.png)
tulsazoo.org
Mayoral candidate Anna Falling has made the insertion of a creationism exhibit into the Tulsa Zoo her number one priority, siding it with crime and the budget.
In the video below Falling says,
“By rejecting creation exhibits at the zoo, God has been dishonored… Unless the churches of Tulsa are brought into city hall to begin to address the community’s greatest ills, the city of Tulsa will go bankrupt spiritually, morally and financially.”
She speaks of “Christian science” as if there were such a thing that could prove the creationism stories to be true. Creationism is not science. The issue of whether or not to include a creationism display was raised in 2005, and after widespread criticism and a second vote the Tulsa Park and Recreation Board decided against it. The exhibit was thought to calm down those who felt one religion was being honored over another because the elephant exhibition includes a statue of the elephant-headed god Ganesha. The simple solution would be to remove any religiously themed displays because they do not belong in a zoo.
A local man, Dan Hicks, was the one to bring up this issue in 2005 and he was able to get a sign removed from the chimpanzee exhibit, which displayed, “The chimpanzee is our closest living relative, branching off from a common ancestor four million years ago.”
Because this sign offended his beliefs he complained until the sign was eventually removed. According to real science, chimpanzees are currently accepted as our closest living relative, considering they share 99 percent of our DNA–something creationism, Hicks and Falling choose to ignore.
Tulsa World’s article on Falling
Tulsa World’s article on Hicks
Anna Falling:
Comments
I really don't get why some people push for such things, as though it will make a difference. She's fighting against a deck stacked against her. It used to be that people were persuaded by argument, reason and evidence. Nowadays, some people think you have to just paint a sign and everyone will believe. It's nonsense!
That's what you call lazy Christianity. Let's just put up displays so that we don't have to talk about it anymore.
I surprised you, didn't I?
She clearly does not understand "Separation". One can only hope her election bid is unsuccessful or Tulsa may be seeing more controversy. The Ten Commandments on the city hall grounds?
The Constitution does not Say ANYTHING about "separation of Church and State". It CLEARLY states "Freedom OF Religion",not Freedom From Religion,"and the "FREE EXERCISE THERE OF". Evolution is and always have been a theory and an UNPROVEN one at best and indoctrination at worst. There exist no transitional evidence in the fossil record to support Evolution only conjecture enforced by non SCIENTIFIC supported JUDGES not empirical science. Thomas Jefferson who did not write the Constitution,mentioned a wall in a PRIVATE letter in answer to a PRIVATE letter from a Baptist Church pastor,who was concern of government authority over reaching upon the free exercise of their faith.
It's frustrating and maddening, but as a consolation, I'm at least glad this in Oklahoma instead of Texas...
It's frustrating and maddening, but as a consolation, I'm at least glad this in Oklahoma instead of Texas...
What next for them ? Individually recognizing what animals were on noah's ark ,lol
No Ken, you're still the same person regardless.
lmao @ los! :)
She is an idiot, and would be hilarious if she wasn't dangerous to both freedom and knowledge.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. but he that is spirirual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. 1 Corinthians 2:14-16
"Mom" - Foolishness is adults who should know better still believing in childhood fairy tales. What's worse is trying to impose those fairy tales into public law. That's about as un-American as it gets.
"Mom" - Foolishness is adults who should know better still believing in childhood fairy tales. What's worse is trying to impose those fairy tales into public law. That's about as un-American as it gets.
Hey TTownT: you wouldn't be living in a free nation today if it wasn't for those so-called fairy tales you mentioned.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
Declaration of Independence!
Ken, you're assuming we wouldn't be a free nation without Christianity's "principles." Regardless of what use they may have had in the past we've grown past the fairy tales as T mentions. And the idea of not having the bible does not mean the polar opposite. Hell, the bible tells you how to keep your slaves and many southerners used verses from the bible to defend what they were doing. How's that for "free"?
Kacey, I didn't make any assumption at all. It's a fact of history and the foundation of our nation. Slavery was always under contest until the civil war finally settled the issue. The bible also warned against slave owners abusing their slaves, even though one thing has nothing to do with the other.
Regardless of how much contempt you have for the Christian religion, It is the reason we have a free nation today.
The forsaking of Christianity in our nation is the reason we are losing our rights today. So yes, without Christianity we would not have become a free nation, and without it we will not continue to be free.
You prove the difficulty in proving the truth to people such as yourself. You have a very low bar set in regard to evolution, but a very high bar in regard to Creation, the flood and Jesus Christ.
You don't have to see macro evolution to be persuaded, but you demand seeing God before you believe.
Even though there is no historical support for evolution, you accept it is true. Regardless of all the historical support of the bible, you deny it.
Even though macro evolution is not consistent with what we all observe in the world, you believe it. Yet what the bible claims is observable in this world and yet you deny it.
You have no problem with believing Socrates existed with very little written about the man, but then question if Jesus really existed though thousands of documents exist in support of his existence.
If your bar of reasoning and judgment were the same across the board, we could easily wipe the floor with you. Christianity doesn't require all the assumptions and extra
If your bar of reasoning and judgment were the same across the board, we could easily wipe the floor with you. Christianity doesn't require all the assumptions and extrapolations that evolution requires. But then again, evolution isn't science. It's myth!
You obviously do not understand evolution and what is considered evidence.
I have evidence, you do not. I don't believe, I rely on facts. You need faith because the facts for what you want to believe do not exist.
But don't worry Ken, soon I'll be running an ongoing article on evolution. Then maybe you'll understand.
That's an old, fallacious and run down argument Kacey. I've been debating people, far more educated on the subject than you, for several years. I know the evidence that exist, the assumptions, inferences and extrapolations associated that aren't and can't be proven. So you go for it.
And so I shall, but you are still showing a lack of understanding. I recently watched a few videos of which there are several of someone like you making a similar argument while talking with Richard Dawkins. Now I'm no Dawkins, but it just shows that no matter who you're talking to you seem to continue to say the same thing and ignore the evidence.
I don't ignore the evidence Kacey. I just don't limit myself to the evidence they claim and their interpretation of it. Most evolutionist only present part of the evidence in their arguments, while neglecting the evidence that contradict their claims. Some do it ignorantly and others do it intentionally. I also find it common where the left hand has no idea of what the right hand is doing. In other words, one evolutionist will hold to one theory when another scientist is claiming a contradictory theory. But claim their theories are the proven correct ones. They can't both be correct, Kacey.
Ken
As I see it, the relationship between freedom and religion (Christianity, Islam, take your pick) is that as religiosity increases, freedom decreases. Christianists such as yourself attempt to restrict the rights and freedoms of anyone who does not share your beliefs.
TTownT, your assumption is completely incorrect concerning me. I'm not a totalitarian. I believe in freedom with self restraint and individual accountability. We must honor truth, love and loyalty in order to protect the order, purity, life, liberty and property of others. Jesus is the only teacher of true liberty that ever lived. To violate these morals is to violate the freedom of others. You are fighting against a phantom; a false dictatorial, egomaniac, tyrannical God that doesn't exist, except for in your imagination.
The only one imagining things in this conversation now is you, Ken. And by the way, there's no solid proof that Jesus actually ever existed.
Tracey, there is more historical documentation for Jesus then there is for Alexander the Great or Socrates or any of the ancient philosophers. You're really going to have and do better than that. If Jesus didn't exist, Christianity would have never existed. You really need to think. Didn't I already recommend that you study about critical reasoning?
hahaha! It could easily exist without there having been an actual Jesus. I'm aware of many of the bogus "documentation" examples your type likes to use as actual evidence, when it is not proof at all. I'll be sure to post an article on it when I get the chance.
Sorry about the name mix up Kacey.
Kacey, not even the orthodox Jews deny that Jesus existed. They just deny that he was the Christ, the son of God that rose again from the grave. They don't even deny that he crucified for blasphemy. You certainly take credulity to a whole new depth.
Yep, and I'm not an Orthodox Jew, so that doesn't matter to me. The problem here is you can't back it up, it doesn't matter what others believe, that doesn't make it any more plausible. Again though, I'll let that one be another topic. This thread has drifted off a bit.
Ken,
I'm not fighting any sort of god, real or imaginary. I'm just fighting for the separation of church and state. I don't want someone else's religious beliefs creating laws that affect the public in general.
TTownT, what kind of beliefs do you want used to make laws? Do you really want a group of narcissist with no fear of consequences making laws to govern you? Do you really want the age of consent to be reduced to 12 years old, so that 40 & 50 year old men can have their way with children and it not be illegal? That's what the Democrats want. Even if you leave God out of politics, you still have to deal with cause and effect.
Even if you leave out "thou shalt not kill", does that change the effect and suffering of murder? You can leave out "thou shalt not commit adultery", but will it somehow change the suffering caused by adultery?
Ken
I don't want ANY belief system to be the basis of public policy or laws. I know it's probably hard for you to separate the two, but morality and religiosity are not one and the same, and one need not be religious to be moral. In fact, many of the things done in the name of religion offend my morals.
Laws should be based on the things that conservatives CLAIM to be so precious... justice, individual liberty, equality for all. Unfortunately, when religion is thrown in the mix, those things become secondary.
TTownT:So then you do at least realize the need for a moral foundation in which our lawmakers should be subject to. That's a good start.
Ken, some of your comments are the sort of "Lying for Jesus" that discredits not only you, but your co-religionsists, and the concept of "faith".
Claiming that your religion is a proponent of freedom, let alone the sole cause of any freedom, displays either extreme ignorance or extreme dishonesty on your part. If you know the history of how all freedom has been won at great cost from authorities, then you know that religion has fought against most freedoms, and this makes you a liar. If you don't know this, then you are ignorant of human history, and can correct your ignorance with a little study. But if you are ignorant on this topic your opinions on it are without merit.
You don't know the difference between "causality" and "correlation". You will need to learn what they mean before you make ignorant/dishonest claims like "lessening religion is eroding our freedom". You have more in common with chanting Muslim street-rioters than your better educated atheist neighbours.
seathanaich, the problem with your comment is the last 60 years of American history alone. The more secular our nation has become the more corrupt it has become. If you can't see the correlation then you are both ignorant and blind due to your bias.
Ken, do you REALLY want to talk about corruption? Religious institutions have historically been some of the most corrupt! Where do we begin?
~ Spanish Inquisition
~ Crusades
~ Catholic priests fondling alter boys (and the subsequent coverup)
~ Salem witch hunts
~ Televangelists
~ Galileo (I guess they probably also thought that whole Earth going around the sun thing was a myth, just like evolution)
~ ...and in the history of Roman Catholic Popes, most are in the same league as any venal senator when it comes to greed, influence peddling, bribery, etc.
Secularism as the cause of corruption?!? The correlation is about as strong as religion = freedom!
TTownT; What is the common denominator? Totalitarianism. This is also the agenda of social progressive movement happening right before our eyes. This is the reason the bible had to be removed from the public schools in order to retrain our youth to confirm. The gospel of Jesus Christ is the enemy of totalitarianism. If you knew the scriptures you would understand what I'm telling you. You need to look up "Fabian Socialism". Unless of course you are already one of them.
"If you knew the scriptures..."
Uh, Ken, you don't know me. I went to a Bible college and have a degree in Biblical Studies.
The difference between us is that I choose to understand scripture in context, rather than blindly following the dogma preached by power-hungry religionists and politicians.
Ken, I was going to just let it go, but my intellectual curiosity is getting the best of me. I would love to hear your take on how exactly totalitarianism plays a factor in priest molestations, the Salem witch hunts and televangelists.
The others I'll give you, but with these I don't see the connection.
TTownT; All the things you mentioned are the product of narcissism.
Well, Ken, it's been fun, but you've obviously given up trying to explain your irrational beliefs, so I'm signing off. I don't blame you, though. Trying to explain the unexplainable has got to be exhausting.
Okay, primaries are over. For all of you who thought this wingnut has any kind of support, she got less than 10% of the Republican primary vote... and that's less than 10% of the party that thinks like her, not 10% of the general public!
Thanks for the update, I wasn't going to tune back into this thing again til the election.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!