So, if we don't have ALL evidence for evolution, wouldn't it be 'scientific' to at least include the possibility of ID?

I know next to nothing about science, but it seems to me that if you are going to throw a political debate, you invite both candidates. Otherwise......what's the point?

As I've already stated, "After all, if a teenager wants to be abstinent, why not support them in that choice?" What possible harm can come from supporting anyone who chooses to be abstinent? Why do you insist that abstinence is not an option? Why does it matter to you so much that their choice must be dismissed?

First, it seems that people confuse natural selection with evolution. While NS does make changes in a species over time, it does not change a species. In previous post, someone brought up giraffes. NS might make their necks longer and heads harder (insert joke here lol) but it won't take a rabbit and over time change it into a giraffe. The most you might get is a rabbit with a long neck. Hardly the same thing genetically. So, while NS is pretty indisputable, it is not proof of evolution anymore than finding a nail in a tree is proof that trees evolved into houses.

Those "Stupid abstinence programs" affirm and support a valid choice for those teens.

It is insulting to these young people to assume that they are incapable of remaining sexually celibate

I hear alot of people saying how long ago the bible was written , and that it does not apply to modern life today. They never explain why.Saying it is too old to really make any impact with the world we NOW live in .

Can anyone go into depth with this? As to why?

Barr is nothing but a LINO. Libertarian In Name Only! When he was a member of congress his stance on almost everything that sets the Libertarians apart from the other two was always with the GOP. He is NOT a Libertarian in any way whatsosever.

I don't know why he ran for their nomination because his political views do not reflect the Libertarian platform. Perhaps he has a book to sell and this will give him good PR.

You keep claiming they are receiving taxpayers money, but you haven't produced any proof they do. In fact, the only proof you've shown is that they did and the grant/reduced rent/whatever was rescinded because of their non-hiring practices.

Where's the proof?

The Secretary of Defense is hereby authorized, under such regulations as he may prescribe, to lend to the Boy Scouts of America, for the use and accommodation of Scouts, Scouters, and officials who attend any national or world Boy Scout Jamboree, such cots, blankets, commissary equipment, flags, refrigerators, and other equipment and without reimbursement, furnish services and expendable medical supplies, as may be necessary or useful to the extent that items are in stock and items or services are available.

The military spent $6 million on the 1997 Jamboree, almost $8 million on the one in 2001, and - until the district court’s injunction - it was scheduled to spend another $7.3 million on the 2005 Jamboree.

The Boy Scouts do not kick out children who wants to be scouts

they just don't hirer people who don't have the same moral values as they try and up holed.

* Employment
With respect to positions limited to professional Scouters or, because of their close relationship to the mission of Scouting, positions limited to registered members of the Boy Scouts of America, acceptance of the Declaration of Religious Principle, the Scout Oath, and the Scout Law is required. Accordingly, in the exercise of their constitutional right to bring the values of Scouting to youth members, the Boy Scouts of America will not employ atheists, agnostics, known or avowed homosexuals, or others as professional Scouters or in other capacities in which such employment would tend to interfere with the mission of reinforcing the values of the Scout Oath and the Scout Law in young people.

It seems to me that the genesis version of creation seems to be the default one referred to unless specified otherwise. The first example of observation refuting it that comes to mind is the fossil record. If every critter was created in a week, we would expect to see every critter mixed together in the fossil record. Trilobites with dinosaurs with rabbits with donkeys with humans with etc etc. Instead, the hundreds of millions of fossils are not mixed together at all, and only appear at certain times (at certain strata) in the fossil record.

The exact reason why I would never have anything political or religious/non-religious plastered on my vehicle ! Never underestimate the power of an idiot walking by.

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."

first off, this thread is not at all meant to be disrespectful. I respect all beliefs. it's just an honest question. christians believe that jesus christ is going to one day come back. they believe that he will rise again. my question is this. we have had several people who have claimed that they were the second coming of jesus christ. how will a christian know when it is the right person?

"Just knowing the influence that our citizens have to talk to our congressmen and senators ... This is awesome," said Nathan Horn. "We really need to bring the fuel prices down for the common person."

If, while having a learned knowledge of certain scientific fields like archaeology/paleontology, etc., and I came across a book called the Bible, I believe after reading just a little I would be very intrigued especially when someone would inform me that book was formatted on writings that were over 1800 years old.

This is one of the finest films ever made. Run, don't walk, to the nearest theater and take several friends with you.

The creme de la creme in the scientific field and all strongly acknowledging an Intelligent Designer in one way, shape or form according to recorded statements or writings.

The Q'uran is based on the same teachings and the same God. It's more or less an "add-on" to the Bible, so it doesn't make for a very good comparison here.

FIRST, on the ground of the testimony of Jesus Christ.
SECOND, on the ground of its fulfilled prophecies.
THIRD, on the ground of the unity of the book.
FOURTH, on the ground of the immeasurable superiority of the teachings of the Bible to those of any other and all other books.
FIFTH, on the ground of the history of the book, its victory over attack.
SIXTH, on the ground of the character of those who accept and of those who reject the book.
SEVENTH, on the ground of the influence of the book.
EIGHTH, on the ground of the inexhaustible depth of the book.
NINTH, on the ground of the fact that as we grow in knowledge and holiness we grow toward the Bible.
TENTH, on the ground of the direct testimony of the Holy Spirit.

Christ would have been going against everything he died for to have the messages of the OT unchanged.