And even though Greek and Roman cultures had a degree of freedom and democracy not seen before or again until the past few hundred years, they were far from bastions of equality. You still had the majority of the population toiling away from day to day while much of the wealth was concentrated with the ruling elite. Regardless, Christians were persecuted horribly during this time and the true explosion of Christianity to dominance in Europe happened during the so call “Dark Ages” when the average peasant could barely feed himself while the Church amassed vast sums of wealth which it used to hoard land, bribe monarchies, prosecute wars, and generally spread its influence via violence and corruption. And I know you don’t believe the earth is flat or the center of the universe – but hundreds of years ago the Church attacked and imprisoned “scientists” for saying otherwise. That was an historical example of the conflict between science and religion. I don’t pretend that evolution is 100% fact or doesn’t have flaws but it is the best example and most plausible theory for how life came to be on this planet. Creationism is fine to believe in – but it’s not a relevant or even a good explanation. Scientifically speaking, there is no way at all to back it up with real-world observations. It’s an article of faith that has no business being taught in our schools. The fact that Evolution fundamentally conflicts with the teachings of the Church is nothing new and given time and scientific advances, I think it will be a mute point - just as nobody, including you, any longer believes the earth is the center of the universe. That was my point.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:53 a.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    Evolution is a theory. That’s not a knock on Evolution in any way – I firmly believe in it. But the fact remains that there are scientific differences between Laws (such as Gravity) and Theories (such as Evolution). In scientific terminology, Evolution is still technically a theory – albeit one with vast amounts of observable scientific data to back it up.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:03 p.m. CST

    "Well then

    by wakeupbomb13

    "Well then pro-Evolutionists, kindly state for us by detinue Sep 29th, 2006 11:40:30 AM the rate at which evolution occurs within a direct genetic line of living organisms of the same species through successive generations. If the issue is as scientifically settled as you are claiming then it shouldn't be a difficult question to answer. In fact, that is the exact question the Thoery of Evolution should be able to answer (or at least make a reasonably accurate educated guess at) if it exists. Pick any species of animal or plant you care to, and tell us, within a reasonable degree of precision, the genetic amount that species will evolve per unit of time (or per generation). Additionally, then, tell us how long an amount of time (or number of generations) it will take for the species in question to completely evolve into a genetically different species." I get your point on this, but like most have said, it's not without it's flaws. All things cannot be answered with the current theory of evolution. Of course, some dude in the sky waving his hand and making everything is a totally sound theory with no flaws either. Right?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:06 p.m. CST

    Using science to disprove Evolution

    by Goatboy

    There's a huge, defcon 5 klaxxon warning as to why these arguments are flawed beyond comprehension. You fundamentalists use science to disprove science in order to shore up a belief? Surely a belief is just that - a belief, requiring faith and trust that whilst it may not make immediate sense, you have "faith" in the reason behind. Kind of hard to reconcile faith and science, they sort of cancel each other out. One requires absolute fact and theory before the acceptance of a conclusion, one requires the absolute and total belief/faith in that which cannot be proven. Y'see, that's why it called "faith" and not "fact". It all becomes clear when you smear a little logic on it, n'est ce pas? Fundamentalist Christians do as much damage to Christianty as Fundamentalist Muslims do to Muslims. You're both as bad as each other. I don't think anybody would mind if we found a nice big salt-flat somewhere and let you red-faced conquistadors kill each other. That way, tolerant and reasonable people of *all* faiths can acknowledge that their belief is a personal choice and not holy writ. Fucking pyschos.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:08 p.m. CST


    by captainalphabet

    Wiki's are biased based on the opinions of the last person to edit the wiki. like any interpretation of history, including the one i've suggested above, they're taken with a massive grain of salt. --- my favorite part of the Wiki on Constantine and christianity is that "It should be noted that historical sources of the 4th century Roman Empire seem to be unusually rich in omens, magic, hexes and spells, while lacking in critical inquiry." Science was obviousy very different then.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:15 p.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    “Pick any species of animal or plant you care to, and tell us, within a reasonable degree of precision, the genetic amount that species will evolve per unit of time (or per generation). Additionally, then, tell us how long an amount of time (or number of generations) it will take for the species in question to completely evolve into a genetically different species.” Why should Evolutionists have to answer something that fundamentally goes against what the entire Theory of Evolution is about? Evolution teaches that species adapt the necessary mechanisms for survival in response to environmental variables. Since those variables are by their very nature “unknown”, it impossible to determine the speed or course that Evolution will take in the future. What can be done is to look at the link between species as they exists now and extinct species in the fossil record. No, it’s not perfect – but it’s a brilliant theory that does a lot better job of explaining how we came to be here in rational, real-world terms than Creationism.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:16 p.m. CST

    All these religions have it so wrong BringingSexyBack

    by FordPerfect

    Do you know who has it right? I do...The Mormons have it right. Accept the good things and let the bad things go. That has to the best motto ever. Do you know who taught me that motto? Mike F'n Allred. He has got it figured out and I am totally Fucking Serial right now!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:22 p.m. CST


    by Thunderpants

    Watching nerds debate Christianity = Comedy Gold.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:24 p.m. CST


    by maxwell's hammer

    "Pick any species of animal or plant you care to, and tell us, within a reasonable degree of precision, the genetic amount that species will evolve per unit of time (or per generation). Additionally, then, tell us how long an amount of time (or number of generations) it will take for the species in question to completely evolve into a genetically different species." Well I guess Meteorology isn't a science either, since you can't predict, with any real accuracy, what the weather will do beyond a few days. Evolution relies heavily on random mutations and chance, plus the above mentioned myriad of ever-changing environmental variables. As with all science, there are still, and always will be, details to work out, but short of being able to hit you over the head with it, the existence of evolution is about as emperically proven as you can get.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:27 p.m. CST

    king-midas and the flat earth

    by stvnhthr

    The idea of Christians supporting the flat earth is without any historical validity. In fact the opposite is quite true, you may want to check out for a different perspective or do a little Google work of your own.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:29 p.m. CST

    The Scientific Method...

    by Admiral_Kirk

    Here’s a five cent explanation of the Scientific Method. First there’s an observed phenomenon which you attempt to create a hypothesis to explain. The next step is to design an experiment to test the hypothesis. In the academic research world the result(s) would be published in a peer reviewed journal and other researchers would attempt to replicate the work to either bolster or disprove the hypothesis. Additionally, experimental results may also serve as a guide to refining the original hypothesis to more accurately reflect the true observed results. Collections of hypotheses that have been verified through observation or experiment may be placed under the umbrella of a theory describing a related set of observed phenomena. It should be noted that the existence of phenomena that cannot necessarily be explained by a theory does not disprove the theory; it only indicates that there is an alternate hypothesis to explain the phenomenon. Let the debate continue…

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:40 p.m. CST

    Religion used to control people

    by stvnhthr

    It is true religion has been used by people in power to manipulate those they rule over, this is not the fault of religion but of the nature of man. Man hasn't used only religion (or even one particular religion) but anything and everything to control and manipulate people. This is because man is capable of both good and evil, not because organized religion is bad. Truth is we as a species will use whatever we can to screw each other over be it the church or the internet.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:42 p.m. CST

    SO WHAT!!!!!!!! WHO CARES!!!!

    by bodosisk

    So what if they release this movie. Who really cares..Any Liberal on earth isn't going to see this movie anyway. Even Christians who go see this movie are going to be worried that it gives the wrong impression. This is one persons view. Just like it's ok to release a movie that shows the assassination of President bush even though no movie has ever been made of that, I’m sure it will be bootleged everywhere. But, this is America right? Freedom of speech!!! when it's putting down Bush, but anything that show's the president in a positive light must be destroyed. What’s sad is a movie like "The War Within" which sympathizes with terrorists ends up getting considerated for an award but anything that has to do with Christianity is Wrong. You Liberal's are so far to the left and hate Bush so much it's clouded your patriotismand ability to think. Even if he found the cure for aid’s you wouldn’t give him credit. I hope a republican wins the next presidency so all you Bush haters can move to Canada or commit suicide. Whichever get's you out of America quicker. It's not about Left or Right...It's about Right and Wrong. When you put the rights of a terrorist before America, it's just sad.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:43 p.m. CST

    king midas

    by leeVSbenway

    Not trying to take a piss but there is NO law of gravity. It too is only a theory, which is about as good as it gets. The problem with debating religious nut-balls is that they have no interest in rational discussion. Case-in-point: Detinue's ridiculous post. If you don't understand even the basic principles of evolution don't ask in-depth questions...because you'll only unmask yourself as being the idiot you are. Evolutionary theory doesn't make predictions on the future, it doesn't care about the future. There is NO GUIDING FORCE in evolution other than mere existance. Evolution has NO PURPOSE OR AIM. Also, can you accuse Wikipedia of being against Christianity? You do realize it is a public information site edited by its users, right?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:52 p.m. CST

    Evolution *is* testable, fools!

    by Vi

    DarthSnoogans: testability includes the prediction of finding additional corroborating evidence in the future. This has panned out time and time again, or else the theory would have been discarded. Scientists are taught to follow the scientific method in all areas of endeavor - all branches of science. If a scientist had found a competing theory, based on the scientific method, and withstood peer review, he would be FAMOUS.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:51 p.m. CST


    by wakeupbomb13

    I'm a liberal, and I don't think like that, thanks. So fuck you and your lumping of everything, you do the same things these "liberals" do when they spout their hate speech against Bush. Oh, and since Bush isn't a scientist I doubt he'll find the cure for AIDS.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:53 p.m. CST

    "Intelligent design" theorists are also evolutionists

    by PhilConnors

    Most anti-evolution Christians would probably be horrified to find out that if they actually read the books written by cutting edge intelligent design proponents (such as Michael Behe) that intelligent design theories take for granted that the current variety of species evolved from a common ancestor. What these intelligent designists try to do, rather than prove evolution wrong, they try to show little mechanisms or occurrences in evolution which cannot be explained - then they label the unexplained as evidence of an intelligent designer. So, in other words, they are no different from any other believers in the supernatural throughout the course of history who label the unexplained as supernatural. And throughout the course of history, the category of unexplained phenomena has gotten smaller and smaller, and consequently things that are considered supernatural phenomena have gotten smaller and smaller. On a side note, from a historical perspective, most major religions have served to function as legitimizing war for the benefit of the state. As a result, through a sort of "survival of the fittest" of civilizations, those peoples who LACKED a religion that legitimized wars were less likely to survive, and so as a result we are left with religions, and civilizations, which are very comfortable with the concept of "good" violence.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:54 p.m. CST

    Misinterpeting Christianity

    by PwnedByStallone

    This talkback is full of Christians defending their religion by saying that extremists are distorting its teachings for their own agenda. Well I say it's time to get rid of it then. By "it" I mean religion. Face it. There are too many ways for it to be interpreted in ways that result in violence. You can't hand people a book saying it is the word of God and then be surprised when they take it literally. To do anything else seems hypocritical. It's time to stop believing in a "man" in the sky and start believing in humanity, The one thing we know does exist.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 12:57 p.m. CST

    I don't know if it posted so

    by wakeupbomb13

    I don't know if it posted so sorry for the double if it did. leeVSbenway, gravity is a law. As is explained on this site, a law doesn't have to explain why something happens just that it does, everytime it's tested. Drop something. Then drop it again. Does it fall to the ground? Yep! Gravity is a law. Newton's First Law in fact.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:01 p.m. CST

    Read "Letter to a Christian Nation" by Sam Harris

    by Some Dude

    Then read "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. If you can still cling to fairy fables and magic after reading these two books, then you are probably retarded.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:06 p.m. CST

    right and wrong and left

    by captainalphabet

    I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that the persons responsible for the 'Right v. Left' political-orienation meter were probably on the 'Right' side of things. in the english language the word 'Right' obviously has a dual meaning (the opposite of 'Left', but also the opposite of 'Wrong'). Just using this frame of reference distorts truth by a) subconsiously linking the 'Right' side of politics with the 'right' way to do things, and b) by even suggesting that the world is black and white, right and wrong, left OR right - everything is subjective, it's ALL shades of grey. Terror is an idea, not a group of individuals you can just declare war on. If you can't sympathize with "the terrorrists" then you'll never understand them, understand what they want or why they do things the way they do. sympathy and compassion are the real keys to world peace, and the obstinate stance of "we do not negotiate with terrorists" is sounding more and more like an ignorant excuse to keep fighting. I'd love it if Bush cured Aids, but that doesn't seem to be where he's spending his money...

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:10 p.m. CST

    AK-47, Babies and Bathwater

    by Captain Mal

    Get rid of religion because there are too many ways for it to be misinterpreted and used for violence? That's utterly ludicrous. You can't "get rid of" religion any more than you can get rid of happiness, hatred or ideology. Of course, you can oppress anyone who disagrees with your view of the world, but then you've fallen into your own trap. And if we're to get rid of things that can be misused to create violence, we'd have to eliminate a lot of things, including, incidentally, AK-47s.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:12 p.m. CST

    you're all lame

    by triplefive

    this movie looks dumb as shit, and equally as pointless.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:12 p.m. CST

    MY BAD!!! wakeupbomb13

    by bodosisk

    I guess I should re-iterate that YES! not all democrat's believe what I posted, and those who don't sorry if I pissed you off. But where are you sensible liberals when this crap comes out, standing up against this hate. I understand that both sides have there radical issuses and have made mistakes and YES! Bush isn't the greatest president but at least he's protecting our country. I don't agree with everything Bush does..but as I said I don't go by Left or Right politics I go by Right and Wrong. It's funny how this movie just happens to be comming out 45 day's before the elction, no doubt to make the republublican's and Christians look bad (Wrong). Keep it up!!! When the Republicans win back most of the seats in the senate MOST of you liberals will be scratching there head wondering "How did we Lose again".

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:13 p.m. CST

    Intelligent Design is religion masquerading as science.

    by King_Midas

    PhilConnors nailed intelligent design exactly and this explains perfectly why it is so patently absurd as a scientific theory. As an article of faith – I have no qualms with it. People can believe whatever they want. However, proponents of intelligent design want it taught in schools alongside legitimate scientific theories based on real-world, observable data and that is a sad state of affairs. “Since Evolution cannot be 100% proven in every single case, let’s instead teach our children something that can never be proven in any case - ever.” It’s so stupid.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:16 p.m. CST

    right and wrong and left

    by bodosisk

    It's not about understanding the terrorist's or even negotiating with them...YOU CAN'T NEGOTIATE WITH THERRORISTS" they want to destraoy everything you stand for..We need to take them out before the take us out. I go by right and wrong meaning what I believe to be right in my beliefs..and thats protecting my family and my country against terrorism. And it mabey an idea, but it's never the less happening.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:19 p.m. CST

    Thank you anchorite

    by bodosisk

    That was very well said...

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:19 p.m. CST

    My wife is from the town where this camp is located

    by NapoleonDynamite

    The mentality represented in the movie is not an exaggeration. Rural North Dakota is like another planet. Philosophically, it's a third world culture of superstition and magic and fear. They're also racist as hell (the rural part of the state is a hotbed for white supremacists) but I don't think the movie shows that part. The fact that the people this film is about have endorsed it as an accurate portrayal should be a warning bell even to non-insane Christians. They're worshipping cardboard cutouts of George W. Bush, for fuck's sake. Oh...evolution is a proven fact. There is no competing scientific theory. The word "theory" in science does not mean "unproven." ID is not science and is not a scientific theory. Arguing against evolution makes people sound just as stupid as trying to argue that the sun revolves around the earth. The rest of the developed world understands this and is bewildered that this is even a subject of debate in the US.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:29 p.m. CST

    Evolution is religion masquerading as science, too.

    by DarthSnoogans

    Evolution as an idea is untestable using the scientific method because it requires that we accept something that is unobservable, namely the development of multiple species over time. In order to "prove" evolution we would have to have data going back much further than the last hundred and fifty or so years. It's like scientists trying to prove the Greenhouse Effect using only the data from the last century...taking a miniscule slice of data to trying and extrapolate trends over millions of years. As it is we have a few, arguably flawed studies supporting natural selection (very different from evolution) as well as a fossil record that can be interpreted any number of ways and is woefully short of any information supporting evolution. It still boils down to people who have an idea and squeezing the available data to fit within the parameters of that idea. It's pseudo-science, not scientific theory. As for what should be taught in schools, neither evolution nor intelligent design/creationism should be presented to children as fact. Neither of them are testable and both require faith to accept...completely incompatible with science education.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:31 p.m. CST

    With God on Our Side

    by caseymarc4

    Check this book out - by Mikey Weinstein - he is fighting Evangelicals in the military - scary stuff, but he is a force to be reckoned with:

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:35 p.m. CST

    With God on Our Side

    by caseymarc4

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:39 p.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    Bush protecting this country is a highly debatable point. I don’t believe spending $578 billion (so far) to invade a secular country that had nothing to do with 9/11, posed no threat to the United States, and had no known ties with Islamic extremists has made this country any safer. Likewise, half-assing Afghanistan, allowing the Taliban to resurge, operating secrets prisons worldwide, torturing prisoners, imprisoning people indefinitely without bringing charges, showing basically no respect for human rights, crapping on our own constitution, and generally destroying the image of America abroad hasn’t done much to keep us safe either. Neither has cutting taxes for rich people while running up record deficits and failing to do anything to protect our boarders, ports, nuclear facilities, chemical plants, power plants, or water supply. In fact, Bush sat on his ass for 8 months after talking office and since 9/11 has really done nothing more than use terrorism to foster a climate of fear so that he could advance a radical neo-con agenda that has nothing to do with making us safer and everything to do with “The Project for the New American Century”. We are far less safe now than we were before Bush took office or even on 9/12/01.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:39 p.m. CST

    I was just bringing up abortion bombings.

    by FordPerfect

    I haven't ehard of one in a long time and I glad I can say that. Church bombins happen like every other day. They can't seem to stop that.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:39 p.m. CST

    Darthsnoogans, evolution IS testable...

    by NapoleonDynamite

    Actually, the word is "falsifiable." Evolution makes many falsifiable predictions which have been tested millions of times and never failed once. Faith has no role whatever in evolutionary theiry. You obviously don't know anything about the subject so it would probably be a good idea not to open your mouth and make yourself look like a moron.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:42 p.m. CST

    Since I am Dum...

    by The Dum Guy

    I can say without a doubt, every religion has a dash of wackiness in it. Since this is irrefutable (cause I say so), then it comes as no shock that some people involved in any religion would focus on the wackiness and not the faith aspect. I've been to places like a Pentecostal church camp (once as a kid, and I hated it), and I do know of "spirit filled" folks that believe if you're not with God (i.e. agree with them) then you have to be against God. Anyhoot, I guess we should take solice in fact that, God or no God, we can eat doughnuts and drink chocolate milk.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:45 p.m. CST

    Wow, I can't be believe that I share the same

    by Orbots Commander

    general belief system as these people in the movie. Although I'm Greek Orthodox by denomination (similar to Catholicism in many ways) and the people depicted in the movie are Evangelical, or rather people calling themselves Evangelical Christians, still their particular 'unique' view of religion is troubling.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:49 p.m. CST

    everything you stand for

    by captainalphabet

    "It's not about understanding the terrorist's or even negotiating with them...YOU CAN'T NEGOTIATE WITH THERRORISTS" they want to destraoy everything you stand for..We need to take them out before the take us out." - this philosophy will NEVER END A CONFLICT. They're not just 'terrorists' - they're people, like you and your family. INDIVIDUALS, and no two are exactly alike. But say 'they' all do 'want to destroy everything you stand for'... did you ever think about WHY? what is it that you believe in that they hate so much? how are you so different from 'them'? learning to ask and maybe even answer these questions seems to me a much preferable alternative to 'take them out before the take us out' - that's a base instinct left over from your insect/reptile brain, and in a technologically advanced society it should really be rendered obsolete. Evolve, dumbass.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:52 p.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    “YOU CAN'T NEGOTIATE WITH THERRORISTS they want to destroy everything you stand for..We need to take them out before the take us out.” Wake up, man! Under that approach – there will always be somebody to kill. It will be never ending war. Now make no mistake, the Republicans would love that because as long as people stay scared, they stay in power but it’s an utterly ridiculous policy. I in no way agree or sympathize with people who blow themselves up to kill innocent Americans but a never ending cycle of who can kill who first is not the answer. We need a broader economic and foreign policy approach that does SOMETHING to address the factors that cause people to hate us so much that they are willing to die if they can just take a few Americans with them. The number one factor being the Israeli/Palestinian conflict – until that is resolved we will never have peace. We certainly need to work to prevent terrorism, expand our intelligence, prosecute the ones we catch, and generally handle it as a criminal matter as other countries have done (countries that have dealt with terrorism far longer than we have mind you). Destabilizing the entire Middle East with a right-wing wet dream of delivering democracy at gunpoint has proven neither prudent nor successful and it certainly isn’t making us safer.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:53 p.m. CST

    more debating, I love it

    by richier123

    I'm a Christian. I think it was evolution, but I also personally think that it started with creation. God put the universe together and incorporated evolution in it. I also think that no matter what, its all too complicated to understand for a human brain. What was here before the big bang? How far does the universe stretch, and if it stops then whats on the other side? These are all questions that havn't been answered. Yea I believe in the Bible, but I believe its written in metaphors. After all, it was HUMAN BEINGS that wrote the thing, not God himself. My issue is that the agnostics of the TB seem to argue against the Bible by paraphrasing it and taking it at face value(i.e. don't accept gays, 7 days to create the universe) rather than looking at for values. The Bible teaches not to accept gays, but then to love all of God's children. Obviously if you take it literally there's serious issues that need to be looked at.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:58 p.m. CST

    I forgot

    by richier123

    Oh, and global warming is fucking propaganda(if i spelled that right)!! Look at the scientific studies, the articles, the papers. And although its damn hard, avoid anyone with any political bias. My problem with Gore is that he says that it shouldn't be a political issue bla bla... yet THE FORMER VICE PRESIDENT is the one pushing and starring in his movie. If he is so determined for it not to be political, then he should have gotten an independant to do the movie, so that he was not mentioned. Does he not see the extreme irony???

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 1:59 p.m. CST

    By independant I meant

    by richier123

    By independant I meant someone have someone that's not with a political party star in it.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 2:02 p.m. CST

    I don't usually agree w/ anchorite, but well said dude.

    by Orbots Commander

    Good point. Extrapolating a view about all Christian denominations, even all Evangelicals, from what's apparently depicted in the documentary would be wrong headed. And anchorite is, unfortunately, right again when he points out the massive religious movement which is having the biggest issues today is Islam. Need I point out at the knee-shaking reaction of some Germans to cancel an opera depicting Muhammad because of what some Islamist radicals *might* do? Notice I wrote Islamist not Islamic, the difference being that an Islamist belief is the mixing of fundamentalist religion with an activist and violent political ideology. But I think this is the only time anchorite and I will agree. His unfailling support of all things Republican, no matter the deficiencies, is a non-starter.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 2:04 p.m. CST

    global warming

    by captainalphabet

    for the last 100 years, we've been burning hydrocarbon fuels like crazy. for the last 100 years, the planet's been heating up. my retarded cousin could make that connection.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 2:09 p.m. CST

    global warming?

    by The Dum Guy

    In the seventies weren't the hold-over hippies afraid that the world was getting to cold? From what I understand the "warming" of the earth occurs in cycles, with or without man's interference.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 2:17 p.m. CST


    by leeVSbenway

    ...DOES NOT MEAN GOD DAMN EVERYONE ELSE. Oh...and gravity might be NEWTON'S first law but it is still a theory to SCIENCE. "Who wouldn't want to go back in time and shove Jesus?" - UCB

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 2:23 p.m. CST


    by Detrs

    Do you have a nobel prize? Because a definitive falsification of evolution would get you one. Seconed, you claim to do research, so in order to see if I get you right, I want you to answer the following questions.***What other types of radiologic dating are there, besides Carbon 14 dating? Why would we use other types of dating? Why is the vitamin C pseudogene in humans and multiple other species of apes ‘broken’ in the same location? Why does the ‘broken’ section of the pseudogene look like a ‘mirror-image’ of the section of the gene that is right next to it? What are the different types of mutations? ie: what’s the difference between a ‘point mutation’ and a transcription error? (Hint. This has a bearing on your ability to understand the Vitamin C pseudogene question). Which type of mutation is most likely to result in genetic changes that create distinct morphological changes? What is cellular differentiation, and at what point does it occur? What causes point mutations? What causes transcription errors? How common/likely is mutation of the human genetic code within one generation (of one family)? How many different types of speciation are there? (Not how many species are there, how many different ways are there for speciation to occur.) What do we mean by ‘reproductive isolation?’ What is ‘junk dna?’ What is selection pressure? Why is it an error to refer to the results of selection pressures as the ‘goal’ or the ‘intent’ of the evolutionary process? Is evolution ‘random?’ These are basic quetsions, and if you can't answer them, please refrain from speaking on the subject in the future. Thanks.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 2:24 p.m. CST


    by tile_mcgillus

    It is like an orgy of dudes shitting on each other and jerking it at the time. You all are saying each other is wrong and then philibustering about your belief system. I LOVE IT! It is like Christmas! This talkback is the most masturbatory since Megatron! While we are at it...can someone show me where the moderate muslims come out publically against terrorism and extremism like the moderate christians do to people like in this movie? Seriously, I want to read it.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 2:33 p.m. CST


    by wakeupbomb13

    "My issue is that the agnostics of the TB seem to argue against the Bible by paraphrasing it and taking it at face value(i.e. don't accept gays, 7 days to create the universe) rather than looking at for values. The Bible teaches not to accept gays, but then to love all of God's children. Obviously if you take it literally there's serious issues that need to be looked at." Sooo...the bible being against gays is a metaphor? Is that what you're saying? So why all this Christian hatred toward gays ( I know it's not everyone, but most Christians I know don't like the gays...why? Latent homosexuality? Maybe. A gay man killed his neice? Could be. The bible says gays are bad. Bingo. That's why, and guess what? They aren't crazy fundamentalists either. They are normal everyday, Christians. So, while you spout off about the agnostics taking the bible at face value why don't you look in your own religion and see that you take it at face value too (not you specifically, I'm saying "you" as in your religious brothers).

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 2:36 p.m. CST

    From what I saw on the news about this

    by beefywhore

    it looks like Pastor Becky is a radical right winged christian who is extreme in her beliefs...she loves to misquote the Bible and uses analogies frome the old-testament that are out of context... Something about how if we were in old testament times, Harry Potter would have been put to death...Of course the majority of people with Christian faith understand that things are different now than they were in old-testament times... example: appharently it was acceptable to offer up your Daughters to be raped by the good people of Sodom in old-testament times, and something tells me that that would just not fly by todays standards. The point is this lady, like any radical of any religion or other organization cannot be the example of the entire organization. Sadly it is the radicals and extremists that make toe most noise and therefor get the most attention.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 3:14 p.m. CST


    by Vi

    One may test a theory by the theory's predictive properties. One of the ways we can do this is by seeing if the theory predicts future evidence. Every time we find additional facts that support the theory and supports the predictions of that theory, that theory has been tested and qualified (until this predictability ceases).

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 3:14 p.m. CST


    by bodosisk

    Oh your one of those people...Let me guess "BUSH LIED..PEOPLE DIED"..or is it John Kerry "BUSH LED...PEOPLE DEAD"...i got it "CUT AND RUN" are a typical VICTACRAT...Let me you'll call me a "racist" or radical Christian...All you have given are typical Liberal Bush Bashing, didn't win the election, Clinton is great talking points...geeze...Come up with something ORIGINAL!!!!!!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 3:35 p.m. CST

    Documentaries are ALWAYS biased

    by the_pissboy1

    Don't ever fall for the trap of believing a documentary can be objective. The very medium is subjective. Everything from the framing of a shot to the sound to the music to the editing to the title cards puts a documentary into a wholly subjective point of view - usually backed by the agenda of the producers, director and editors. I have more respect for a documentarian who clearly steps out and says he's got an agenda, then one who hides behind FALSE pretenses of objectivity. The mere act of deciding a scene should be in a film means the film can't be objective.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 3:34 p.m. CST


    by Balrog_77

    I'd just like to thank you for your patient, well-reasoned defense of the faith, brother. I get frustrated to no end at some of the misconceptions that abound about the nature of faith. So many claim that belief in the gospels can come only through blind acceptance; yet I know many highly intelligent, rationally-minded people who have come to Christ only after a thorough examination of the facts. I was one of them. After graduating summa cum laude in Microbiology, I had become convinced that there was no God, that macroevolution driven by natural selection could explain life. But when I was challenged to examine all of the evidence from both sides of the argument for myself, it became astonishingly clear how little actual evidence there is for macroevolution, and how much evidence there is that contradicts it. Furthermore, when I looked into the arguments for and against the reliability of the gospel accounts, I was again startled at what I discovered. It was only after months of reading, examination and reflection that I finally made the decision to come to Christ. And the clincher, the final evidence that convinced me, was the change that has occured in my heart and in my life as a result. The "experience-test" validated the theory, so to speak. :) To anyone who is interested in learning the truth, I highly recommend "The Case for a Creator," by Lee Strobel. A truly eye-opening read. Anyway, stvnhthr, I'm very busy right now in my second year of veterinary school, so I really don't have time to join the fray. But I appreciate what you're doing in explaining the truth. God bless.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 3:38 p.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    First of all, I never mentioned Bush Lied, Cut and Run, or Bill Clinton. You accuse me of rehashing typical liberal Bush bashing points but then spout the same, tired talking point phrases sent straight from the RNC into the mouth of every right wing pundit. I do believe Bush lied but how we got into Iraq was never the point I was making – we’re there now and are we a safer nation because of it? Are we a safer nation because of anything Bush has done? Could not have almost $600 billion been better spent? A number of other liberals may have made the same arguments but that doesn’t make them any less true or valid. I will take your complete refusal to address any of the points I raised as an implicit acceptance of my argument – or at least as complete inability to debate them without resorting to childish name-calling.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 3:39 p.m. CST


    by captainalphabet

    Midas presented some well-articulated thoughts about the need for real change. You shot back with buzzwords. "VICTACRAT"? C'mon...

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 3:50 p.m. CST

    Who cares how much violence believers do...

    by Some Dude

    ... it doesn't change the fact that they have an insane view of reality. Show me a non-violent religious person and I will show you a non-violent person in need of psychological help. There are two problems: violence and insanity.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4 p.m. CST

    Hey, Balrog

    by NapoleonDynamite

    Can you explain retroviral genes, Mr. "microbiologist?" If you're going to make up credentials at least try to be a little more convincing. Don't use the word "macroevolution," for instance (that's a creationsists' word. Acyual scientists do not recognize and meaningful distinction between "micro" amd "macro" evolution. It's the same thing. Macro is just a whole bunch of micro). Also don't make patently ignorant statements about what the evidence is, because it immediately expsose you as a fraud. I have one more question for you, what PREVENTS macroevolution from occurring if you conced that micro occurs? Oh, yeah, one more thing, "macroevolution" (speciation) has been directly observed many times.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:03 p.m. CST

    Lee Strobel is a joke and a hack, by the way

    by NapoleonDynamite

    Anyone who is impressed by Lee Strobel clearly lacks any real knowledge or critical thinking skills whatsoever. The guy is really one of the worst, most easily debunkable amateur apologists you're ever going to find.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:08 p.m. CST

    "The God Who Wasn't There"

    by Huffy_Henry

    Interesting documentary that you guys should watch. Not the best made piece of film, but brings up some interesting questions about whether Jesus was just a myth pieced together from previous myths and Old Testament prophecies re: a messiah.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:11 p.m. CST


    by bodosisk

    ok....let's talk points...We are safer...How do you explain no attacks on US soil since 911. We have stopped many attacks as well including one in Downtown LA. We have destroyed the Taliban. Yes BL is still alive but his organization is finished. Yes there are individuals that are charring out attacks in his name but no where close to what it was before 911. Also you mention that bush only had 8 months. Are you kidding me. Clinton had 8 years. HELLO! During his stay in office he wouldn't have been able to even sign a law because the democrats had him in a court case over that stupid "Hanging Chad" incident. Democrats didn't even believe he was president and refused to even call him that during his 8 months...Now he's responsible? Come on. Give me the speech he made where he lied us into the war. How did he lie us into the war? Also, Sadam Hussein gone is the best thing we could have done. It's called stopping the attack before it comes. Clinton failed to do this in 8 years. Sadam was paying $25,00 to family's of suicide bombers he shot at our planes..USED WMD's on 100,000's of his own people and even tried to buy to uranium from he wouldn't have attacked us..he would have just held them over our heads...pleeeeze...we are bringing a freedom to a country that never had it. How is that wrong. Yes I agree there are allot of things better sending money on but defeating Sadam was important. I suggest reading a book by Sadam's right hand man "George Saddah" called Sadam's secret's. He mentions how sadam used a flooding in Lebanon to send 2 planes filled with WMD's over there claiming "It was a Help effort". Bush has done allot of things to keep this nation safe. all of them have been fought by the democrats. The wire tapping, The patriot act..The leaking of information doesn't help our country. Democrats have fought all of them and tried to prevent them. Democrats are not letting Bush do his Job. I'll tell you what...I haven’t heard one democrat give an alternative to the war. How would you handle IRAQ? If we pull out now they will have won. We learned this mistake through the president before Regan. 425 day's our troops were captured and we didn't do a single thing. Then we attack in the desert which failed. All this was strengthen there resolve.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:19 p.m. CST

    balrog and stvnhthr

    by LonChair

    It's great to see intelligent conversation, without flaming….LOL What most of those that “bash” faith fail to realize is….as biblically defined (Hebrews Chapter 11), faith is belief BECAUSE of the evidence, not in spite of it. Faith is NOT a blind, un-intelligent dulling of the senses. Faith is not bound to those that hold to a spiritual belief system. Those on this board that ferociously support the theory of evolution do so because of faith…based not on blindly following what someone has said, but because of the evidence. Faith grows stronger with each successive piece of evidence. I acknowledge that there is ample evidence for the theory of evolution, but there is also ample evidence that blows serious holes in the theory. I have a faith, not Christianity or the “church”, but in Jesus Christ…big difference. I have seen, read, felt, experienced, and researched enough evidence to make an intelligent decision to follow after Jesus. EVERYONE is religious about something. Some “religiously” believe that there is no such thing as absolute truth, some “religiously” refuse to believe in the existence of God, some “religiously” believe that G.W. Bush is the devil himself… Some of you seriously crack me up because you are guilty of the very same fanaticism that you absolutely despise in others…namely in this case…Christians.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:26 p.m. CST

    My general philosophy is: fuck all religious types.

    by MattCG

    Nothing good comes of it. Religion exists to suck up the spare change of the world. Why do you think they hate state lotteries so much? As for this movie, I'm sure the makers tried to make a few people in it look bad, but due to the fact the subjects of the film have seen it and signed off on it's 'accuracy and fairness', I'm willing to believe these people are as batshit crazy as they are portrayed. But, don't think I'm just getting down on Christians, I think all religions are fucking stupid and are the main obstacle to true progress on moving the human race into the future. As long as we have all these fuckers sitting around, wishing we could devolve back to the days of being afraid of the sun and calling the idea of 'world peace' a sign of the 'end times', we're stuck right where we are. If I had any say in the matter, there would be a fucking cull tomorrow.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:28 p.m. CST


    by Balrog_77

    I really don't care whether you believe me or not. Unfortunately, since I majored in MICRObiology, my focus was on studying evolutionary mechanisms in bacteria, not in eukaryotes. And since no bacteriophages are retroviruses, I really can't comment too much. I did learn about the mechanics of reverse transcription and integration in virology, however, so I can only make an educated guess. I know that after the reverse transcriptase enzyme has produced a complementary DNA strand to the RNA genome, its integrase activity incorporates it into the host chromosome. I know that many genes associated with inherited defects in humans and animals are believed to have been introduced on retroviral vectors, in much the same way that many genes associated with virulence factors and antibiotic resistance in bacteria exist on proviruses, lysogenic bacteriophages that have inserted into the bacterial genome and become a permanent resident of sorts. As for macroevolution, I agree that evolutionsts don't make a distinction, and that's a problem. The difference is in the extent. And please provide a link to the paper which directly demonstrated an example speciation, because I'm certainly unaware of it. As for Lee Strobel, I'm sorry you feel that way. Because of my studies, I was well aware of the best criticisms that evolutionists had provided against creationist arguments, and I agreed with them. And because I was aware of these arguments, I was quite impressed that Lee Strobel did not hold back in presenting every one of these arguments for the creationist scientists to respond to. But more than this, it was the eloquent, well-reasoned responses of those scientists impressed me the most. Now if you don't mind, I'd like to get back to studying pharmacology.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:30 p.m. CST


    by bodosisk

    Also explaint to how is that almost every major democrat in power incuding: Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Kennedy, Nancy Palosi and more all agreed and believed that Sadam had WMD's. Bill Clinton 3 months after the war began said he believed going into IRAQ was the right thing to do. everybody believed that the war is going bad it's all Bush's fault and non of them agree..bwecause it would make them look bad..what it does is show that they are weak on defense.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:36 p.m. CST

    This Talkback is giving me a mean 12-inch Jabba

    by Sir HickoryBeans McCrackin


  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:36 p.m. CST

    Good point, LonChair

    by Balrog_77

    And well said. Another example is the faith that some have that the scientific method is the only begetter of truth. It is certainly A begetter of truth, and one that has helped us tremedously, but it is by no means the only way the truth can be discovered.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:37 p.m. CST


    by richier123

    Global warming: The Dum Guy is correct in what I am trying to get across. The Earth goes through cycles or cold and hot throughout its life. Obviously one example would be the Ice Age. Regaurdless of whether we stop emmisions from our cars, etc, its going to slowly keep heating up, and we can't stop it. So what I'm saying is that global warming 'caused by humans' is a total sham, cause global warming is going to happen no matter what we do. wakeupbomb13: I understand what you are saying and agree to a certain point. I must be one of the few that is a Christian, yet doesn't have a problem with someone being gay. What I was trying to say is that I see the Bible as guide, as compared to a book of laws. It says that being gay is a sin, but it also says that thinking lustfully about someone that you arn't married to is also a sin. Which is all the same in God's eyes. Its just a matter of people putting WAY more infasis(sp?) on one part than on another.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 4:51 p.m. CST

    Didn't Tenacious D write a song about this?

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    "Fa, la, la, la, lie, lie, lie..."

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:26 p.m. CST


    by King_Midas

    Now we’re talking here. Foreign terrorist attacks on American soil are actually quite rare – there was one during Clinton’s entire 8 years – the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. And the foiling of the millennium bomb plot at LAX was actually under Clinton’s watch. The fact that there hasn’t been another attack on American soil since 9/11 simply speaks to the time and complexity that goes into planning such attacks, especially here – it’s not due to anything tangible that Bush has done. In fact, the biggest victory seems to be the foiled airline plot by British Police last month – again handling terrorism as a criminal matter as I suggested earlier rather than a “war”. Nonetheless, terrorist attacks worldwide (including against American interests) have actually increased in large part because of Bush’s policies and specifically the Iraq War. The numbers support this and our own intelligence estimates actually say the Iraq War has made terrorism worse and increased Islamic radicalization. By our own definition we are not even winning the war on terror. And don’t get me started on Clinton didn’t do anything. Do you remember the uproar when he bombed Al Qaeda training camps in response to an overseas terror attack? The Republicans screamed like a bunch of babies that he had bombed an aspirin factory and was trying to divert attention from Monica Lewinsky. Or how about the Republican who leaked that we were eavesdropping on Bin Laden’s satellite phone causing the bastard to stop using it? A Republican Congress spent the better part of Clinton’s term investigating irrelevant personal matters to damage his reputation while not only ignoring, but stifling his very real attempts to combat terrorism on a global scale. Bush then took office, ignored every warning he was given, let 9/11 happen on his watch, and now claims the fight against terrorism as his personal mandate. It’s patently absurd! As for why so many Democrats believed Saddam had WMD’s – it’s simple. Bush lied, distorted, and cherry-picked the evidence from our own intelligence agencies, ignoring all caveats in order to present a case that looked much stronger than it actually was. Congress DID NOT see the same intelligence that Bush had access to and he is blatantly lying when he says they did. I will never defend Saddam nor his use of chemical weapons against his own people (chemical weapons he acquired from the Reagan Administration by the way) but trading him for either a civil war or a Democratic Islamic Republic based on Sharia is hardly a benefit to this country. And I was against the Iraq War from its very inception – it has nothing to do with hindsight. A doctrine of preemption is asinine because any country could claim the right to attack anybody else based on some perceived, future threat. If it’s not clear to you what is wrong with that logic, then there is little point continuing this debate.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:29 p.m. CST

    Troublesome Talk

    by Ol_Jack_Burton

    I find it odd that no one has brought up the idea of science as religion. I also find it weird that no one has thought to say that there is lots of evidence for creationism, a fact I dont think a lot of evolutionists will have looked at enough to accuse Christians of believing in nothing in terms of Creation. There are a great many scientists who devote their lives to creation science just as earestly as those who devote their lives to evolutionary science. I also find it pretty frustrating that so many on this talk back refer to the weakness of those who have faith, who need faith when until something, anything, is proven absolutely and becomes a law (not just evolution), it is a matter of believing it to be true without knowing for sure that it is. Those of you who are so convinced that evolution is real are so quick to judge those who believe in creation when both are going on a certain level of faith, and depending who you are science in and of itself is somewhat of a religion. Science too requires believing without seeing and certain leaps of logic. All one has to do is look at the Big Bang which is a fine explanation for the origin of the universe if one can explain where the matter and energy for the explosion came from as neither (according to the laws of physics) can be created or destroyed. Creationists believe God created the world ex nihilo (out of nothing), evolutionists believe the Big Bang started ex nihilo, how are the two so different. Is one a bigger leap of logic. Admittedly believing in one has bigger implications for the meaning of life the universe and everything, but believing in the other requires, at the very least is faith...

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:28 p.m. CST


    by McClintock

    Has anyone here that is saying that Jesus was a good man actually read the Bible. He stated that he was God incarnate and that if you didn't accept the sacrifice he made for you you will stand alone before God on the final day of judgement. With statements like that he can only be one of three things 1. A Liar, purposefully misleading people 2. A lunatic, convinced that he is God 3. Or the Lord and the key to salvation Don't give me the good man stuff, he is either the Lord of Salvation or a liar or crazy.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:32 p.m. CST

    Intelligent Design

    by McClintock

    My religious view says I should try to convert people to Christianity. When people say that I shouldn't try to change people's religios views, do they not see that they are trying to change my religious views? Pot calling the kettle black?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:40 p.m. CST


    by zacdilone

    How you can call Lee Strobel an "amateur apologist" when his approach is to interview various experts on different subjects is beyond me. You make it sound like he just makes things up off the top of his head without any evidence to back him up. He's an investigative reporter, not a theologian. He heads out to gather information from different sources and then presents what he's discovered. You can disagree with the people he's interviewed, but you can't knock his technique.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:50 p.m. CST

    Balrog, Napoleon

    by Detrs

    Balrog, re: "macroevolution" (the fact that you think there's some distinction proves you don't quite understand evolution). Napoleon: Strobel is a hack. He never once interviewed front line skeptics like Michael Shermer, Daniel Dennett or Richard Dawkins, or more obscure types like Thomas Mack, Earl Doherty or Dan Barker. It's a book written by a christian for christians. If you'd like a serious challenge to your faith read "Atheism" by George H. Smith.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:52 p.m. CST


    by CTU Mole

    No one has mentioned creation-science because creation science is embarassing. Now, there is no such thing as "science as religion". By definition, science is based on evidence that can be observed and tested. Scientists invite all attempts to discredit or modify itself. Religion is the exact opposite of that. As for "the Big Bang", that has nothing to do with evolution. Science does try to refute the existece of God but religious types are constantly sniping at science, usually with embarassing results for religion.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:54 p.m. CST

    Science does NOT try the refute God that is

    by CTU Mole


  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:57 p.m. CST

    Why The Religious Right Sucks Balls:

    by Mechasheeva

    A Handy-Dandy List For Those Wishing to Shut Up the Stupidheads. 1. They don't believe in science: There is a difference between science and the Bible. Evolution is still a theory because nothing can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. However no one has ever DISproved Evolution definitively. I'm fine with looking at the thousands of studies of dated fossil records and genetic tests that back up the theory of Evolution. Saying that it's not true because the Bible says so is taking the word of people who lived thousands of years ago and wrote that because that's what they believed. Through their blind faith. 2. They hate equal rights: In fifty years people who decry homosexuality as unnatural and want to ban gay marriage will be seen in pretty much the same light as those who told Rosa Parks to get to the back of the bus. Mark my words, assholes. 3. They hate women's rights: The belief that an embryo is a person with a soul (whatever that is) as soon as it's conceived is a religiously-motivated belief that not all people share, and they are trying to force it upon thousands of women who don't share that belief. And that's bonk. 4. They value an embryo over the lives of sick, dying suffering people: I am, of course, referring to repeated attempts to outright ban stem cell research. Again, that's bonk. 5. This movie: They're brainwashing kids to make sure their agenda doesn't die. Not cool. 6. They've got it all backwards: I was raised Catholic and I know that Jesus preached a message of love and acceptance. These people preach a message of fear. Fear of homosexuality, fear of other religions, fear of science, and most of all fear that any one of their closely-held, medieval beliefs will ever be proven wrong. All Jesus asked was for people to be nice to each other, and this is what we get instead. Seriously, what's wrong with you people? 7. They think Harry Potter is the Devil: I mean, really. What the hell? Obviously this is a list directed at Religious Fundamentalists and not Christianity in general. So, Christians, unite! Save your faith from those people who are making every person of non-Christian belief shudder when you talk about how you went to Church on Sunday! Take back your faith, oh sane Christians of America! PS Worshipping cardboard cutouts of a former coke addict is the most hilarious way to spend your summer.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 5:58 p.m. CST

    Evolution is a fact you dolts

    by AElfwine

    You people are confusing the fact of evolution and the theory of evolution. When you hear about scientists having problems with evolution they are having problems with the theory of evolution, ie punctuated equilibrium vs. multiregional models. The fact that life has evolved from point A millions of years ago when no humans exitsted to point B in present day when we populate the entire planet is an indisputable fact. Now if you want to argue about the natural mechanisms that got us from point A to point B then that is fine. But so far all i have heard is people posting anti evolution things that have nothing to do with refuting the fact that life evolves. Also stvnhthr when you stated that Judaism evolved among egyptian society could you please elaborate on where you got your information. As far as I am aware there is no archaeological evidence for a hebrew prescence in Egypt during the middle to late bronze age. In fact we have excavated the sites mentioned in exodus that the hebrews were supposed to have built. Even better they excavated the buildings housing the laborers building the city and guess what no hebrews. Now to be fair the egyptians did control palestine during periods in the broze age but there was definately no hebrew state to deal with. At best we can say they marginally interacted with people living in the judean hills but there is no way to define them as hebrews as their material culture is identical to the surrounding peoples. ie they were native canaanites. In fact it isn't until the mesha stele that we actually get a mention of a peole named Israel. Which if my memory serves me correct is dated to the 10th century BCE. It isn't until much later during the 7th century BCE that we actually find a hebrew state existinng and even then it was a minor power trying to survive between the anvil of and hammer of the Egyptian and Assyrian Empires. Not quite the grand monarchy that the Bible potrays. Of course the entire corpus of ancient text we have relating to the period could all be lying and it could just be part of some ancient athiest conspiracy to discredit the bible but somehow i doubt it. In short the bible is a diverse work of literature but like any other piece of good literature it is usually not good practice to base your entire life around it. Especially when any rational examination of it will lead one to the conclusion that it cannot and is not the word of god. If god has a word to reveal to man it will be revealed through the natural world and discovered through science and reason not fear and dogmatism.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 6:07 p.m. CST

    Evolution Vs. Creationism

    by Coyote Joe

    While you faggots debate, I'm going to go have sex with a woman.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 6:16 p.m. CST

    U can't prove Creationism just by disproving Evolution

    by Shan

    It's very important to mention that you can't prove Creationism and/or Intelligent Design is true by proving parts or all of Evolution is untrue. You have to prove your case with evidence positively supporting your case, not negatively disproving someone else's case. Having said that, I don't think they will because the evidence is not there.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 6:44 p.m. CST

    When is the FSM documentary coming out?

    by Cylon Agent

    Seriously. There needs to be one. By the way, you're all wrong. Obviously the world started when the Flying Spaghetti Monster created a hill with a tree on it, and a midgit (that's right, midgit with an "i") dressed in full pirate regailia. How that theory is any different than the Bible's is beyond me, hell FSMism even has a sense of humor! A shout-out to all those who've been touched by His noodly appendage!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:04 p.m. CST


    by PSUinMD

    I had to register just to respond to part of your very first comment because it shows the fallacy in your logic. You say scientists are taught to accept what other scientists say as fact. Incorrect. Scientist put forth theories that are examined and tested by the scientific community. Sometimes the theory is correct at conception. Sometimes it takes many years, a lifetime perhaps, for new evidence to change a theory. Most of us were tausght that electrons, protons, and neutrons were the smallest particles. Of course that theory has been "upgraded." Even the Bible itself has had scientific examination to show how many of the events could have naturally ocurred without divine intervention. Unfortunately, to be a "true" believer you have to accept the book as gospel because to do so would render it meaningless, or at best, an antiquated history book.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:19 p.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    Glad I spurred you to register. It is a great community to be a part of. Lots of fun film nuts to bounce ideas off of. Unfortunately your criticism is slightly off. I said in the case of evolution scientists are taught to accept at face value other scientists findings. This differs from almost every other field of scientific study. It really makes for a fascinating read once you start to investigate how only the topic of evolution gets the bar lowered for varification of facts. No other theory is given such preferential treatment. Only once you see how necessary evolution is for a naturalistic and materialistic world view do you begin to understand why otherwise legitimite researchers will do anything to protect the theory. Honestly the back peddling and double crossing found in the academic history of evolution is like a bad WB teen drama.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:22 p.m. CST

    As for this movie

    by PSUinMD

    So now we know North Dakota, a barren wasteland similar to Afghanistan, is growing its own malcontent terrorists that by any other name would be known as the Taliban.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:22 p.m. CST

    on subject

    by repus3000

    Rather than write ten paragraphs... let's just say I'm not surprised to see yet another documentary with a dose of Anti-Bush make the waves, and the spins of Aintitcool. Incredible.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 7:33 p.m. CST


    by PSUinMD

    This board does have some interesting characters. I saw Detrs had some really good questions for you and I'm waiting for you to deliver him at least some considerate answers. I know a couple, but I suspect his general point is that evolution is a process with complicated clues and refining and arriving at the all-encompassing answer doesn't happen overnight. It takes more intellectual curiosity than accepting life began with God taking a piss on a pile of mud. Look for the answers and I promose we'll all benefit.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 8:53 p.m. CST

    An extremist by any other name

    by chavee

    With all this talk from Bush about Islamic fascism...he has to know that their are elements in this country just as fanatical as the Jihadi's. And they call themselves Christian. Would he protect us from them and deal with them in the same manner he does the Islamo fanatics.?

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:37 p.m. CST

    Lee Strobel and apologia

    by cyberskunk

    I have not read his book The Case for Christ and frankly, I am disinclined to, but from reading reviews at, I've read everything I care to know about it. In particular this excerpt of a review: <p> "In light of Strobel's frequent reminders that he used to be a hard-nosed, skeptical journalist, I skimmed the table of contents and index to see which critics of Christianity he interviewed. In so doing, I discovered a glaring deficiency in Strobel's journalism: Strobel did not interview any critics of Christian apologetics, even though he attacks such individuals in his book. For example, Strobel devotes an entire chapter to his interview of Greg Boyd (an outspoken faultfinder of the Jesus Seminar), yet Strobel never interviewed a single member of the Jesus Seminar itself! Likewise, he repeatedly criticizes Michael Martin, author of Case Against Christianity, but he never bothered to get Martin's responses to those attacks. This hardly constitutes balanced reporting on Strobel's part; indeed, on this basis, one is tempted to dismiss the entire book." <p> The reviewer does say it is a creative, well-written contribution to Christian apologetics.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 9:43 p.m. CST


    by minderbinder

    People are doing this crazy shit, and they're showing it. How does "bias" create a scene like kids encouraged to worship a cardboard Dubya? I'm just glad they're lifting the rock so we can all see what's squriming underneath.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:23 p.m. CST

    stvnhthr reminds us all...

    by Venator2000

    ...that there's nothing better than cracking the good book... upside his head!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:22 p.m. CST

    Lets destroy everything we don't understand!

    by rsswope

    particularly if it's someone's religious beliefs. If someone thinks different than us, they are intellectually inferior and the enemy! Yea for modern dualistic American ideologies!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 10:28 p.m. CST

    Coyote Joe, don't be a Creationist

    by Venator2000

    Be sure to wrap that rascal!

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:42 p.m. CST

    I was born and raised in North Dakota

    by uberman

    I was in some of these 'churches'. I had the 'revelations' phamplets, I remember the faith healer my Aunt took me and my cousin to in Bismark at a Holiday Inn or some sort of chain. I remember my Uncle the youth pastor, the weeping kids, scared shitless I was going to hell. I also remember being free to run around and play in the state capital, the faith of my grandparents who never ever uttered a political word or condemnation on anyone and had their little Luthern church every Sunday. Yes, North Dakota is a fundamentalist breeding ground, but also has alot of people who just are too polite to stand against it.They also have folks like Byon Dorgan who is probably one of our greatest and most trustworthy political leaders. Dont stereotype the state because of the vocal minority.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:52 p.m. CST


    by NapoleonDynamite

    I call Strobel an amaterur apologist because he is a.) an amateur with no legitimate credentials even in theology, much less critical scholarship and b.) he is a rank apologist who engages in the most uninformed, unsophisticated, fallacy-ridden drivel you're ever going to find. He does NOT interview "experts," he interviews evangelical Christians and fundamentalists, "challenges" them with strawman arguments that skeptics don't really make, never seeks an opposing view or bothers to fact check that garbage routinely fed to him by his interview subjects and then pretends that he has "investigated" something. Anybody who actually tries to use, for instance, something like C.S. Lewis' "liar, lunatic or lord" trilemma is someone who doesn't know what he's doing. His arguments for the resurrection are especially ham handed, ignorant and circular. I challenge you to pick any argument or point that Strobel makes -- anything you think is particularly strong -- and I guarantee you I can blow it right out of the water with very little effort.

  • Sept. 29, 2006, 11:55 p.m. CST


    by NapoleonDynamite

    I think you may have confused me with someone else. I'm the one who said Strobel was a hack and a joke. I'm an empiricist. I don't have any faith.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 12:03 a.m. CST


    by Detrs

    So I did. So I did. My apologies. I hope we can still be friends, eh?

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 12:15 a.m. CST

    No problem, Detr.

    by NapoleonDynamite

    By the way, I think you might have meant to say Burton Mack instead of Thomas Mack. Also, here's a forum you should check out sometime (if you don't already know it) You'd probably like it there.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 12:33 a.m. CST

    Well McClintock....

    by Orbots Commander

    I guess then that Thomas Jefferson believed some pretty radical things because then how do explain this?: Or was one of the founding fathers a lunatic for believing this?

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 12:42 a.m. CST

    To all "christians"...

    by Parzival

    First off...welcome to science...many independent thinking people sacrificed their lives and were persecuted by or killed by the Church for hundreds of years to bring it to us. You see, they knew that all the BS about Sampson slaying an army with the jawbone of an ass could not have happened when they used reason (brains) rather then fear. Jonah getting swallowed by a whale...*sigh* take it metaphorically and you might be close to uderstanding its true meaning. Thousands of people have been killed by the church in the name of Jesus for not believing. Anyway...back to science..and my question...why is it that you discredit something that has made it all the way to scientific theory like evoloution, but fail to critique all the impossible acts in the Old and new testament? You blindly follow unscientific fables in the bible, but convienantly use science in an attempt to disprove evoloution. Look, we live in a free country, but if christians really beiieve all this and want to discredit science, then I think that you should quit using it. Next time you have a heart attack, please pray for healing rather then use medical science to get better.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 1:15 a.m. CST

    He has time later...

    by Pageiv

    To find out who he is when he grows up. Otherwise you could critize every parent for not letting the kids be "who they want to be."

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 1:26 a.m. CST

    No drama here yet

    by Kingdaddy

    It opened last week in Tulsa. Great, I can't get the cool fucking movies to open here early or even on time...but a doc that has Jesus in the title gets an early opening market. Anyways...the buckle of the Bible belt hasn't said shit about it so far... So the way right no dancing necks have ignored it...or football season has blinded them... Either way, the cultural vacuum has engulfed another indie.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 1:31 a.m. CST


    by sitchin

    Jesus, Mary, and Joseph you guys are sure clueless. People raising their kids to worship God and follow the bible actually SCARE you! Fundamentalist Christians believe that you go to hell if you don't accept Jesus into your heart as your personal savior. So to these people, what you call indoctrination and brainwashing is to them "saving their kids from eternal damnation". And what's wrong with Christians dabbling in politics. Christians are citizens, and are entitled to cast their votes for the candidates they feel best reflect their values. That's not mixing church and state, that's respresentative government. They deserve representation just as much as you idiots who believe in evolution because you think everybody else beleives it and you wanna belong to the majority. Well guess what, the majority isn't always right. Look at the comment by Jimbelushi above.. "I can look at scientific evidence to see that species change over time and that those changes correspond to environmental factors." Ding ding, that's not evolution. Nobody disagrees that species change over time due to environmental factors. That's adaptation WITHIN a species. Evolution says that due to these factors a species will change to a completely different species, which has NEVER happened. Um, let me repeat that for the west coasters out there who are probably high right now... it has NEVER happened. There is not one fossil record to support a jump from one species to another species. SCIENCE, which is what you are taught in school, has very little to do with REALITY. Global warming...? It was hotter in the 1400s than it is now, yet, as difficult as it is to believe, they had no SUV's in the 1400s. Earth's temperature is 1 degree warmer now than usual, and the consensu among ACTUAL meterologists, as opposed to scientists in general with no training in the field, is that there is NO EVIDENCE that man's activities have anything to do with this 1 degree increase. Polar bear populations in the arctic are stable or increasing, not decresing as the MSM keeps claiming. Ask Dr. Mitchell Taylor, who lives up there and studies polar bears for a living. "There are 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present." And the ice cap in the antarctic is growing, not shrinking, and temps there are cooling, not warming. See the recent articles in the journals Science, and Nature. Evolution is a "theory", not a fact, about the way the world works, and it says that species jump from one kind to another, and has not one concrete example of it ever happening. Christianity is a "theory", not a fact, and it says that God created us, despite us not having one concrete example of ever seeing him create one of us. What's the difference? Evolution is a religion, believing on faith in things not supported by ANY shred of evidence. Ditto Christianity. Yet we're the loonies and you are men of science? Bah, a pox on your house. I ridicule you daily for believing all that wacko global warming and evolution stuff. The difference is, it doesn't bother me a bit that you get to vote based on your silly beliefs. The fact that I vote based on my beliefs, however, causes you to fume and rant and wish all us Christians were locked up or killed or something. Such tolerance from the supposed party of inclusiveness an acceptance. What a crock. And shut the fuck up about President Bush. We let you kids play at government when the world is fairly stable and there's not much chance of you screwing things up, but when the world gets dangerous and we have to defend ourselves from those who wish to kill us just because we EXIST, we have to send you children back to your rooms and let the grown ups run things. Feh.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 1:58 a.m. CST


    by NapoleonDynamite

    You are a fucking retard. 1. Evolution is a proven fact. 2. Arguing this point just makes you look like even more of an ignorant retard. 3. Speciation has been directly observed and common desent is a proven fact. 4. Only retards try to deny that. 5. There is no debate within science over the FACT of evolution or common descent. 6. There is as much evidence for evolution as there is for gravity and the atom (both of which are theories, by the way). 7. You really don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about on the subject so you really shouldn't open your mouth about it. 8. Any religion which teaches that non-believers will be eternally tortured is a hate religion and deserves no respect. 9. The US is a secular country. Our constitution forbids the government from endorsing any particular religious view or legislating anything based on religion. 10. That means you can't make kids in public schools pray to your magic sky fairy and you can't teach mythology as science. 11. The really SCARY thing about the movie is the fact that theyr are trying to instill a militant, ani-social ideology into innocent children. They are teaching these kids that anyone who disagrees with them is EVIL and is their ENEMY. That's not ok, dude. That's what al Qaeda does. Teaching a 2000 year old superstition written by goat fucking desert nomads is one thing. Teaching kids that their fellow citizens are evil and must be destroyed is completely beyond the pale. There is no difference between this kind of mentality and the mentality of the KKK. It's just substitution one kind of mindless, gibbering bigotry for another. 13. Bush is an incompetent, mendacious, grandiose, mentally deficient chimp who has 10 times more innocent people than Osama bin Laden. increased terrorism and anti-American sentiment worldwide and single-handedly done more to destroy the basic civil liberties and ethical credibility of the US than any president at least in living memory and arguably in US history. Only a raving zealot or a complete imbecile could still support that human cancer.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 2:09 a.m. CST


    by CatVutt

    You could've stopped at "You are a fucking retard". The rest are 1) no-brainers and 2) Completely lost on the Only Slightly Evolved from a Chimp boy.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 2:12 a.m. CST

    Where is the movie showing muslim children to hate?

    by emarten

    Why is everyone so quick to throw the Chirstians to the lions when Muslims brain wash their children to hate anyone not Muslim? You can't compare what Muslims teach their children to do compared to some wacky evangelicals. Who has the courage to go to the Middle East and make a movie based on what Muslim children are taught about the West and that it is good to be a martyr? How many Christians have you seen beheading people in the name of God? The people that make anti-Christian movies and books wouldn't have the balls to make an anti-Muslim movie. Could it be because of the death threats? Salmon Rushdie anyone? Remember Theo van Gogh? He was murdered for making a controversial film about Islam in Holland, the land of ultra-tollerance. He paid the ultimate price for his freedom of expression. Most filmakers are pussies and wouldn't attempt what he did. They know Christians are so pacified that you can say and do anything you want and they will turn the other cheak. All of you assholes that say kill the Christians instead of me, I'm a ________ need to wake up and realize that bombs don't descriminate.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 2:22 a.m. CST


    by NapoleonDynamite

    99.99% of Muslims are non-violent and the activities of the extreme minority is already so well publicized that it's an image which completely obscures the reality of Islam as it is practiced by the vast majority of Muslims. By the way, the people who run this "kids on fire" camp (could there be a creepier name?) have ENDORSED this movie and saod it's an accurate representation. If they don't have a problem with it, why do you? Are you one of those Christians who thinks you're being persecuted and oppressed all the time? Do you think there's a "war on Christmas?" Buck up there, Christan soldier. Christians are 80% of the American populace and control all of the political power. You are not a persecuted minority.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 2:38 a.m. CST


    by Parzival

    Christianity is NOT a scientific theory. It would never make it past hypothesis. It is a faith based religion.I don't think you understand the foundation of science or scientific theory. You have every right to vote as you please, but please do not pretend that you know anything about science or global warming or evoloution. If you beleive in Santa Claus, the toothfairy, or that Moses parted the red sea, you don't belong in a scientific discussion. But, you seem to like to use science when it is convienant to you. Where is the science that jesus was the son of god? That Moses parted the red sea? I bet you also believe that humans walked with dinos 5,ooo years ago. Why is it that you will not argue with the lack of science on these things, but will with global warming and evoloution (that have much more science to support it)?

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 2:45 a.m. CST


    by emarten

    What I'm trying to say is a few nut job Christians are not the enemy. How can you say that 99.99% of Muslims are non-violent? Much of the hateful displays by Muslims are covered up for fear of retribution. The media is very quick to censor anything that may "offend" Muslims. Have you seen the statements by their religious leaders calling for the death of anyone that blasphemes their religion? The Imams hold the power of the flock, and what they say goes. I agree that most Muslims would rather live in peace. The problem is their religious leaders are whipping the flock up into a frenzy in order to further their political agenda. As the U.S. wants to "spread Democracy", the Imams want to spread Sharia law around the world. It is coming to a neighborhood hear you. Just do a search for the major conflicts going on around the world. You will find that in most cases it is Muslims that can't get along with their neighbors.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 2:47 a.m. CST

    and another thing...

    by Parzival

    I love this propoganda movement by christians to try to sound like they are being persecuted in this country. What a joke...especially when the president is a Jesus freak like them.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 2:49 a.m. CST

    Starship enterprise

    by Power_Girl

    Religion is the only thing thats going to stop humanity from becoming an advanced civelization. Do humans keep beleaving in god and wipe themselfs off the face of the planet and cease to have ever existed or do we stop beleaving god and jump onto the starship enterprise and become an advanced civelization.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 2:57 a.m. CST


    by Parzival

    Some Christians might turn the other cheek, but most are not pacified as you claim. With your logic, Christians would be against this war. I don't believe that is the case.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 3:10 a.m. CST


    by Power_Girl

    I just watched the trailer for this movie and that is some scary shit.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 3:27 a.m. CST

    You can't get rid of AK-47s!!!

    by PurityOfEssence

    What will we worship in the coming post-apocolypse. Worshiping THE BOMB would be sort of silly seeing as traditional Nuclear combat no longer has the same social impact as it once did. It's all about small arms combat baby.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 4:18 a.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    Ha ha! These are basic questions; you do have a rye sense of humor. This is an interesting and popular tactic of the pro-evolutionary crowd to try to silence detractors. Honest questions are usually asked, Oh I don't know, maybe one or two at a time. When you see a massive essay list of say twenty or so you know you are being had. It is a trick. See no matter what you answer they know the general public will be ignorant of the correct response and they will either a.) deny the truth b.) ignore the response or c.) ask two dozen more questions. You see, they don't want answers, they don't care about answers. Their real reason for posting their pop quiz will always come at the end of the post. They are all about intimidation. They try to use a bunch of obscure facts (usually copy and pasted from some website they found) to silence detractors. They almost always end their posts with a demand like "answer this or never post again."

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 4:35 a.m. CST

    wry vs. rye

    by stvnhthr

    Did I just say "rye sense of humor"? boy I must be hungry. That's what I get for posting while hunting for a midnight snack.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 5:35 a.m. CST

    lol I thought it was the D too

    by DigitalDong

    Go take a walk in the woods FUCK YOU!! its nice, its really really nice....smells like shit.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 6:17 a.m. CST


    by Sepulchrave

    an organisation that literally worships George W Bush can maintain it's tax-exempt status?

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 7:28 a.m. CST

    Evolution is fact, you retards

    by Teamwak

    It can be seen in action in the Galapagos islands. Carbon dating proves with world is older 6000 years. Fact, fact, FACT!!

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 7:40 a.m. CST

    Carbon dating...

    by Parzival

    is the new thing that Christians are trying to discredit. Amazing how they attack science in order to make the bible believable.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 7:53 a.m. CST

    Whats going on is this.....

    by emeraldboy

    A dangerous fantaical minority hijacked islam in the late seventies early eighties. What america didnt realise however was that the same thing was happening in the US. A dangeous fantaical group hijacked christianity around the same time. There ambitious is the same as the jihadists. namely to create evangelical empire the world over. These people knew that spetember 11th was going to happen. but they let it happen. they hate islam. this is thier private view(Pat robertson called it vile). They have no time for other gods just thier own. We should care deeply about the state of the planet. they are blocking that discussion. The hatred of muslims(i mean all) can be seen in what is happening in the middle east they are blocking any attempt to set up an arab state in palastine. Dont believe me. lets take this example. An islamic man converted to Christianity in Afghanistan. which is against the law there. He was going to be excusted when George W Bush intervened and was horrifed that a man who becmme a born again like himself was going to be excuted. What the bush junta are trying to do is to convert the middle east to christianity by bombing countries that they believe are responsible for 9/11 that is how they got Musharrif onside by threating to bomb him to. All you have to do realise this is to strip away all the cant from the likes of Dr. Rice and cheney and Rumsfeld and others, this is thier aim. One can only hope that the US citizens will give this crowd there marching orders and soon. did anyone see the program by tony robinson about the endtimers.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 8:01 a.m. CST

    "How many Christians have

    by Ecto-1

    "How many Christians have you seen beheading people in the name of God?" Do the Crusades, the Witch trials/persecutions and the Inquisition count??????? Seems that these may have slipped your mind. As far as I'm conserned, all organised religions should be banned. They are all about controll and supression. Weather it's the people within their religion, those from other religions, or those infidels who choose to live thier lives without any sort of religion. I was raised as a catholic, went to a very devout catholic school and am from a large irish catholic family. But all of this brainwashing - and that's exactly what it is - had the opposite effect on me. It made me despise it all.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 8:48 a.m. CST

    Teamwak and Parzival

    by stvnhthr

    It may be helpful for you to first understand what you are trying to attack before you post. For instance the young Earth theory is not an essential Christian belief and neither proves nor disproves the existance of a creator. In discussions it is usually only mentioned by those who have the barest inkling of what Christians actually believe. Carbon dating is a tool, it has its limitations, but I don't think Christians as a whole are against the procedure, or at least it has not appeared anywhere in my Church's bulletin.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 9:12 a.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    You stated "How many Christians have you seen beheading people in the name of God?" Do the Crusades, the Witch trials/persecutions and the Inquisition count??????? Seems that these may have slipped your mind." Excellent points, you've illuminated three of the major historical fallacies often brought against the Christian Church. It is important to remember Christians never claimed to be perfect, but rather they should be quick to admit mistakes and make amends. While the Church's history is tarnished and filled with the shortcomings of its members (remember the Bible has some pretty unflattering portrayals of great figures of faith) in the areas of the Crusades, the Witch Trials, and the Inquisition you can let go of some of your misplaced guilt. Historian Rodney Stark’s new book “For the Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts, and the End of Slavery” would be an excellent resource for you as it references rock solid historical facts to dispel many of these foolish notions. Take the Salem with hunts for instance. The fact is, belief in the Bible is what put a stop to the witch hunts. You see, the Salem witch trials took place at a time when nearly everyone—not just Christians—believed in witches and ghosts. In Europe, for example, literally thousands of people were condemned to death for witchcraft, often the only one to speak in defense of the accused were Christians. In Salem the great Puritan theologian Increase Mather published a sermon, signed by 14 other pastors, condemning the local judge for using lax standards of evidence which had lead to the hanging of 19 people (that’s right not hundreds, not thousands, nineteen.) Mather’s intervention turned the tide, and the trials were finally stopped.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 9:20 a.m. CST

    It makes me so sad...

    by Moonwatcher

    to see how faith is increasingly being used as an excuse for violence nowadays. It isn't enough that millions over the centuries have been sacrificed on the altar of religious exclusivism; now we all have the weapons to destroy completely each other, and ourselves, and all because we feel threatened by our neighbor who just happens to believe differently than we do. It's no wonder so many outside the faith are disgusted by the violence done in God's name; if I weren't already a believer and a pastor, I think I too would be put off by the antics portrayed in this film (which I hope I get to see, cringeworthy as it sounds). The real scary thing is that some will see this as a recruitment film, instead of a warning against religious extremism. God help us indeed, Capone.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 9:40 a.m. CST

    The meaning of life is

    by Power_Girl

    The meaning of life is....(drumrool)...Living : The act of experiencing life. So just live and experience life. You don't know what will happen when you die and no matter how much you pray to a god your society created out of fear you may cease to exist after life. So what was the point in following a religion. Just be kind to youre fellow man and life a happy life, it's probably all you have. And I will now answer you're questions about who put us here...Time, space and matter have allways existed. It's an imposibility for something consisting of matter to exist without ever having not existed. You, me and everything around us has allways existed just not in the shape and form you see it as. The Earth was once one singular piece of matter before forming a speck of dust. That dust over millions and millions(allot longer that that) allong with other events such as the formation of the sun and the qualexy became a mass able to sustain life. That mass will not allways support life and will not allways be here.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 9:56 a.m. CST


    by Parzival

    Good point. Help me understand Christians. I see you use the "small earth theory" to explain the age of the earth. Keep in mind, it is not a scientific theory. Which scientific theory do christians use to explain the parting of the red sea? How bout how an Egyptian ruler being able to turn his staff into a snake, as well as Moses? How did Moses travel to South America and China AND put two of every species from there in the ark. Since freshwater fish cannot live in saltwater, did moses build a fishtank for them on the ark? I really want to know how you can discount scienctific facts and theories on evoloution and global warming, but fail to critique these ideas. Please don't use the common chriatian loophole of miracle or gods works in mysterious ways. This is a scientific discussion. Thanks for your help!!

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Send religious extremists to meet God--

    by John Dalmas

    Line them up, two shots in the back of the head. Then they can spend eternity with Jesus and the Carpenters in the magical kingdom of heaven. These people are just the Western version of the Taliban; dangerous, frightened children masquerading as adults. They live in a fantasy world with which they want to infect everyone; apocalypse-mongering, death-worshipping, reality-denying shitbags.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 10:12 a.m. CST


    by Power_Girl

    I wasn't explaining the age of the earth how can I explain how old it is in it's current form. The earth has allways existed just not in it's current form as Earth. It's impossible for this god fellow to exist from nothing then go on to create something out of nothing. There is an infinite amount of planets out there in time and space forming and ending as we speek.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Christianity is as valid

    by DrFarben

    as any other religion that ever existed or still exists. Maybe I should start preparing for Valhalla? So many gods, so little time.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 10:58 a.m. CST

    Hollywood won't release "Al-Qaeda Camp" anytime soon.

    by KennyKilo

    My dad said something about they have an Islamic movie very similar to this, but are afraid to release it. And I cant blame them, if a nun gets murdered after what the Pope said, Hollywood would be sitting on Al-Qaeda's death wish list. I am also glad for all the Christians here who have defended our faith especially with mentioning titles like "Gods Politics" and "Myth of a Christian Nation." At least someone with faith and reason lives in this contry.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 12:14 p.m. CST


    by Parzival

    Faith and reason are complete opposites. There is no reason in faith. Faith is subjective, while reason in objective. I am glad that there are people on this board who defend logic and proper science. Its nice to see that some of us want to move the human race forward. Let's let the muslims and christians fight it out over whose god is right. I'm gonna enjoy the view....and not live in fear.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 12:22 p.m. CST

    ALL religions = cults

    by Dragulf

    Yeah, I said it. Every religion is a cult. How dare anyone think for themselves! Lazy bastards in cults/religions. Think for me, please! Here is money...

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Good to see level heads prevail

    by Ol_Jack_Burton

    I suppose you have read all of the theories that have been developed in relation to the flood other than simply dismissing it. Most cultures have a deluge story in their mythologies, Gilgamesh and others like that. A flood of that magnitude greatly affects plate tectonics as well as other factors because of the increased pressure on the face of the earth. An event like this also affects the formation of things like diamonds and fossils. The two factors in the formation of the two are time and pressure. If one or both change it affects how they form. Correct me if I am wrong but in order to prove something like carbon dating is accurate enough to be a measure, does it not have to be established that it is accurate. In other words, don't I have to have an object that I KNOW is 1000 years old, test it and see of the method is accurate, and then do that several times before I start using it as a means to measure. What about the environment in pre-history. We don't have a lot of information on what the environment was like because we do not have all the factors. It cracks me up that all you lot can be so viscious to Christians and tell them how judgmental they are, passing them off as retards because they believe something. I am sure someone will say, "But Christians are viscious too, Christians do act crazy." Yep, some of them do, but people with scientific minds, people just as level headed and thoughtful as you spend their whole lives looking for the answers, not looking to disprove others answers. I wrote earlier about science requiring people to believe without seeing, and that is still true, even a skilled evolutionary scientist would tell you they believe that it makes sense but it is still in the realm of theory, not FACT, for so many reasons. If evolution was unequivocally proven I would be more than happy to accept it, but it isn't. Creation science is a valid form of research, and if anyone here had actually looked into any of it instead of knee jerk reacting to it, you would see that there are some very good ideas there that do make sense scientifically. The reality is, evolution or creation or whatever, mankind has not featured on this planet for very long. How exactly can we KNOW, beyond the shadow of any doubt that what any science has uncovered is true? Atomic theory works, but until we have the ability to see an actual atom, electrons and all, we are taking it on faith. Just because a theory makes sense does not mean it is the right theory, just that it is a possible explanation. And just so we are clear, one of the folks up top said the Big Bang had nothing to do with evolution, but sidestepped the argument, and neglected to mention how any evolution could have started if the was no formation of the universe. I read this comment page and the lines are so blurred. Who are the ones who are level headed again, those of you who insult and goad Christians I suppose, or the Christians who simply choose not to understand that evolutionary theory is a credible enough theory that it deserves an educated response, something I am woefully unequipped to provide. I just see a bunch of people wanting to be right, when it just seems like none of us have the answers.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 12:39 p.m. CST

    can't we all just get along?

    by Solact

    I grew up a christian. Attended camps, just like this. I'm no longer a christian. I've become very concerned over the course our country has taken. All these people defending the "bad" parts of their religion. By posting hateful, and judgemental comments, you are doing a disservice to your religion. You are taught to witness with testimony. All you guys are doing is talking AT each other. I no longer feel I'm in the country I was raised. I've become disheartened by the name calling by the Bush Administration, and a 51 percent majority thinking their the only ones in this beautiful country. We all live here together. We all believe different things, and that 51 percent, do not, speak for me. Maybe I'll take the previous posters comment, and move out of the country in two years. I just don't know. I've been to Europe many times, and always find the people their to be so much more accepting of every walk of life. Sure, most hate what America is beginning to stand for, but they're not stupid, and they know that not all of us think the same way. I thought I grew up in a country that embraced diversity, and was able to worship, or not worship any way I wanted. I guess I was wrong because now we are being told that there is only way to do things. This country is on a downward spiral, (see Ancient Greece, Egypt, etc..)just like all "powers" in the past. We are failing because of arrogance. We fail the Iraqi's, we fail the world with our policies, but most importantly we fail the people in our own country who don't subscribe to everything that is "fed" to us by this administration. I'm saddened. Why can't creationism and evolution exist as one. Who says they know how god created the universe? Isn't it possible that evolution was the way he created?

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Orbots Commander

    by McClintock

    No I don't think Thomas Jefferson was a lunatic for believing this. Believing that Jesus taught good things is one thing, believing that Jesus is a really good man is another. He told us to love our neighbor which is good. But he also told people he could forgive there sins which has much deeper implications, If this is false he could be misleading people from a true way to heaven, but if he can forgive sins, which I believe he can, that makes him more than a man. Just because I think someone is a nut or a liar doesn't mean I don't think they can have good points.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 3:17 p.m. CST


    by Junior Frenger

    You still have yet to answer any (not all, maybe even one or two) of Detrs questions. You either can or can't it's as simple as that. Making an excuse for not answering any of the questions only weakens you position. Again, you either can or you can't. It seems to me that you can't.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 3:54 p.m. CST


    by emarten

    Can you show me an example from the 21st century where Christians have beheaded people in the name of God? Don't bring up events that happened hundreds of years ago and say "see I told you so" That is bullshit. What is happening now? When was the last time a Christian fundamentalist group beheaded a Muslim in the name of God? NEVER! All of you small minded people out there trying to equate radical Islam with Christians are missing the point. America and Europe have been very tolerant compared to any Muslim country. Try getting a Bible into an Arab country. There are Christians and Jews in Arab countries, but they are treated very poorly and are under constant scrutiny. One TB'er said something about how we should just get along and that its ok to think differently. How do you get along with people in a religion that still thinks women should cover themselves? What does your superior progressive mind think about that? Honour killings anyone? That is thinking differently! BTW, the Crusades were a reaction to the Muslim invations of Europe.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 5:20 p.m. CST

    There are no such things...

    by 9SilentNine9

    as "Republicans" and "Liberals" anymore. No such things as Christianity, or Muslims anymore in America. Thanks to Mr. Bush, there are only his supporters... and rational mined human beings. If you look up the term "bigot" in the dictionary there are easily clear distincions relating that term to this admisistration. It's such a shame that all of America is at each other's throats. Whether politically, religously, or otherwise.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 6:04 p.m. CST

    Advanced Civilization

    by Cheapskate

    Hey, this has been a really fun talkback. I don't want to get into fruitless points about whether Christianity is evil or if Islam is evil, it doesn't get anywhere. I just want to address those guys who think that all we need to do is stop clinging to some pie-in-the-sky God to achieve the growth of humanity. The opinion that without religion we are free to truly be good to each other. I have to say, that in itself sounds pretty pie-in-the-sky to me. For one, there already was a grand experiment to create a humanist civilization, and it utterly failed. It was called Communism. People are just NATURALLY bad. No amount of enlightenment thought or education will ever change that. I mean, Europe is probably as liberal and religion-less a developed civilization we have right now, and there's many things I appreciate about the way they do things, but I fail to see any sort of advancement of peace. Have you read the newstories about the treatment of blacks and Arabs in France? It sounds like stories from the Civil Rights Era! And you can't use ancient civilizations like the Roman Empire as an example for "an era of peace" because every one of those empires was built on the backs of SLAVES. I can understand that people have a problem believing in the supernatural. But has the alternative really been that great???

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 6:21 p.m. CST

    It's a brand new record for 1990.

    by cyberskunk

    What I had heard about floods in mythologies and different cultures is that floods are common. Snakes are common. Snakes are in different mythologies. Floods are in different mythologies. Having snakes in different mythologies wouldn't mean there needed to be one giant snake in the past. <p> Having said that, looking at the mythology of Gilgamesh with the OT. ark, I wouldn't be able to believe anything but that the OT version was taken from the earlier source. I have read rationalizations for Gilgamesh predating the OT to the extent that people were saying the "true" (OT) version was preserved through word of mouth, because it imbued with divine truthfulness, while the Gilgamesh version was the filtered-down result of whatever the explanation said it was.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 8:20 p.m. CST

    On a lighter note...

    by Parzival

    this has actually been a good thread.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 9:15 p.m. CST

    it has been a good thread

    by Power_Girl

    It would be nice if we could all stop the religion debate and escape into a movie related debate. If anyone wants to contnue the religion bashing and what not find a religion message board and spend the rest of your life debaiting useless facts and nonfacts.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 9:59 p.m. CST


    by HillaryLovesMe

    A good review, but: "What you may not be aware of is that they are also being taught that global warming doesn’t exist because scientists can’t prove it (these would be the same scientists who believe in evolution, I assume)." *** Um, it's only common knowledge that Christian conservatives don't believe that global warming exists. Personally, by the way, I'm a libertarian atheist who believes in evolution, and believes that global warming is a crock of shit, at least as it's portrayed by a very much politically motivated scientific community. It's silly to say that scientists can't "prove" global warming, any more than they can or can't "prove" evolution. (Science, unlike religion, is not really in the "proof" racket; it merely seeks what is most likely to not be false.) But there really is a definite rift among scientists over many aspects of global warming; such as whether it's happening at all; or whether it's happening enough to affect climate chage; or whether humans are causing it (far more likely, that big, hot, yellow shiny thing in the daytime sky controls climate patterns; there's a large dose of vanity, bordering on megalomania, inherent in global warming advocacy); or whether humans can do anything to stop it; or whether humans can do anything to stop it without wrecking the global economy (i.e., the American economy, which amounts to nearly the same thing). If you want to discover unnoticed religious impulses, try asking a leftist about global warming; odds are he'll probably say "Yes of course it's happening, yes of course it's our fault, yes of course we need to try to stop it, and yes of course even if it means setting us back to the 18th century! Why are you asking, are you some kind of neocon ignoramus?!" Faith over reason, right there.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 10:37 p.m. CST


    by Parzival

    All of your rhetoric aside, about 75-80% of scientists worldwide believe that Global warming is happening. It is not faith to believe that global warming is happening, it is the understanding of data researched by science. By analyzing the possible effects, I would say that it prolly won't hurt to error on the side of prevention.

  • Sept. 30, 2006, 11:20 p.m. CST

    Without getting into a debate

    by UnderRadar

    I'm a believer. I grew up in church, walked away from it and came back. It's always distressing to see people who call themselves christians and do heinous things like blow up abortion clinics. But with this movie, judging completely on the review it dosen't really sound like there's too much dangerous stuff going on. Pray for the president, cry durring service. Harmless (non-violent) stuff. But when it gets scary for some, is the idea that kids like these will grow up to be voters and pretty soon non-conservatives are saying stuff like "were losing control of our country". it just sounds like this whole thing falls into a power issue. And I don't want to turn this post into the start of a political debate, because I have no affiliation. I'm actually very tired of christians and conservatives walking hand in hand because that seems like a huge sell out. Jesus spoke about being so indifferent from the physical world that he told the rich young ruler to give everything away to the poor and broken to befor he could follow him. Jesus isn't a republican, he is what he is. Liar or Son of God he is what he is. And that's for us to decide on our own.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 12:11 a.m. CST

    hey indies: where's JIHADI CAMP?

    by Sir Loin

    Once again, I triple-dog-dare you to make a documentary about the "schools" in Pakistan, where the kids are forced to read the Koran for hours and hours a day and NOTHING else. C'mon, get a spine and make the film. Don't be afraid. Theo van Gogh wasn't.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 12:35 a.m. CST

    believe or don't believe

    by thebearovingian

    know the rewards or consequences of said beliefs and then when you find out the truth, take it lilke a man. Ya heard?!

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 3:38 a.m. CST


    by Vi

    I wouldn't mind exposing those nuts too... just to be fair.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 8:05 a.m. CST

    stvnhthr can't

    by PSUinMD

    Sorry, but it's obvious you find it more comforting to rely on the good book than search for answers yourself. Beware of what you may find. Since Detr's questions are too tough why not start with Parzival and his easier ones?

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 9:40 a.m. CST

    And you complained

    by Sudynim

    ...when Sister Mary Frances hit you with a ruler. Jesus save us, indeed.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 1:53 p.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    Parzival, thanks for remaining civil. You sound like you have some honest questions so I would like to address those. First you seem a bit confused about the nature of science. Currently the common understanding of science is limited to only areas of observing, identifying, describing, conducting experimental investigations, and posturing theoretical explanations of natural phenomena. This means science is an effective tool, but a limited tool, for exploring our universe. Scientific explanations are not the benchmark for truth; massive areas of study are completely out of reach of the sciences. Science can neither say something is or isn’t possible if it is of a supernatural origin, it is beyond its limited ability to effectively study. I’m not knocking science, it is a great tool, but we would do well not to confuse what science is able to study with what is real. It isn’t wrong to look for a scientific explanation, just not always possible if you wish to honor the integrity of the data.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 2:45 p.m. CST

    Detr's questions

    by stvnhthr

    If you still want answers to Detr's questions you can go here: This is the website he cut and pasted his list from. Not all of the questions get good answers, which is fair as currently no one can say with 100% certainty if "junk dna" serves a purpose or not, or what causes things like the C pseudogene. Remember I never said Evolution is all bad; it is an interesting field of study. It is just unfortunate the amount of misinformation which is repeated about what it is capable of proving.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 3:40 p.m. CST


    by Junior Frenger

    ... no answers. Whether or not they are cut and pasted is a bit irrelevant.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 4:20 p.m. CST


    by stvnhthr

    It is actually highly relevant. Why answer questions for someone who may not be capable of understanding your reply? Do you talk to the prerecorded telemarketing messages you recieve on your phone? I didn't say they were bad questions, they just don't make much sense as they don't follow a common path of reasoning. If you understand the nature of the questions you would readily see the futility of answering them, it is sort of like the old "have you stopped beating your wife yet?" question. Get my point? Anyways I think anyone truly interested could pop the key words into Google and do a little research for themselves. Being spoon fed answers is of little benefit, which kind of goes back to my original point. The problem is too many people are reading these fradulent Evolutionary claims and taking them at face value instead of doing a little reasearch themselves.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 5:05 p.m. CST

    ...and yet

    by Junior Frenger

    Still, no answers are forthcoming. Thank you for proving a point. What research have you done besides read creationist slanted books such as "Darwin's Black Box". Intelligent Design is not science. NOW THAT'S A FACT. You simply can't aply supernatural causation to scientific ceases to be science at that point. While evolutionary theory has a few blank spots to fill in (getting filled in continually as time passes), you can't just fill in those blanks with the word "GOD" and then posit it as science. Any scientist that claims otherwise has an agenda and is going against a basic rule of science. Intelligent design as a theory from it's outset if flawed simply by including supernatural causation. It's not science. It never has been. It never will be.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 5:08 p.m. CST


    by Junior Frenger

    "Intelligent design as a theory from it's outset IS flawed simply by including supernatural causation. It's not science. It never has been. It never will be."

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 5:45 p.m. CST

    Your getting closer

    by stvnhthr

    Junior now you are on the right track, but I think you still may need to do a little research. I don't think you can really say Darwin's Black Box is creationist slanted, I mean Behe does strongly support common descent which puts him in hot water with many hardcore Creationists. Intelligent Design, if you took the time to reasearch it, does not mention supernatural causation. To do so, as you mentioned, would push it outside the window of scientific study. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, and are not the result of an undirected, chance-based process such as Darwinian evolution. A designer can be either natural or supernatural, that does not change the fact something is the product of design. Now many supporters of Intelligent Design do believe God did the designing, but they oppose teaching this in the science classroom, as it is not essential to the ID theory; just as many components of Evolution are either unknown or non-existent, the theory still is of academic merit.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 6:53 p.m. CST

    I'm sorry...

    by Junior Frenger

    ... but, Your response borders on insulting. "If I took the time to research it" An assumption. I know, it doesn't outright say "GOD", but now we're just splitting hairs, because we both know that's what is implied. "A designer can be natural or supernatural" That's convieniently vague. It either is or isn't. Is it god or not? You can't posit a theory and then be vague about it's machinations. You are simply dancing around in an attempt to validate intelligent design. Be as vague as you want. Post as many "this or that" type responses you like. You and I both know that you (and all intelligent design theorists and backers) are talking specifically about GOD as the designer. That in itself is supernatural causation. Thus invalidating intelligent design as scientific theory. You can be as vague as you like, everyone here knows exactly what you are. implying. If science relied soley on vague assumptions we'd still be in the dark ages. The assumptuion that complexity indicates a "designer" is not science. The vatican itself has deemed intelligent design as no scientifc alternative to evolution. Worthy of academic study? Possibly from a sociological stand point, but what on earth does it have to do with science? Nothing. It is not a "fact" that our development as a species is a "product of design". These may be you beliefs, but that does not make them fact. Here is a fact. Evolution has ininitely more research to support it than intelligent design does. Why is that? Because you can only go so far with the theories behind intelligent design. It just comes down to this, science begets investigation, faith (or intelligent design) negates investigation. Essentially intelligent design cannot be expanded upon, it cannot be proven wrong or right. Whereas Evolutionary theory has been challenged, refined, and expanded. It has yet however not been disproven. That is why Darwins basic theories has stood the test of time. Years from now intelligent design will be nothing more than foot note in sociology classes.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 6:55 p.m. CST

    I Will See The Scary Film "Jesus Camp".

    by HaveCameraWillTravel

    The previews for this film scare me. "Laying hands" on a standee of Bush? Kids willing to actually go to war for Jesus? Sounds like terrorist training camps to me. A must see movie that is actually socially revelant.

  • Oct. 1, 2006, 11:14 p.m. CST

    Lee Strobel and the journal Nature

    by Balrog_77

    To the people bashing Lee Strobel... There was an article in the journal Nature several years ago that had a huge impact on me. In this article, three notable intelligent design theorists, including Michael Behe, were asked to summarize their critiques of evolution. Prominent evolutionists were then given a chance to respond, and it seemed that they tore apart the arguments of the intelligent design theorists. Of course, each of their responses was much longer than the original ID theorist summaries. Furthermore, the ID theorists were never given a chance to respond, so it seemed as if the evolutionists' rebuttals were the last word on the matter. After the three rebuttals, another evolutionst wrote a lengthy article slamming intelligent design theory. For a long time this made me think that the ID theorists HAD no response to the evolutionist's rebuttals, and it served to bolster my faith in evolution for a long time. But when I read the Case for a Creator, Lee Strobel presented these exact rebuttals verbatim from the journal Nature to the scientists against whom they had been directed, and lo and behold, time and again, the ID theorists pulled the rug out from under the evolutionist rebuttals. Now I ask you, how is what the journal Nature did any different to what Lee Strobel does in his books? Sure, Lee Strobel didn't give the evolutionists a chance to respond back yet again, but then, the journal Nature didn't even give the ID theorists a chance to respond back the first time. Why is it that evolutionists are so afraid to launch a fair debate, and tend to leap down the throat of anyone who criticizes evolutionary theory with, dare I say, "religious fevor"? I thought the spirit of science was to question existing theories, so that the "best explanation" can truly be found? Now, I'll acknowledge that Strobel is convinced of the truth of ID, and that slant naturally comes into his choices of who to interview, but I've also got to say that he really does present some of the very best arguments that have been made against what these ID scientists have to say. The reason he interviews these scientists, and doesn't go interview evolutionsts, is that his book is directed largely towards those who, like him, only have had one side of the story and have bought into it entirely. So naturally his emphasis is to show the other side of the story, so that those who, like me, thought they had heard the whole story, can have their eyes opened.

  • Oct. 2, 2006, 12:09 a.m. CST


    by Junior Frenger

    As stated in my previous posts, by it's very nature Intelligent design is not science. "ID scientists" (by that term I assume you mean scientists that are pro ID)are forgeting (deliberately I might add) one of the basic fundamentals of science. Scientific investigation cannot include supernatural causality.

  • Oct. 2, 2006, 1:54 p.m. CST


    by Detrs

    Yes, I copy and pasted the questions, but I can answer them. I have over 3 feet worth of books on evolution on my shelves and probably more books on or with some peripheral to religion. I've been reading and learning about evolution, from news articles, to books, to editorials, and all the evidence says that evolution is incontrovertible fact. If you have a specific problem ASK A BIOLOGIST. I could give you probably 3 dozen blogs that are all done by guys with doctorates (you know, the people who actually study this for a living). If you have a bone to pick and you don't feel it's answered satisfactorily by talkorigins (another excellent source), talk with them. In the future, don't insult my intelligence. You've yet to make any specific claim other than that there's evidence that evolution isn't true, and yet you've presented none of it. If you'd like I can give you easier questions regarding autoimmune disorders, hox genes, or punctured equilibrium. Also, in the future, anyone using the word "evolutionist" will be ignored by me for rampant stupidity (seriously, what IS an "evolutionist?").

  • Oct. 2, 2006, 3:09 p.m. CST

    Science and "evolutionists".

    by Balrog_77

    Junior: As a matter of fact, science existed long before either naturalism or humanism. Many of humanity's greatest scientific achievements were motivated by a desire to "reveal the glory of God's creation." The fact is, naturalism is a BELEIF, a philosophy, a faith if you will, that claims that all effects seen in nature have a cause within nature. But I put to you, what if that belief is wrong? That is why proponents of evolution attack any doubters with such fevor--evolution is the ONLY naturalistic explanation of life as we see it, and if evolution can't explain said life, then it undermines their underlying philosophy that there is no God. Detrs: "If you have a specific problem, ASK A BIOLOGIST." That's funny that you should say that, because it way my weekly Friday dinner-debates with a professor from my university that convinced me that evolution, at least by natural selection, didn't have foot to stand on. And also, here is the definition of "evolutionist" the way I'm using it... Evolutionist (n.): one who believes that the full range of species today evolved from some kind of primordial organism via the mechanism of natural selection ONLY. And let's not even open the can of worms on the complete helplessness of science to explain how such a primordial organism could have come into existence in the first place.

  • Oct. 2, 2006, 3:13 p.m. CST


    by Balrog_77

    I should clarify that I am aware that natural selection isn't the ONLY mechanism behind evolution in modern evolutionary theory. It is however still considered the primary one, hence my emphasis on it. I would have been better saying "evolution ONLY by mechanisms involving undirected, natural processes."

  • Oct. 2, 2006, 3:41 p.m. CST


    by Detrs

    There is a difference between something being unexplained and something being unexplainable. As for abiogenesis, look up the Miller-Urey experiment. I've personally talked with over a dozen biologists about half as many ID proponents and more theologists than I can name, and there's no doubt in my mind at least: the scientists can easily cite a volumnious amount of evidence for their claims.

  • Oct. 2, 2006, 3:42 p.m. CST


    by Detrs

    Have you talked with any other biologists? I wouldn't go with just the one.

  • Oct. 2, 2006, 10:16 p.m. CST

    Yeah, Balrog sure...

    by Junior Frenger

    Ummm... I never claimed science didn't exist before naturalism. my point was that Intelligent Design is not science. "And let's not even open the can of worms on the complete helplessness of science to explain how such a primordial organism could have come into existence in the first place." let me get this straight? Because science san only hypothesize about this primordial soup,it must be god? 'Yawn' This is the typical creationist rant. If it can't be completely explained it must be the work of god.