Ann Coulter #fundie

Ann Coulter #fundie amazon.com

Darwinism never disappoints the liberals. They never say ‘Well, I'd like to have cheap meaningless sex tonight, but that would violate Darwinism.' They can't even say ‘I'd like to have cheap meaningless sex tonight with a goat, but that would violate Darwinism.' If you have an instinct to do it, it must be evolved adaptation. Liberals subscribe to Darwinism not because it's science, which they hate, but out of some wishful thinking. Darwinism lets them off the hook morally.

78 comments

old comment by Maronan

What exactly is "Darwinism?" Did one of Charles Darwin's relatives create a religion or something?
Anyway, Ms. Coulter, you are technically correct; there is no action that violates evolution's moral teachings. This is because evolution has no moral teachings, just like gravity, cells, tables, cars, boxes, Ann Coulter, flashlights, or balloons. There are a great many things that are not moral codes and don't have moral codes imbedded in them. Where do you get the idea that liberals hate science and are less moral? When was the last time you saw a liberal claiming the world is 6,000 years old or that we were created by a magic sky fairy? When was the last time you saw a liberal blow himself up in the middle of a crowd or bomb an abortion clinic because he thought some magic god told him to?

old comment by Anon-e-moose

"Darwinism never disappoints the liberals."

And the likes of you never disappoint we at FSTDT. Your point, Ann Cunter?

"They never say Well, I'd like to have cheap meaningless sex tonight, but that would violate Darwinism.'"

image

Care to point out anywhere in "On the Origin of Species" where it says 'Sex is only permitted within marriage...?

...oh yes, that's right. Nor does the Bible, for that matter. Nope, no hypocrisy on the part of you fundies, nosiree. [/hyper-sarcasm]

"They can't even say I'd like to have cheap meaningless sex tonight with a goat, but that would violate Darwinism.'"

http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2010/02/16/republican-list-of-paedophiles-shocking/

"Darwinism lets them off the hook morally."

See above. Also...(emphasis added):

Hosea 13:16: 'Samaria will be held guilty, For she has rebelled against her God. They will fall by the sword, Their little ones will be dashed in pieces, And their pregnant women will be ripped open.'

...meanwhile, science gave us not only contraception, but materials that give us (as near as dammit) reliable condoms.

Any questions...?

old comment by Swede

Darwinism never disappoints the Liberals because it's not a rule book, and it doesn't exist outside fundie scare points. Darwinism (aka ToE) only describes a natural process, it has nothing to do with morality. You might as well say that Gravity lets Liberals off the hook, it's just as stupid.

Strangely enough, it's mostly fundie people who get caught in these cheap meaningless sex acts, so apparently they feel that God lets them off the hook morally as well.

We have also evolved a conscience that tells us not to do things that may harm others or infringe on other people's rights. This conscience seem to be a bit weak in the Religious Right mind. Maybe if they used it more, it would become stronger, like a muscle after training...

Ann Coulter #fundie amazon.com

78 comments

Confused?