This is why I don't like debating religion

[timmah]

GameOver22 said:

Alara317 said:

First of all, I'm not explaining every facet of my stance on religion vs science in every post.  I said in a previous post that scientific theories are revised and updated all the time, and sometimes flat out disproven.

Secondly, I said right there that "either wasn't a brilliant scientist with a conflicting theory".  I was making it clear that credible people who oppose established theories and facts are usually ones with counter-theories with enough evidence to support said theory.  Religious folk have a counter theory, but they do not have sufficient backing evidence to support their theories.  

This thread further establishes why arguing with the religious is futile.  I've seen over a dozen pages arguing semantics (the meaning of faith, the application of faith in science, what is a fact, what is a theory, etc), with very little in the way of palpable arguments supporting 'intelligent design'.  The only 'argument' that wasn't just "yeah, well science needs faith too!" was someone foolishly claiming that the bible said it, therefore it's true.  

Let's be honest here....its not like the debate parameter were set very well. You titled the topic "This is why I don't like debating religion" and then proceed to criticize a fundamentalist (straw-man) argument for homosexuality and religion in general. I mean.....what did you expect?

As for the bolded, maybe reread the thread.....

Yep. It's pretty clear he's just out for blood. The stratagy was, attack, wait for a response, attack again (rinse, repeat).