RationalWiki serves, backhanded by Bob Perry

RationalWiki offers this:

The basic assumption of theism, that God does exist, hasn’t been backed up with solid and universally convincing evidence – so arguing the finer points of the nature of God is quite pointless.

Bob Perry challenges that by saying:

But if science is the only appropriate defender of the Naturalistic worldview, it seems fair to ask how science can analyze things that, under the presuppositions of Naturalism, are not possible even in principle? How do the priests of scientism propose to explain away non-natural realities?

Take for instance the often-repeated declaration that “science has disproved God.” This is an odd claim to say the least. For one thing, it must simultaneously address the mutually exclusive truths that: 1) science is the study of the physical universe and, 2) no credible theist has ever claimed that God is part of the physical universe. This detail seems to be lost on the priests of scientism – especially on those who espouse their disbelief in the deity with a smug wave of the hand and a demand for “evidence.” They insist that the Christian theist offer acceptable physical evidence for a non-physical entity that the scientific clergy has already dismissed by mere presupposition. Do they not see the circularity in their reasoning? Without it, the entire scaffolding of scientism collapses under the weight of its own criteria for identifying truth.

Quote sources

  1.  RationalWiki (2013). Atheism FAQ for the Newly Deconverted. Available http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki_Atheism_FAQ_for_the_Newly_Deconverted. Last accessed 31st Dec 2013.
  2. Perry, B. (2010). Defrocking the Priests of Scientism. Apologetics 315. Available http://www.apologetics315.com/2010/04/essay-defrocking-priests-of-scientism.html. Last accessed 17h Oct 2013.

The appeal to back alley abortions refuted

Lauren Rankin asserts that:

While Republican lawmakers attempt to use criminal abortion provider Kermit Gosnell to smear safe and legal abortion, they ignore the fact that by closing 37 of the 42 abortion clinics in the state of Texas, they are essentially sentencing women to dangerous illegal abortions and sending women straight to illegal abortion providers like Gosnell.

But Troy Newman refutes that by saying:

“This is such great news for those who cherish life. Our experience, confirmed by state abortion statistics proves that when abortion facilities close, abortions are reduced and lives are saved,” said Newman. “There are literally dozens of pregnancy help centers in Texas that offer free resources to women in crisis pregnancies standing at the ready to assist women with life-affirming help. With that kind of support, there is no reason for women to not get the help they need during their pregnancies.”

Quote sources

  1. Rankin, L. (2013). Texas Abortion Law: Why You Shouldn’t Mess With Texas Women. Truthout. Available http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/17205-texas-abortion-law-why-you-shouldnt-mess-with-texas-women. Last accessed 18th Oct 2014.
  2. Newman, T. cited in Sullenger, C. (2014). Confirmed: Fourteen Texas Abortion Mills Shut Down While Electrical Outage Prevented Appointments in Dallas. Operation Rescue. Available http://www.operationrescue.org/archives/confirmed-fourteen-texas-abortion-mills-shut-down-while-electrical-outage-prevented-appointments-in-dallas/. Last accessed 18th Oct 2014.

Betty Friedan’s shortfall

What’s sad is, Betty Friedan actually pointed out a lot of very real problems with women spending all day puttering around an empty house.

And when she asked the question, “Is this all?”, it actually was the right question—she just came up with all the wrong answers.

Quote source

Botkin, A.S & E (2014). It’s Not About Staying at Home. Western Conservatory of the Arts and Sciences. Available http://westernconservatory.com/products/it’s-not-about-staying-home. Last accessed 11th Oct 2014.

 

Sleeping in church; when the sleepers got busted

Mr. Moody, of York, Maine, employed a similar device to awaken and mortify the sleepers in [church] meeting. He shouted “Fire, fire, fire!” and when the startled and blinking men jumped up, calling out “Where?” he roared back in turn, “In hell, for sleeping sinners.”

Quote source

Earle, A.M. (1891). The Sabbath in Puritan New England. Available http://www.reformed.org/books/gutenberg/sabbath/index.html?mainframe=/books/gutenberg/sabbath/The_Sabbath_in_Puritan_New_England.html. Last accessed 11th Oct 2014.

 

Reminder: The Bible is a blueprint

A tag line for her [Rachel Held Evans'] book on her blogsite caught my eye. It speaks from the hip of a large section of the crypto-liberal evangelical world:

“The Bible is not a blueprint.”

Back in the mid-to-late 80s, Gary North launched a ten-book series aimed at distilling the teachings of biblical law down to laymen’s terms, so to speak, in ten major areas of life. It was called the Biblical Blueprints series. The point was to show that the Bible is indeed a Blueprint for all of life, every area of life, and that evangelicals could advance the kingdom rather than leaving the world to liberals and other miscreants.

Quote source

McDurmon, J. (2014). Rachel Held Evans has a rude awakening. The American Vision. Available http://americanvision.org/10472/rachel-held-evans-rude-awakening/. Last accessed 11th Oct 2014.

 

Comical liberal reasoning on gun control

While liberals have emotionally blinded themselves so totally that they believe they’re taking compassionate, intellectual, well-crafted stands, this is how they sound to everyone who’s not a liberal…

4) Guns cause crime and if we take guns away from people who haven’t broken the law yet, then criminals will also not have guns somehow. Gun-free zones also protect people from criminals, who we’re sure won’t enter “gun-free zones” for some reason. Unless they do…. Which proves the problem is actually law abiding gun owners somehow or another. And that’s why we need more and more gun laws until all the people who obey gun laws can’t have guns any more, which will save us from criminals and crazy people who don’t care about the law.

Quote source

Hawkins, J. (2014). 6 Arguments Only A Liberal Could Believe. Town Hall. Available http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2014/03/18/6-arguments-only-a-liberal-could-believe-n1810570/page/full. Last accessed 11th Oct 2014.

Gender studies courses as indoctrination

Spencer Case asked:

The question is: there is a kind of tension between, I think, more traditional type philosophers and people who are into feminism, gender studies, this kind of stuff. I’m sort of the mind that these fields inject politics and political activism too much into philosophy. But they have responses to that. One of their responses is: “We’re concerned about justice, we’re concerned about authority, and these really are perennial philosophical issues.”

Roger Scruton answered:

Yeah, sure. There is plenty of room for people to include as part of the philosophical discussions of justice the whole question about the relation between man and woman, all the questions that feminists consider. There’s absolutely no reason why that shouldn’t be included. But, if the assumption is that one has to be a feminist, one has to arrive at a particular conclusion as a result of studying this, then what is involved is not philosophical discussion but ideology. The whole defining nature of philosophy is that you start from free inquiry and you don’t actually know what you’re going to come up with as a result of your arguments. To think that you have to have the conclusion prior to the investigation is effectually to say that this is a form of indoctrination.