Mad Libs: Defend Your Religious Dogma

[_Bob Loblaw]

It almost sounds like a heavily bastardized version of Pascal's wager in my opinion.

To me it sounds like "I'm going to ignore evidence against my beliefs as long as I need to."

[_Philo Sofee]

It almost sounds like a heavily bastardized version of Pascal's wager in my opinion.

To me it sounds like "I'm going to ignore evidence against my beliefs as long as I need to."

That's how I understood it, and it certainly is the majority of the Mormon's mindset. It's astounding really on second take a look at it all. They will use science a whoring after her sexy butt as long as it already agrees with preordained conclusions they wish to be true, but damn science to the netherworld of anti something or other (ALWAYS label something you don't like or agree with and you have already won 90% of your audience by default) and you can't lose. When science agrees with you with evidence, shout it from the rooftops, when she completely contradicts your silly man made doctrines, claim it's only science, and it never has the last word, and it's usually godless atheists who are scientists anyway, and besides, the church takes no issue on that! HOW can a church who is said to communicate with God EVER remain neutral in knowledge of something? Especially when we have examples in the D&C of Joseph Smith asking and God giving all kinds of explanations to various parts of the Bible he didn't know about. Gee, why not do the simple thing and just ask God about evolution and be done with it? WHY would that be so spooky or scary to do?