theweaselking: (Default)
[personal profile] theweaselking
Today's loonie alert:

"The Scripture does not even envision married couples who choose not to have children. The shocking reality is that some Christians have bought into this lifestyle and claim childlessness as a legitimate option. The rise of modern contraceptives has made this technologically possible. But the fact remains that though childlessness may be made possible by the contraceptive revolution, it remains a form of rebellion against God's design and order.

The church must help this society regain its sanity on the gift of children. Willful barrenness and chosen childlessness must be named as moral rebellion. To demand that marriage means sex--but not children--is to defraud the creator of His joy and pleasure in seeing the saints raising His children. That is just the way it is."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The entire site is evangelical. I'd decribe it as "arrogant, ignorant, and repugnant", but that's pretty much the definition of redundancy once I've said "evangelical". What's worse, this ideologically blinkered supply of idiots has the tagline at the bottom of every page "Your source for gender-related news!", as if they had a monopoly on truth.

Speaking of idiots, hick town in Pennsylvania to add "Intelligent Design" to high-school biology curriculum.

Oh, and another terrifying sign that the American education system has failed completely - courtesy of the Christian Science Monitor, itself a terrifying monument to deliberate ignorance:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1123/csmimg/p12a.gif

(no subject)

Date: 2004-11-23 09:24 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jsbowden.livejournal.com
Sorry John, but 1,018 people in a nation of ~300,000,000 does not an authoritative poll make.

And since when is Creationism a theory? It fits none of the definitions I've ever met.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-11-23 09:31 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
I didn't claim it was authoritative. Gallup, however, did.

Either way, it's still a monumental failure in the "learning to think" department.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-11-23 11:15 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jsbowden.livejournal.com
And apparently I need glasses. 1016.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-11-23 11:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] spartonian.livejournal.com
I'd be interested in what the results of such a poll would be in other countries.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-11-23 01:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ryusen.livejournal.com
Was it a Gallop Poll or a Christian Science Monitor Poll? "Let's Poll our redership."

(no subject)

Date: 2004-11-23 01:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ryusen.livejournal.com
I remember hearing about the first Part.. doesn't the Catholic Church have some kind of thing saying contraception is a sin?

(no subject)

Date: 2004-11-23 08:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
The site claims it's a Gallup poll, and gives dates and references. I did not copy that part.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-11-23 08:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
Contraception being a sin is not the same as saying that married people *who are not currently producing children as fast as possible* are sinning against God's perfect will.

Catholics don't believe in artificial birth control, but they're still allowed to avoid pregnancy.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Feb. 6th, 2026 10:00 pm