Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the home. In church. In your thought processes. In reasonable behavior that does nothing to foist your religion on others.
I don't do anything publicly in my life that foists my belief in Buddhism and atheism on others. I don't mind seeing churches with their flashing billboards as I drive along streets and highways. I don't mind seeing a church picnic at a public park. But I do mind seeing religious symbolism making a statement on public property...property that belongs to me as much as anyone else.
Do you mind seeing billboards advertising Mcdonalds or Wendys on public property or in other places where you can see it? There really isnt any difference between them. Advertising is advertising.
As it is, at least in my experience most churches dont advertise. To be honest though, I dont believe that I have seen a church truly advertise in public. I have seen signs and billboards on church property, but I have never drive down a highway and seen a church billboard advertising for itself. Ill admit that it may happen but I if it does it isnt nearly as much as say, McDonalds.
Do you mind seeing billboards advertising Mcdonalds or Wendys on public property or in other places where you can see it? There really isnt any difference between them. Advertising is advertising.
As it is, at least in my experience most churches dont advertise. To be honest though, I dont believe that I have seen a church truly advertise in public. I have seen signs and billboards on church property, but I have never drive down a highway and seen a church billboard advertising for itself. Ill admit that it may happen but I if it does it isnt nearly as much as say, McDonalds.
Most churches do advertise. The majority of churches in my community have some form of electronic billboards in front of their church. That's advertising. But, it's on their property, so no problem.
Most McDonalds and Wendys billboards are not on public property. They are on private property for which they pay a fee.
Well I suppose anything is possible. But there's no evidence for it.
I mean you could surmise that alien beings might have blood made out of liquid Mercury. But since that's not possible on earth I'm not sure why it would be anywhere else.
The only common denominator on earth is the presence of water. Some tardigrades can fully dry out so that they are essentially dead and can be revived again with water. But in their dry state they can't be described as 'alive'. They are only alive when in contact with water.
In the search for other planetary bodies that may harbor life, astronomers are looking for planets that may have water. Water as far as we know, is where life is at.
I think the possibility is so minuscule as to be close to zero.
Apart from all the factors I explained in my previous post, the factors for life to develop here on earth were ripe. To sum up, we have the conditions that are right: the atmosphere, the elements, the tides, the distance from the sun, the seasons etc. So why wouldn't life have developed here? An argument could be made that life on earth was not only fortunate, more like that it was inevitable. Anywhere on earth you find water, you find life.
Considering the other argument that it was somehow transported here, you have to consider not just impossibly harsh conditions you also have to factor in time and distance.
We know of no other planet yet for sure that can harbor life. Life on earth developed from microbes.
Let's take, the next nearest exoplanet to us (within a habitable zone of it's star)which is Proxima Centuri B. Using current technology, it is estimated it would take about 6300 years to get there from here. And that's using spacecraft, not riding on an asteroid. And there's only a slim likelihood of finding even bacterial life when you get there. You'd have to factor in the conditions on the planet having been stable for billions of years as ours was for life to evolve. And all this would have happened billions of years ago by the way because life appeared here billions of years ago. Somehow, the microbes would have to have left their planetary gravitational pull and hitched a ride here on a rock for about 6300+ years, arrive at earth, somehow break through earths atmosphere without burning up and start replicating.
Granted 3.7 billion years ago, things looked quite different but the whole universe was also earlier in it's evolution. I'm just trying to demonstrate some of the factors involved.
All that when we have all we need for life to have evolved right here.
I was meaning in response to the OP's original point about god. Young Earth creationists believe in the creation of earth by god down to a specific place and time. Nobody else I don't think would object to ingredients being provided from elsewhere.
Again all duly noted and I understand all you well explain here. IF we look at earth as the model on which to draw our conclusions about such things, then yes of course water is key. Water is also something we look for in other planets, because we know how to detect water.
However, the universe is a big place with lots of things going on that we don't yet well understand. We also look for signals that would indicate intelligent beings (of any kind), like radio waves. I've just read an interesting book about some of this by Neil deGrasse Tyson you might find an interesting read. Titled, "Astrophysics for People in a Hurry."
I'm also not as convinced the possibility of life being transported to earth from outer space is as low as you describe, because all of earth came from outer space. Why not life too? I agree it would seem life may have spawned right here on earth, but I'm not sure I would assume the odds to be almost non-existent for life to have immigrated here from outer space.
Did life on Earth come from outer space?
"Some astronomers hypothesize that asteroids and comes might shuttle biological matter between planets."
I'm not sure of the odds. Of course no one is. No doubt they are low, and I'd not bet a lot of money that life on earth came from somewhere else, but I certainly wouldn't rule the possibility out entirely. You don't seem to rule out that possibility either, but to say "the possibility is so minuscule as to be close to zero" is awfully close to saying impossible.
The answer is out there somewhere, or maybe right here, but I'm sure neither of us is losing sleep over this either way. Fun to think about though...
Most churches do advertise. The majority of churches in my community have some form of electronic billboards in front of their church. That's advertising. But, it's on their property, so no problem.
Most McDonalds and Wendys billboards are not on public property. They are on private property for which they pay a fee.
So if churches are advertising on their own property, and you dont have a problem with it, what is the issue?
And you have people who want anything that can be remotely religious not be viewable in public at all. Like I said, it works both ways.
hawk,
ANY argument can be made both ways and this seems to be a defense you apply quite liberally, but just because any argument can go both ways doesn't make all arguments equal in terms of validity. All these arguments have been made extensively by both sides, and at least in this country, secularism has been deemed the better way to go. The secular argument has won over the religious arguments generally speaking, and for good reason far as many people are concerned going back to our founding fathers. They and many a court decision rendered since then.
So..., what you believe "works both ways" is true to a point, but not all arguments work as well as others. That's all.
ANY argument can be made both ways and this seems to be a defense you apply quite liberally, but just because any argument can go both ways doesn't make all arguments equal in terms of validity. All these arguments have been made extensively by both sides, and at least in this country, secularism has been deemed the better way to go. The secular argument has won over the religious arguments generally speaking, and for good reason far as many people are concerned going back to our founding fathers. They and many a court decision rendered since then.
So..., what you believe "works both ways" is true to a point, but not all arguments work as well as others. That's all.
You are not wrong. However, the ones that I was talking about do apply both ways.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
