Thank you gentlemen…

If, from now on because of my beliefs (and like my lesbian friends), I'm subjected to a severe tongue lashing – I shan't be able to prevent myself gagging…

With laughter.

Pericles,
What was Runner’s flawed point that needed correcting?

“Darwinists argue that the body is poorly designed, and conversely they also argue that science cannot make judgments about design because claims in this area are outside of science—judgments that science cannot entertain because it assumes purpose in nature. Either science can make judgments about design, or it cannot. Both cannot be true. One common claim of poor design is the human pharynx.

“When the oral cavity’s many functions are carefully considered and compared to other possible designs, it shows that the ‘bad design’ claim is invalid. There are at least a dozen important reasons for its existing design. The only way to scientifically prove a system is better is to do a scientific comparison of two groups, one group that uses each system. This experiment will never be done as it would require major surgery and likely would create serious health problems.” – JB

Nigel,
For the lady you mention who pastors the fundamentalist church, why do you use the term ‘fundamentalist’. Why is her church any more fundamentalist than yours or mine? Is that not just emotive language? Is the definition of a fundamentalist church simply one that disagrees with your view or mine?

You say this lady condemns gays without actually saying what she said. I’m curious to know what she said. I suspect you’re exaggerating.

You say that the God revealed by Jesus Christ is an alternative view. How is anyone supposed to swallow that? Jesus’ revelation of himself has been the central focus of Christian religion throughout the world for 2000 years. It’s pretty mainstream, not alternative.

You may have something important to say, but you need to tighten up on your arguments.

>>Yea I am sure you could of done better Tony.<<

Of course I couldn't. But I'm not omnipotent or omniscient. What's God's excuse?

What's this, Dan S de Merengue, another red herring?

>>“Darwinists argue that the body is poorly designed, and conversely they also argue that science cannot make judgments about design...<<

Who are these people? Name names.

I'm a "Darwinist" (always assuming that is the same thing as "someone who favours evolution over design"; it's sometimes difficult to tell with you) and I would not dream of suggesting that the body is poorly designed. In fact, I would go further - I don't accept that the body has been "designed" at all. Like Topsy, it just growed.

Furthermore, red-herring-wise, you have quoted from a Jerry Bergman article whose introductory paragraph states "The concept of dysteleology claims that much poor design exists in the natural world, and therefore an intelligent creator does not exist"

You, of all people, should be aware that dysteleology - in the form attacked by Bergman - was the brainchild of Ernst Haeckel. Haeckel was a competent zoologist, but an appalling philosopher, with most of his theories - dysteleology included - widely derided. He was also an archetypal "master race" proponent. Just saying.

All in all, Bergman's attack is manifestly directed at the strawest of strawmen. But you knew that already, did you not.

I nearly forgot. You asked a question:

>>Pericles, What was Runner’s flawed point that needed correcting?<<

In response to runner's insistance that purpose of the female body is to enhance male-on-female attraction, hence heterosexual activity and childbearing in the sanctity of marriage. (I was going to use a whole lot of inverted commas there, but you'll just have to imagine the raised eyebrows instead.) I simply pointed out that the same design is fiercely attractive also, to lesbian women.

So far, no rebuttal.

Pericles,
Who are the people saying the body is poorly designed? Tony Lavis, for one, is saying so.

Are Darwinists saying that the body is poorly designed? The creators of the journal Panda’s Thumb speak of poor design. It’s there even in the naming of their journal. They’re Darwinists aren’t they?

And I think you’re reading something into Runner’s posts that he didn’t quite say. But I’ll let him clarify or defend his comments if he wants to.

Pericles you write

'I simply pointed out that the same design is fiercely attractive also, to lesbian women.'

Unfortunately also some men and women are fiercely attracted to young girls and boys.