addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupsimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo

Re: [humanism-174] FW: Not new, but well said and Mr. Ham

From: coreyhaines
Sent on: Saturday, November 3, 2007 11:17 AM
When discussing a debate with these people, it is important to
remember that any reasonable debate relies on acceptance of some
common starting points.

What are you going to say when they bring up something like this:
"Estimates for the pre-Flood population are based on very little
information, since Genesis 1 doesn't give extensive family size or
population growth information. We know that Noah was in the tenth
generation of his line, and he lived about 1,650 years after creation.
Genesis also indicates that in Noah's lineage children were being born
to fathers between the ages of 65 and more than 500 (when Noah bore
his three sons)."
http://answersing...­

I can't imagine that you can say anything to this, really. They accept
that the words of the bible are the truth and any other argument must
eventually conform to the bible. If our knowledge gained through the
evidence around us contradicts the bible, then the evidence is wrong.

Look at the picture at the bottom of the link that I put above. That
is their approach: read the bible and interpret it, so-called
"secular" theories do not hold any worth to them.

-Corey



On 11/1/07, Marni Tiborsky <[address removed]> wrote:
> Ok, I agree with every point that has been brought up by Gordon, John,
> Corey, Mark, and Fred. Our best defense is a well-thought out,
> well-executed, well-planned offense. As I have said before and will say
> again, our group should ALWAYS take the high road, be the banner group for
> manners, ethics, honesty, integrity, and above all, steadfastness. We are
> not a group of "secular fanatics" as someone wrote in the PD yesterday. We
> are in this group because we are a damn good bunch of people who all have
> similar viewpoints and "beliefs", who are smart, friendly, educated and
> respectful, and we won't back down from our convictions. That is what I like
> about this group, and that is what will keep us going strong from here on
> out.
>
> Aside from us being all that and a bag of chips, we also know when caution
> and patience are needed to work through challenges, like Mr. Ham's
> "conference", and because of this, we will plan together how to make this
> happen. Even if Mark and I are for some reason unable to attend this
> lecture, we would really like it if a group of people can go, take notes,
> listen actively, and participate nicely in the presentation. We need to
> educate ourselves to strengthen our position. We will not go in half-cocked,
> thinking we know everything and they should get out of dodge. We will work
> out the logistics, we will investigate the AIG website further, we will
> learn more about Mr. Ham and his belief system, and we will have a plan.
>
> Please don't get me wrong. I am saying this for those who wish to be
> actively involved in this and many more activist type events in the future.
> However, we are a solid group of people with all sorts of backgrounds, and
> we all have things to contribute. You do not need to be an activist to be a
> part of this group, and we don't ever want anyone to feel like he/she has to
> be. You contribute enough simply by being with us via email, via the meetup
> website, simply by reading our posts and doing your own thinking, you are a
> contributing member. You don't need to speak up, you don't need to do
> anything unless you want to.
>
> As the organizer of this group, I am proud to say we are a determined bunch,
> and we are steadily growing. This makes me happy. I just wanted to get this
> out in the open that I am very glad all of you are here, and that you are
> all contributing in your own ways.
>
> Thanks, everyone,
> Marni
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [address removed] [mailto:[address removed]] On Behalf Of
> Fred Welty
> Sent: Thursday, November 01,[masked]:14 PM
> To: [address removed]
> Subject: Re: [humanism-174] FW: Not new, but well said and Mr. Ham
>
> Gordon,
> Probably you are right that we will not change the beliefs of a
> hardcore believer.  There is a chance however small.  I'm an example.
> I was once very religious.
> Consider this: If we did help an ardent proselytizer to begin to
> question and think outside the strictures of religion, that might
> have a considerable effect on a number of his or her religious
> acquaintances.  I take my idea from the book,  Tipping Point.
> Another thought: Sometimes a person who is very aggressive in
> defending the faith is actually trying to override their own doubts
> about god.  Getting to that doubt might take more skill than any of
> us have.
> Regardless of the outcome, we could have a stimulating exchange of
> ideas.  That, in itself, is worth the effort to bring about a meeting.
> Fred
>
> ---- Original Message ----
> From: [address removed]
> To: [address removed]
> Subject: Re: [humanism-174] FW: Not new, but well said and Mr. Ham
> Date: Thu,  1 Nov[masked]:45:32 -0400 (EDT)
>
> >I would like to be involved in this as well. I think I may order a
> >book or two by Mr. Ham, just to see what rational he uses to justify
> >his claims. I don't really feel knowledgeable enough to sit on a
> >panel, but maybe I will after understanding the AIG agenda a bit
> >better.
> >  I agree with Fred. This whole AIG thing should be understood in
> >depth before jumping into anything. Also, I would hope if we do plan
> >some type of public debate, our goal would be solely to encourage the
> >public to do some rational thinking. I seriously doubt that we are
> >going to shake the beliefs of the AIG people, but maybe some people
> >attending might hear a viewpoint they have never been exposed to
> >before...
> >
> >  Gordon
> >
> >Fred Welty <[address removed]> wrote:
> >  Mark,
> >I agree with going for the gold, but let's be effective about it.
> >To make one wild stab in the dark will probably result in failure.
> >We would accuse them of ridged, medieval thinking and they would
> >promise to see us burning in hell. Nothing new in that.
> >Here's a suggestion: First, let's understand AIG's position in
> >detail. The more we know, the stronger our approach will be. Then
> >we can have large public meetings, as you suggest. I think that we
> >first need to meet with some believers in AIG for conversations.
> >These would be non-confrontational,­ even friendly. What do you think?
> >Fred
> >
> >---- Original Message ----
> >From: [address removed]
> >To: [address removed]
> >Subject: Re: [humanism-174] FW: Not new, but well said and Mr. Ham
> >Date: Wed, 31 Oct[masked]:23:18 -0400 (EDT)
> >
> >>The Cleveland Freethinkers vs. Answers in Genesis, in a true public
> >>debate
> >>with a moderator & all that stuff... I have to admit, that sort of
> >>activism
> >>intrigues me!
> >>
> >>There would be a lot of issues to consider- first, how would the
> >>group as a
> >>whole feel about such an endeavor? If it is viewed favorably, would
> >>we then
> >>take volunteers for a sub-committee which would be directly involved
> >>in the
> >>possible planning & execution of this event?
> >>We'd need 3 to 6 panel members, I guess- who among us will be brave
> >>enough
> >>to face the mighty wrath of AIG?
> >>
> >>Contacting Ken Ham & bunch shouldn't be too hard- there is contact
> >>info on
> >>their site. Whether or not they'd want to be involved in a debate,
> >>well...
> >>
> >>As for a place, the Shore Cultural Center in Euclid has two small
> >>auditoriums-­ Lakewood High is another possibility. Tickets could be
> >>sold for
> >>a modest price & the proceeds donated to charity.
> >>
> >>Thinking too big for our britches? Probably- or, what the hell,
> >>should we
> >>work towards going for the gold?
> >>
> >>On 10/31/07, Fred Welty wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I like the idea of getting together with a group of xian
> >>> fundamentalists. They might want to meet with us thinking that
> >>they
> >>> could win a convert or two. This is much better than disturbing a
> >>> bible study group or lecture. In a group called together for the
> >>> purpose of discussing theism vs. secularism, we would very likely
> >>> meet people who are aggressively proselytizing. Personally, I
> >would
> >>> find it very satisfying to develop some cracks in their armor.
> >>> Fred
> >>>
> >>> ---- Original Message ----
> >>> From: [address removed]
> >>> To: [address removed]
> >>> Subject: Re: [humanism-174] FW: Not new, but well said and Mr. Ham
> >>> Date: Tue, 30 Oct[masked]:42:14 -0400 (EDT)
> >>>
> >>> >Maude, Corey, and John; I see good points in what you all have
> >>> >written this evening. How does all of this tie in with this email
> >>> >that Marni sent the other day (attached below)? If we do decide
> >to
> >>> >get a group together to go to this thing in Sugarcreek, perhaps
> >we
> >>> >should have some sort of meetup beforehand.
> >>> > I wish we could organize some kind of public debate and get this
> >>> >Ham fellow and some scientists to attend. You know, get the
> >papers
> >>to
> >>> >cover it and all... That could never happen, could it?
> >>> >
> >>> >Marni Tiborsky wrote:
> >>> > Gordon, here was what I was mentioning last night that was sent
> >>to
> >>> >us from
> >>> >Charles Pervo. Everyone, I feel this needs to be reiterated time
> >>and
> >>> >again
> >>> >to the majority of people who are ignorant about our country's
> >>> >founding.
> >>> >This is what I say should be on the front lines of our cause as
> >>The
> >>> >Cleveland Freethinkers.
> >>> >
> >>> >Thanks,
> >>> >Marni
> >>> >
> >>> >P.S. Great meetup last night and a terrific dinner at Harry's!
> >>Thanks
> >>> >to
> >>> >Maude, Gordon and Mark :)
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >-----Original Message-----
> >>> >From: Charles Pervo [mailto:[address removed]]
> >>> >Sent: Thursday, October 25,[masked]:37 AM
> >>> >Subject: Not new, but well said
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >From Bob Cesca, Huffington Post:
> >>> >
> >>> >"America was founded by men of the Enlightenment: a movement
> >which
> >>> >emphasized reason, rationality, liberalism, anti-authoritarianis­m
> >>and
> >>> >political equality. The founders were revolutionary liberals who
> >>> >believed
> >>> >strongly in secular government. This is nowhere near "right of
> >>> >center" or
> >>> >indicative of a Judeo-Christian Nation.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >Many of the founding fathers, especially Thomas Jefferson, while
> >>> >claiming
> >>> >to believe in God, were deists and didn't believe in the
> >>resurrection­
> >>> >or
> >>> >the divinity of Jesus Christ; they didn't believe in Christ's
> >>> >miracles or
> >>> >the holy trinity. Bill O'Reilly would've poked their eyes out
> >with
> >>> >his
> >>> >pointy fingers.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >Thomas Paine, whose writing inspired the Declaration of
> >>Independence­,
> >>> >rejected all religions: "I do not believe in the creed professed
> >>by
> >>> >the
> >>> >Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the
> >>> >Turkish
> >>> >Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any church that I know
> >>of.
> >>> >My own
> >>> >mind is my own church." (The Age of Reason, 1794)
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >John Adams, as president, signed a treaty in 1796 which stated
> >>> >unequivocally: "As the government of the United States of America
> >>is
> >>> >not in
> >>> >any sense founded on the Christian Religion." There's no gray
> >area
> >>> >there.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >And, naturally, we have the First Amendment which includes that
> >>pesky
> >>> >Establishment Clause which separates church and state. That, and
> >>> >Article VI
> >>> >which forbids a religious test for holding public office. Clearly
> >>a
> >>> >section
> >>> >of the Constitution the Republican candidates have overlooked.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >Make no mistake, the founders absolutely believed in the
> >existence
> >>of
> >>> >a God
> >>> >or a Creator. George Washington often spoke of "Providence." But
> >>they
> >>> >were
> >>> >fighting and dying to escape the tyranny of a theocratic
> >>government.
> >>> >Why
> >>> >would they risk everything only to establish -- hell, to
> >establish
> >>> >exactly
> >>> >what today's Republican Party wants: an imperial, conquering
> >>> >superpower
> >>> >fronted by a strong executive who legislates Judeo-Christian
> >>dogma?
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >The founders knew that theocracy and authoritarianism were the
> >>> >weapons of
> >>> >tyrants. Likewise, in establishing a constitutional democracy,
> >>they
> >>> >knew
> >>> >that if they sanctioned a national religion, then government
> >would
> >>be
> >>> >able
> >>> >to tax and regulate religion -- suppressing religious expression.
> >>So
> >>> >the
> >>> >founders created a secular nation in which any and all religions
> >>> >would be
> >>> >free to prosper without government intrusion -- and vice versa.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >As for the political and ideological views of the founders, you
> >>can't
> >>> >get
> >>> >much more liberal than instigating a rebellion and engaging in
> >>> >revolutionary warfare against a standing imperial army, a monarch
> >>> >(unitary
> >>> >executive) and a monopolistic mega-corporation (the East India
> >>> >Company,
> >>> >which received the most infamous corporate tax cut of all time --
> >>> >triggering the Boston Tea Party).
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >Sorry Republicans. The founding fathers were secular liberals.
> >And
> >>so
> >>> >are a
> >>> >majority of Americans right here and now.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >==========
> >>> >This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain information
> >>that
> >>> >is
> >>> >private, confidential, or protected by attorney-client or other
> >>> >privilege.
> >>> >If you received this e-mail in error, please delete it from your
> >>> >system
> >>> >without copying it and notify sender by reply e-mail, so that our
> >>> >records
> >>> >can be corrected.
> >>> >==========
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >--
> >>> >Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to
> >>> >everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
> >>> >This message was sent by Marni Tiborsky ([address removed])
> >>from
> >>> >The Cleveland Freethinkers.
> >>> >To learn more about Marni Tiborsky, visit his/her member profile:
> >>> >http://humanism.m...­
> >>> >To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click
> >>here:
> >>> >http://www.meetup...­
> >>> >
> >>> >Meetup.com Customer Service: [address removed]
> >>> >632 Broadway New York NY 10012 USA
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to
> >>everyone on
> >>> this mailing list ([address removed])
> >>> This message was sent by Fred Welty ([address removed]) from The
> >>Cleveland
> >>> Freethinkers.
> >>> To learn more about Fred Welty, visit his/her member profile:
> >>> http://humanism.m...­
> >>> To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click
> >here:
> >>> http://www.meetup...­
> >>>
> >>> Meetup.com Customer Service: [address removed]
> >>> 632 Broadway New York NY 10012 USA
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to
> >everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
> >This message was sent by Fred Welty ([address removed]) from The
> >Cleveland Freethinkers.
> >To learn more about Fred Welty, visit his/her member profile:
> >http://humanism.m...­
> >To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here:
> >http://www.meetup...­
> >
> >Meetup.com Customer Service: [address removed]
> >632 Broadway New York NY 10012 USA
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on
> this mailing list ([address removed])
> This message was sent by Fred Welty ([address removed]) from The Cleveland
> Freethinkers.
> To learn more about Fred Welty, visit his/her member profile:
> http://humanism.m...­
> To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here:
> http://www.meetup...­
>
> Meetup.com Customer Service: [address removed]
> 632 Broadway New York NY 10012 USA
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
> This message was sent by Marni Tiborsky ([address removed]) from The Cleveland Freethinkers.
> To learn more about Marni Tiborsky, visit his/her member profile: http://humanism.m...­
> To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here: http://www.meetup...­
>
> Meetup.com Customer Service: [address removed]
> 632 Broadway New York NY 10012 USA
>
>


-- 
http://www.coreyh...­

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy