Skwim
Veteran Member
This is the headline on Answers in Genesis's website today (8-24-13)*
. . . sent to the mother of an autistic child, complaining about him and asking that the family move out of the neighborhood.
I highlighted the "anonymous" above because no one really knows who wrote it. However, as AiG would have it, it has to have been someone under the influence of the pro-choice propaganda or one caught in the clutches of the Darwin's Frankenstein monster, evolution. Why? Well actually for no better reason than that it serves to disparage those who are pro-choice and/or those who accept evolution as an alternative explanation to Biblical creationism.
And just how does pro-choice figure into the character of the writer of such a letter? As AiG explains in its only reference to it.
Aside from completely miss-characterizing pro-choice, AiG figures this is exactly the kind of person who would write such a letter. That, or an evolutionist, which AiG explains with the following logic.
So there we have it. Not one word explaining why the nincompoop who wrote the letter must have been the product of pro-choice thinking or under the influence of evolutionary concepts.
Of course, knowing AiG as many of us do, such groundless and disparaging pronouncements don't come as any surprise. Outright lying, misrepresentation, and a host of other indefensible techniques are all part of the creationist's tool box. So why do I bother to bring one more example of their duplicity? Because I think it's good to remind ourselves of how abysmally low the promoters of creationism can sink, and to enlighten the noobies here, and those who may have already bought into the creationist rhetoric, of the real character of creationism's leaders. Having to resort to ad hom attacks, lies, deceptions, etc. isn't how fair minded people go about making a case for their side. It's how the morally bankrupt, desperate, and self serving do it. In this case it happens to be debasing those who are pro-choice and/ or evolutionists by implying that only someone with those outlooks would do such a thing. As if no creationist would ever break the law (Kent Hovind), espouse disorderly conduct (Fred Phelps), or engage in pedophilia (Tony Alamo).
*source of the AiG article.
The crux of the issue, which I previously posted here on RF, concerns an anonymous letter . . .
I highlighted the "anonymous" above because no one really knows who wrote it. However, as AiG would have it, it has to have been someone under the influence of the pro-choice propaganda or one caught in the clutches of the Darwin's Frankenstein monster, evolution. Why? Well actually for no better reason than that it serves to disparage those who are pro-choice and/or those who accept evolution as an alternative explanation to Biblical creationism.
And just how does pro-choice figure into the character of the writer of such a letter? As AiG explains in its only reference to it.
Pro-choice Planned Parenthood, promoting the murder of millions of inconvenient people, writes that every child deserves to be wanted, loved and cared for6with the obvious corollary that the unwanted children should simply be killed."
and that's it!
Aside from completely miss-characterizing pro-choice, AiG figures this is exactly the kind of person who would write such a letter. That, or an evolutionist, which AiG explains with the following logic.
After all, evolutionary dogma teaches that human beings are nothing more than highly evolved animals.
and
After all, evolutionary psychologist Michael Price maintains that evolutionary science provides the key to . . . moral progress.9 Yet evolutionary thinking can provide only a relativistic man-made moralitythe sort of morality that devalues imperfect babies and handicapped children.
The paragraph that contains the above has a bit more about evolution(ists) but nothing relevant to AiG's assertion.and
After all, evolutionary psychologist Michael Price maintains that evolutionary science provides the key to . . . moral progress.9 Yet evolutionary thinking can provide only a relativistic man-made moralitythe sort of morality that devalues imperfect babies and handicapped children.
So there we have it. Not one word explaining why the nincompoop who wrote the letter must have been the product of pro-choice thinking or under the influence of evolutionary concepts.
Of course, knowing AiG as many of us do, such groundless and disparaging pronouncements don't come as any surprise. Outright lying, misrepresentation, and a host of other indefensible techniques are all part of the creationist's tool box. So why do I bother to bring one more example of their duplicity? Because I think it's good to remind ourselves of how abysmally low the promoters of creationism can sink, and to enlighten the noobies here, and those who may have already bought into the creationist rhetoric, of the real character of creationism's leaders. Having to resort to ad hom attacks, lies, deceptions, etc. isn't how fair minded people go about making a case for their side. It's how the morally bankrupt, desperate, and self serving do it. In this case it happens to be debasing those who are pro-choice and/ or evolutionists by implying that only someone with those outlooks would do such a thing. As if no creationist would ever break the law (Kent Hovind), espouse disorderly conduct (Fred Phelps), or engage in pedophilia (Tony Alamo).
*source of the AiG article.
Whats wrong with you?!
