(June 12, 2013 at 11:25 am)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:One of the board's dissenters, Ken Willard, a Hutchinson Republican, criticized the standards for what he saw as their lack of objectivity on evolution and climate change, which he said are presented “dogmatically.”
I laughed my ass off at this dickhead. How does he think "religion" is presented?
![[Image: 17757693.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=cdn.memegenerator.net%2Finstances%2F400x%2F17757693.jpg)
Yeah, I go to Hutch once in awhile.. It's getting bigger, and with it so are its' quid pro quo fundamentalist bull.
But, considering they've come
this far since 2011, I think sanity is winning out.
If I were to create self aware beings knowing fully what they would do in their lifetimes, I sure wouldn't create a HELL for the majority of them to live in infinitely! That's not Love, that's sadistic. Therefore a truly loving god does not exist!
Dead wrong. The actions of a finite being measured against an infinite one are infinitesimal and therefore merit infinitesimal punishment.
I say again: No exceptions. Punishment should be equal to the crime, not in excess of it. As soon as the punishment is greater than the crime, the punisher is in the wrong.
![[Image: tumblr_n1j4lmACk61qchtw3o1_500.gif]](https://66.media.tumblr.com/5fb74c6d16622fb3dbb358509c9aec03/tumblr_n1j4lmACk61qchtw3o1_500.gif)
Quote:The sin is against an infinite being (God) unforgiven infinitely, therefore the punishment is infinite.
Dead wrong. The actions of a finite being measured against an infinite one are infinitesimal and therefore merit infinitesimal punishment.
Quote:Some people deserve hell.
I say again: No exceptions. Punishment should be equal to the crime, not in excess of it. As soon as the punishment is greater than the crime, the punisher is in the wrong.
