home
RSS
Unsolicited Advice: What should Mitt Romney say at Liberty University?
Mitt Romney will address Liberty University students on Saturday.
May 11th, 2012
12:34 PM ET

Unsolicited Advice: What should Mitt Romney say at Liberty University?

We asked a couple of Christian college presidents to give some unsolicited advice to Mitt Romney ahead of his commencement speech at Liberty University on Saturday. The school, founded by Jerry Falwell, will offer Romney a big "evangelical moment." Here's how the leaders responded:

Philip Ryken is president of Wheaton College. 

Good leaders put other people first. So I would encourage Romney to see this commencement address more as an opportunity to serve the students of Liberty University than as a chance to advance his presidential campaign.

Today’s Christian college graduates are hopeful but uneasy. They feel more or less ready to take on the world, but they worry about finding good jobs, paying off their debts and leading lives that really make a difference.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

College students also value authenticity. What they are most likely to remember from a commencement address is not a policy statement but something personal. So I would encourage Romney to give a message that is partly drawn from his own experience of education, family, work and public service.

Evangelical students care as much about the needs of the world as they do about their own circumstances (or at least they ought to). They want to know what they can do to protect human life, reduce armed conflict, rescue orphans, feed the poor, care for creation, safeguard people of faith from religious persecution and bring an end to human trafficking.

When it comes to the needs of our own country, evangelicals have a growing concern for the protection of religious liberty. Here I would give Romney the same advice that I offered in a letter to President Obama when the White House asked for comments on the health insurance mandate: promote religious liberty as a first and fundamental freedom.

Religious institutions like Wheaton College and Liberty University have the constitutionally protected freedom to practice our Christian convictions. As president, how would Romney defend this freedom with regard to hiring practices, health care and human sexuality?

Despite our many theological differences, these are areas where Mormons and evangelicals ought to be in strong agreement: life, family and the protection of religious liberty.

---

R. Albert Mohler Jr. is president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world.

At Liberty University, Romney faces the opportunity to introduce himself to American evangelicals in a whole new way. He is speaking as the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party, and this represents a crucial moment for his campaign.

As he addresses evangelicals, Romney’s most important goal must be to speak as himself. He should speak of his faith and his convictions. He should identify himself as a Mormon whose worldview is shaped by his faith.

He should draw clear lines from his faith to his political principles, speaking of his concern for the culture, marriage, the family and the future of our nation. He should speak without hesitation, explaining how he arrived at his most important political and moral convictions.

He should not try to bridge the theological gulf that separates Mormons from evangelical Christians, but he should point directly to common concerns and shared convictions about the crucial issues facing our nation. He should acknowledge the fact that he is a Mormon and that he has taken his faith seriously as it informs his worldview. Evangelicals respect an honest statement of theological difference, for we take theology seriously.

He should remind the audience at Liberty University that he is not running to be their preacher but to be their president. He should speak to shared political and policy concerns, making clear the fact that his policies emerge from a deep reservoir of commitment.

The governor will serve himself and his campaign well by telling evangelicals his story, understanding that it is very different from their story. Like most Americans, evangelicals would choose, if possible, to elect one of their own.

Nevertheless, evangelicals have demonstrated a readiness to vote for serious candidates who represent very different theological understandings but share a common set of concerns for the nation, rooted in an overlapping of worldviews.

If Romney seizes the moment at Liberty University, he will make history for himself, for his campaign and for the nation.

The opinions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of the authors.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: 2012 Election • Christianity • Mitt Romney • Politics

soundoff (101 Responses)
  1. Mike Blackadder

    I think Romney should take Ryken's advice. Good stuff.

    May 11, 2012 at 10:50 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Do elaborate.

      '

      Ummm. On second thought, don't bother.

      May 11, 2012 at 10:53 pm |
  2. mandarax

    Romney should say, "Hey, is this electricity being supplied by coal that is less than 6000 yrs old? Neat."

    May 11, 2012 at 10:13 pm |
  3. mandarax

    Romney should say, "I sure wouldn't trust anyone with a Liberty U. biology degree to be my doctor!"

    May 11, 2012 at 10:10 pm |
  4. mandarax

    Romney should say: "Why didn't you guys go to a real college?"

    May 11, 2012 at 10:08 pm |
  5. just sayin

    What Romney should say. "I repent of my sins and accept the Lord Jesus Christ into my heart, turning from my wickedness and embracing the Kingdom of God." God bless

    May 11, 2012 at 6:52 pm |
    • EvolvedDNA

      That will keep your old sky alien happy then will it?

      May 11, 2012 at 8:46 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      just an idiot is so freakin' stupid, it would probably believe anything Romney said just so it could cast its vote for him.

      May 11, 2012 at 8:50 pm |
  6. Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things

    Prayer changes things

    May 11, 2012 at 5:56 pm |
    • Jesus

      Prayer doesn’t not; you are such a LIAR. You have NO proof it changes anything! A great example of prayer proven not to work is the Christians in jail because prayer didn't work and their children died. For example: Susan Grady, who relied on prayer to heal her son. Nine-year-old Aaron Grady died and Susan Grady was arrested.

      An article in the Journal of Pediatrics examined the deaths of 172 children from families who relied upon faith healing from 1975 to 1995. They concluded that four out of five ill children, who died under the care of faith healers or being left to prayer only, would most likely have survived if they had received medical care.

      The statistical studies from the nineteenth century and the three CCU studies on prayer are quite consistent with the fact that humanity is wasting a huge amount of time on a procedure that simply doesn’t work. Nonetheless, faith in prayer is so pervasive and deeply rooted, you can be sure believers will continue to devise future studies in a desperate effort to confirm their beliefs!.

      May 11, 2012 at 6:20 pm |
  7. Joe

    If there are any real Christians here I hope you will read this article

    http://www.defendthefamily.com/_docs/resources/6390601.pdf

    it explains some of what is going on, and how they work at CNN, NY Times, etc. They have been trained to divide certain groups....

    May 11, 2012 at 4:54 pm |
    • ME II

      Haven't you figured it out.

      There are no *real* or *true* Christians. They are a theological impossibility.

      May 11, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
  8. Joe

    Many of the activists who are here 247 have been employed to remove those who practice faith. (I can't type this how it is). They have been trained to target certain people, "Mormons, Catholics, and Evangelicals" they have Obama in their pockets. Evidence indicates that the reason he came out in support of gay marriage was because a large portion of his money comes through activists.

    May 11, 2012 at 4:52 pm |
  9. Joe

    Jesus is the only important Judge of who is Christian and who is not. Everyone should feel free to disagree on matters of faith, but It is important that people of faith stand united. There really is a wore on religion: Here is what liberal activists tell me their goal is: "End the religious stranglehold on humans by 2025!"

    May 11, 2012 at 4:48 pm |
    • satan

      No war. Just keep your religion to yourself. We don't give a fvck about what your bible or made up god says or tells you to do. Keep all religion out of politics, do not debt any civil rights to any based on any religious beliefs. Pretty simple if you ask me. This is America, your free to practice what you wish. Just don't tell me what to do. If you do then you have a war.
      "Fvck you, I won't do what you tell me!" – Rage Against the Machine

      May 11, 2012 at 4:56 pm |
    • EvolvedDNA

      Joe..it is, and always has been, the other religions that will be your nemesis. With so many religions and gods in the mindset of humans why do you fear the atheists?. we have no gods that will smite yours, or any hell to send you to, but most of the other religions have some thing nasty waiting for the "other folks" We are just happy if you could see the world the real way and understand how it all fits together with out myth.

      May 11, 2012 at 9:04 pm |
  10. Colin

    I would pay $10,000 to be able to write his speech for him:

    “Students, as students of Liberty University, many of you come from Christian households were you were taught the core values and beliefs that many Christians hold dear. It is time to graduate now and to go out into the real World. You will face new challenges and I would like to suggest to you 10 commandments for the 21st Century that may aid you on your way.

    First, do not automatically believe something just because a parent, priest, rabbi or minister tells you that you must. It is time now to challenge the beliefs that were instilled in you when you were too young to know any better. Stand up, be adults and face life with the intellectual courage of a freethinker, not the slavish weakness of a compliant drone.

    Second, do not think that claims about magic, miracles and the supernatural are more likely true because they are written in old books. That makes them less likely true. The Bible, for example, contains stories that, if presented in any other book, would be regarded as obvious mythology, such as a talking snake, a man rising from the dead, that same man walking on water, the Red Sea splitting and the regular appearance of gods, angels and demons. These stories might be comforting for the simpler, more naïve members of society, but have no place in the minds of future leaders and thinkers.

    Thirdly, analyze claims about religion with the same critical eye that you would claims about money, political positions or social issues. Any religion that requires “a leap of faith” to believe it is essentially admitting it has no basis in reality.

    Fourthly, do not accept it when religious leaders tell you it is wrong to question, doubt or think for yourself. It never is. I am yet to meet a person who said, “I regret not taking what they told me on face value and checking for myself.” In my experience, in life, business, politics and religion, only those selling junk cars want to prohibit you from looking under the hood.

    Fifthly, decouple morality from a belief in the supernatural elements of Christianity, Mormonism or any other belief. One can be moral without believing in gods, ghosts and ghouls and believing in any of them does not make one moral. Confusing the two causes many a person to cling to childish beliefs they would otherwise have abandoned years ago.

    Sixthly, a bit of independent research into whatever book you were brought up to believe in. Who are its authors and why should you believe them in what they say? How many translations has it gone through? Do we have originals, or only edited copies of copies of copies– the latter is certainly true for every single book in the Bible.

    Seventhly, be honest and accept realize that you are only a Christian because of where you were born and what your family taught you. Were you lucky enough to be born in the one part of the World that “got it right”?

    Eighthly, do not accept the explanation “your mind is too small to understand the greatness of God,” “God is outside the Universe” or “God moves in mysterious ways” when you come upon logical inconsistencies in your belief. A retreat to mysticism is the first refuge of a person who is shown to be wrong. I would never accept such an obvious, weak cop out in my business or political life and nor should you in any aspect of your life.

    Ninthly, take the time to understand where your religion came from and how it evolved from earlier beliefs to the point you were taught it. For example, the literal truth of Adam and Eve was taught as fact for 2,000 years. It was only after science showed it to be myth that mainstream Christianity had to recast it as a “parable”. Are you lucky enough to be living at that one point in history where we “got it right”?

    And finally, and perhaps most importantly, educate yourself on the natural Universe, human history and the history of life on Earth, so as to be able to properly evaluate claims that a benevolent, mind-reading god is behind the whole thing.

    In my life, the more I came to understand mother nature, the less I could believe in a god and the more I came to understand human nature, the more I understood why billions of us so desperately want to.

    Good luck in your chosen careers."

    May 11, 2012 at 4:03 pm |
    • Chad

      Edited applicability to reality...

      ============================
      “Students, as students of Liberty University, many of you come from Christian households were you were taught the core values and beliefs that many Christians hold dear. It is time to graduate now and to go out into the real World. You will face new challenges and I would like to suggest to you 10 commandments for the 21st Century that may aid you on your way.

      First, do not automatically believe something just because a parent, priest, rabbi or minister tells you that you must. As Paul commended the Bereans:
      "Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. 12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men. Acts 17

      Second, do not think that statements such as "science has disproved God", and other materialistic claims are true. Critically read the bible and become familiar with big bang cosmology, the anthropic principle, punctuated equilibrium and the unanswered questions surrounding the origin of life on this planet.

      Thirdly, analyze claims made by certain atheist "scientists", such as "something can come from nothing" and "given enough time anything can happen". These claims require a leap of faith that should not be acceptable to a person motivated to investigate the true source of an event.

      Fourthly, do not accept it when certain atheist "scientists" tell you it is wrong to question, doubt or think for yourself.
      "What triggered the big bang, or why does the universe obey laws is a stupid/irrelevant question to ask" is simply not acceptable.

      Fifthly, remember that without God, there is no universal right and wrong, there are only opinions.

      Sixthly, make it your life's work to independently research the bible. Who are its authors and why should you believe them in what they say? How many translations has it gone through? Do we have originals, or only edited copies of copies of copies. Once you gain a clear understanding of the phenomena of the accurate preservation of the original text thru ~3500 years, your faith will be greatly strengthened.

      Seventhly, Be thankful that you were born into a Christian nation.

      Eighthly, be thankful that you are no longer separated from God by your sin, rather you are reconciled with Him and He can live within you through the indwelling Holy Spirit.

      Ninthly, take the time to understand where your religion came from and how it evolved from earlier beliefs to the point you were taught it. For example, the literal truth of Adam and Eve was taught as fact for 2,000 years. It was only after science showed it to be myth that mainstream Christianity had to recast it as a “parable”. Are you lucky enough to be living at that one point in history where we “got it right”?

      And finally, and perhaps most importantly, educate yourself on the natural Universe, human history and the history of life on Earth, so as to be assure yourself that God is behind it all.

      Good luck in your chosen careers and may God bless you!"

      May 11, 2012 at 4:31 pm |
    • Chad

      D'oh!
      I missed ninthly!
      =====================
      Ninthly, take the time to understand where your religion came from and how it has remained consistent and true for 3500 years. The bible is 66 books written by over 40 authors over the span of 1500 years. There simply is nothing that approaches it for consistency, and truth. You do well to make it a daily habit to spend time reading it.

      May 11, 2012 at 4:37 pm |
    • satan

      Read Colin's ten commandments, then read Chad's. Chad's seem to be written by a dim wit incapable of thinking for themselves. More of the same old "the bible says it therefore its truth" rhetoric. Colin's commandments destroy Chad's plain and simple.

      May 11, 2012 at 4:44 pm |
    • satan

      The biggest lie ever perpetrated by mankind is the existence of any god.

      May 11, 2012 at 4:47 pm |
    • Chad

      "More of the same old "the bible says it therefore its truth" rhetoric"

      really? I looked back and for the life of me I cant find anywhere where I say that.. perhaps you were thinking of some other thread? ;-)

      May 11, 2012 at 5:15 pm |
    • momoya

      @Chad

      Why do you persist with your absolutely stupid-as-fvck misrepresentation of the atheist position concerning which you've been corrected many times?. Are you really that stupid?. Your continued strawmaning behavior is equivalent to pathological lying.. You're a liar.. congrats.

      May 11, 2012 at 7:21 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Amazing that anyone could be as ignorant and delusional as the Chard and still earn sufficient income to afford a computer and the electricity to run it.

      Oh, wait! Maybe his mommy pays his bills.

      May 11, 2012 at 7:24 pm |
    • momoya

      I think that Chad is probably quite successful at his vocation and that he enjoys much of his success BECAUSE of his popular stance on his nation's most beloved mythos.. What he can't seem to do is think about his reasoning as sharply divided between stupid&christian sense versus smart&business sense.. If he would simply quit giving his religious beliefs a "free-pass" from his critical thinking, he's see within mere seconds how absolutely asinine it all is.. He just can't make the hurdle.. It's sad to witness.

      May 11, 2012 at 8:41 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Well, mono, I agree with you analysis (emphasis on the "anal") of Chard's character; however, I disagree with you in regard to the degree of sadness his idiocy elicits. I find great satisfaction is the Schadenfreude his posts elicit.

      That is to say: I laugh at him. A lot.

      May 11, 2012 at 8:48 pm |
    • momoya

      Of course he's always good for a laugh.

      May 11, 2012 at 9:07 pm |
    • Chad

      @momoya "Why do you persist with your misrepresentation of the atheist position..."

      => can you point out where I misrepresented it? Specifically?
      Don't just go on and on about something that isn't actually in my post. I mean point out something in my post that misrepresented an atheist position..

      May 11, 2012 at 9:19 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Why? What possible good would entail, Vegetable? All that would happen is that you'd deny, obfuscate, and lie about whatever anyone with an opposing view posted.

      Chard, when will you be honest?

      May 11, 2012 at 9:24 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      momo, you are spot on. I never take the Vegetable's posts seriously; they're entertainment. P0rn is better, but Chard is a close second as a guilty pleasure. And just about as meaningful.

      May 11, 2012 at 9:26 pm |
    • Really-O?

      @Chad –
      Once again you seem to be the forum whipping boy. Perhaps it's time for some self-reflection...no?

      May 11, 2012 at 9:32 pm |
    • AGuest9

      Actually, college is the time to challenge the beliefs that were instilled in them. By the time they have graduated, it's too late. They must join the real world, and will now never know if they made the right choices.

      May 11, 2012 at 9:58 pm |
    • EvolvedDNA

      Chad.. We accept that abiogenesis is still open to debate, you claim with out evidence that god did it..."Some thing from nothing".. also there is a good book you should read to get a better understanding of why you are also wrong about some thing from nothing....it is because your understanding of "nothing" is wrong. Read " A Universe From Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss it may help you understand the most recent understanding of the universe and why it appears so confusing to you.

      May 11, 2012 at 10:40 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Wow, Evolved, you really are an optimist.

      May 11, 2012 at 10:44 pm |
    • EvolvedDNA

      Tom Tom ....yes...at least Chad has been thrown a life line to help pull him from the religious abyss... no guarantee he will be able to grasp it thought!

      May 11, 2012 at 11:03 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      I repeat myself: Chad has trouble grasping how shoelaces work.

      May 11, 2012 at 11:10 pm |
    • Chad

      @EvolvedDNA "We accept that abiogenesis is still open to debate, you claim with out evidence that god did it."
      @Chad "hmm.. what would you accept as evidence?"

      =========
      @EvolvedDNA "Some thing from nothing".. also there is a good book you should read to get a better understanding of why you are also wrong about some thing from nothing....it is because your understanding of "nothing" is wrong. Read " A Universe From Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss it may help you understand the most recent understanding of the universe and why it appears so confusing to you."
      @Chad "hmm.. you should understand that Kraus has acknowledged his "nothing" actually isnt "nothing" in the sense of the absence of everything.. you see, he acknowledges his "nothing" has a sea of virtual particles, it has gravity, it has space, it has the ability to be acted upon by quantum fields.

      Most importantly, Krauss acknowledges that his "nothing" (the quantum vacuum), is NOT the condition that preceded the big bang.

      You're better off dealing with reality ;-)

      listen to this sometime: William Lane Craig destroy's Krauss in a debate:, a small portion:

      And lest you think that this is not reasoning that impresses contemporary scientists, like me quote from George Ellis, a great cosmologist, when he asks, “Can there be an infinite set of really existing universes?” He says “We suggest that, on the basis of well-known philosophical arguments, the answer is No.” And therefore they reject a realized past infinity in time.
      Now what about the Big Bang confirmation? Dr. Krauss appeals to Stephen Hawking’s model. Hawking’s model involves an absolute beginning of the universe! It has the beginning of the universe, though it does not have a beginning point of infinite density.
      He says, “But it can come into being out of nothingness because nothing is unstable.” This is the grossly misleading use of “nothingness” for describing the quantum vacuum, which is empty space filled with vacuum energy. It is a rich, physical reality described by physical laws and having a physical structure. If a religious person were to so seriously misrepresent a scientific theory as this, he would be accused of deliberate distortion and abuse of science, and, I think, rightly so! What the quantum vacuum is is a roiling sea of energy. It is not nothing. As Dr. Krauss himself has said, “By ‘nothing,’ I don’t mean nothing. . . . Nothing isn’t nothing anymore in physics.”7 Empty space is not empty. “Nothing is really a bubbling, boiling brew of virtual particles.”

      May 11, 2012 at 11:31 pm |
    • EvolvedDNA

      @Chad "hmm.. what would you accept as evidence?" anything that is verifiable....you still have to over come the fact that your god would have to come from nothing...and be more complex than the entire universe.

      William Lane Craig destroy's Krauss in a debate: says who? You really need to read the book and make your own mind up rather than get sound bites from WLC who is clearly an apologist for god and not a scientist or mathematician.

      May 12, 2012 at 1:39 am |
    • momoya

      @Chad

      Don't act like you aren't aware of how you presented strawman arguments in your list.. Just going on memory, here, I believe you said something about "science hasn't proved that god doesn't exist," and "something doesn't come from nothing" and other, similar garbage..

      Atheists aren't how your pastor says they are, and atheists don't use the STUPID ARGUMENTS you infer.. What you're doing reminds of muslims who mock christians for worshiping the trinity of God, Jesus, and Mary.

      May 12, 2012 at 9:50 am |
    • momoya

      William Lane Craig speaks with a lot of fervor and well-laid out arguments, but none of his arguments are any good.. His conclusions don't follow from his premises and his logic fails throughout, but after he presents them he acts like there's no defense for them regardless of how many times they've been destroyed by his opponent..

      Speaking as a former believer, I can understand why brainwashed simpletons would assume Craig "wins" his debates.

      May 12, 2012 at 9:52 am |
    • mandarax

      Chad, it is clear that you put lots of effort into studying and internalizing "information" from all those apologist writers. Why not put all that effort into simply studying objective science? Just think if all those hours and all your efforts were put into learning from legitimate sources (and I don't mean religious or non-religious, I just mean professional experts in their fields), you would have quite a command of humanities current understanding of the universe. Instead you are absolutely squandering your curiosity and intellect on people who are unwaveringly committed to promoting absurdities.

      May 12, 2012 at 10:15 am |
    • Chad

      @EvolvedDNA "hmm.. what would you accept as evidence?" anything that is verifiable."
      @Chad "define "verifiable", atheist cosmologists propose all kinds of theories on the origin of the universe.. How are they verifiable?
      "Verifiable" applied consistently to theists and atheists with respect to the origins of the universe has to do with the ability of your proposal to be consistent with our observations of the universe now.
      right?
      Or, are you proposing 2 different criteria for "verifiable", one for atheists and another for theists ;-)

      ==========
      @EvolvedDNA "you still have to over come the fact that your god would have to come from nothing...and be more complex than the entire universe."
      @Chad "God alone has no beginning and no end.
      Not sure why you think that God having to be more "complex" (whatever that term implies in this context) than the universe is a problem?

      =========
      @EvolvedDNA "William Lane Craig destroy's Krauss in a debate: says who?
      @Chad "atheists and theists alike :-)

      =========
      @EvolvedDNA "You really need to read the book and make your own mind up rather than get sound bites from WLC who is clearly an apologist for god and not a scientist or mathematician."
      @Chad "who won the debate is subjective of course, that Krauss' "nothing" really isnt "nothing" is not.
      Krauss acknowledges this fact, so any attempt by yourself to argue otherwise is pretty moot.. right?

      ==========
      @momoya "Don't act like you aren't aware of how you presented strawman arguments in your list.. Just going on memory, here, I believe you said something about "science hasn't proved that god doesn't exist," and "something doesn't come from nothing" and other, similar garbage.."
      @Chad "atheists claim that science has demonstrated that God doesnt exist.. that's a fact, not a strawman. See for example:
      God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist [Hardcover]

      as well atheists claim that "something can come from nothing"", just scroll up and read EvolvedDNA

      ==========
      @momoya "atheists don't use the STUPID ARGUMENTS you infer"
      @Chad "?? on this very page, atheists have claimed that something comes from nothing, and I provided a book showing that atheists claim that science has disproved God..

      Indeed, atheists do use those silly arguments ;-)

      ============
      @mandarax "you are absolutely squandering your curiosity and intellect on people who are unwaveringly committed to promoting absurdities"
      @Chad "don't agree at all, the majority of what I read in cosmology is secular, and I purposefully shy away from theistic cosmologist lectures, favoring debates between atheists/theist as I get a much better understanding of the relative weaknesses of the arguments.

      May 12, 2012 at 1:04 pm |
    • Rachel

      @Chad-That made for a very thought provoking and interesting read! Thanks for the post!
      :)

      May 12, 2012 at 1:08 pm |
    • Really-O?

      Hey, look, now Chad is posting as Rachel...emoticons and all.

      May 12, 2012 at 2:06 pm |
    • momoya

      @Chad

      You miss the finer points of discussion so you presume a pixilated image rather than simply judging precepts according to merit.. Science can prove that god doesn't exist; science proves that CERTAIN GODS OF CERTAIN DEFINITIONS are impossible if our current understanding of science is accurate.. There's a difference there, but perhaps you're too stupid to appreciate it as a critical thinker would.

      Evolved DNA is not saying that "something comes from nothing.". Evolved DNA is trying to show you that what you call "nothing" is not actually nothing but instead is full of quantum fluctuations that can "express" actual particles.. Nobody even knows if "nothing" is even possible.. It certainly doesn't seem to be.. Just because you label a state "nothing," doesn't mean that it actually is "nothing.". If you would actually read some of the excellent rebuttals that you receive in response to your absolutely stupid assumptions you'd already know this flatly and you wouldn't be debating it.

      Why do you insist on using stupid arguments that don't affect atheists at all????? Don't you want your arguments to be persuasive??? Don't you want to make plausible points????? You're never going to get anywhere with either your own search for truth or anybody else's search for truth if you continue to refuse to engage the subjects honestly (without making them look stupid simply by your word and argument selections)..

      May 12, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
    • momoya

      CHAD IS A LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR, LIAR!!!!!!

      You said that member "Evolved DNA" was using an argument that he was NOT using.. You either lied on purpose to confuse the issue or you aren't comprehending what you're reading.. You should stop lying and start trying to understand what people are trying to help you understand.

      May 12, 2012 at 5:38 pm |
    • EvolvedDNA

      Chad..@Chad "God alone has no beginning and no end.
      Not sure why you think that God having to be more "complex" (whatever that term implies in this context) than the universe is a problem? " Yes it is a problem..it would mean your god, would spring fully formed into some thing then create a universe...where did all the stuff to make god copme from, and claiming that god has no beginning and no end..in totally unverifiable and as such meaningless.. you are back to where you started.. no proof just a comment to support the world view you have. Verifiable evidence means just that.. if god exists then the evidence must be there to test and confirm that it is only possible from this god....lets see ...how about growing a limb back on tv in front of the world perhaps..know it would show that some thing did the magic but it could be a super intelligent alien... god may still not be present... Look at it this way..you using the technology we have today would appear" god like" to say a group of humans who have no contact with the rest of the world and suddenly exposed to it . We could say the same about a group of aliens visiting the planet say, with technology we have no idea about. it would appear god like to us as well. So what you may think is god is not.... see your dilemma.

      May 13, 2012 at 11:49 pm |
  11. Mike

    Um... how about "Who cares" ? If Romney really does get the nod from the GOP, my money's on he doesn't win this thing anyhow. The Republicans in office have, for the most part, been a bunch of shlubs anyhow that nobody would vote for, unless of course you're against personal privacy and liberty.

    How ironic that the one person the GOP, which with support for such things as SOPA, PIPA, CISPA, NDAA/EEC, and the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act is about as anti-liberty a party as I have ever seen, is willing to permit as their candidate of choice, will be speaking at a university named "Liberty". If that doesn't take the cake, I don't know what will.

    May 11, 2012 at 3:15 pm |
  12. BRC

    "Like most Americans, evangelicals would choose, if possible, to elect one of their own."

    I think that statement above belies a serious problem in our countries way of thinking, and demonstrates once again that many people just do not understand the consttution.

    May 11, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
    • just sayin

      Christians understand and respect the Const i tution about as much as the religo nuts in the ME do. The next time we will be fighting for our freedom will be against Christians.

      May 11, 2012 at 3:52 pm |
    • ME II

      @BRC,
      "I think that statement above belies... that many people just do not understand the consttution."

      Not sure I understand this one. Why would that go against the consti.tution?

      May 11, 2012 at 4:26 pm |
    • just sayin

      On Christ the solid rock I stand. God bless

      May 11, 2012 at 7:08 pm |
    • BRC

      @ME II,
      Sorry about the long delay. Because it basically scoots around the directive that there shall be no religious test for office. No matter what a person's beliefs are, the religion of the candidate should be one of the last considerations made, not the first, and not one of the dominant ones. We shouldn't be looking to elect someone who is "one of ours", it's a divisive mentality that sets us at odds with one another over as subject that should have little or no bearing (and for many people isn't even a possible consideration). We should be basing the decision on what they stand for ON SPECIFIC issues, who intelligent they are, and how likely they seem to be to do a good job.

      Example: 10 years from now, almost as a publicity stunt, a very wealthy and prominent atheist managers to keep himself in political focus enough that his name is actually on the ballot come November. There's just one problem, he's an awful candidate with terrible positions whose goal is to enact as much legislation as he can to restrict the existence of religion in the US. On the other hand, there is a Central tended Democrat, who is smart, actually willing to take advice from business geniuses on how to make financial leeway for the nation, and who wants people to have the liberty they are supposed to have according to the consttution; but he's a Catholic. I am an atheist (for both this example and in reality). I understand the purpose of religion, but I think it has long outlived its usefulness, was never really that honorable, and we'd all be better off without it. I'm still going to vote for the good Candidate, not the agenda laden atheist. That is how I would hope all people would think. That's not what the author said.

      May 11, 2012 at 7:24 pm |
  13. Kris

    Seriously... These are your comments? Grow up and become civilized instead of engaging in politics like children and barbarians

    May 11, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
    • Kris

      This is directed not at Mr.Ryken or Mohler but towards those who are commenting on this post.

      May 11, 2012 at 2:51 pm |
    • Crom

      This is a worthless article in two parts. The first part is written by a totally clueless git, and the second part is written by a neo-nazi who has Rove as his hero.

      So who cares what's in the comments section? The article is worthless puke. I wouldn't trust either of these jokers with a dead dog.

      May 11, 2012 at 5:05 pm |
    • Mike Blackadder

      Crom, any comments on what they actually said?

      Kris has a good point about useless comments throughout this thread (and others).

      I think that there ought to be an alternate definition of atheism added to the dictionary "atheism: an ironic obsession with regard to any religious topic.".

      May 11, 2012 at 11:17 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Why don't you post a definition of Christianity as well, honey?

      Maybe it would read: A delusion based on nonsense promulgated by idiots.

      May 11, 2012 at 11:19 pm |
  14. momoya

    "Vote for me, a person you think is going to h.e.ll for being a heretic of your faith instead of voting for a fellow christian brother in the Lord who you will spend eternity with."

    May 11, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      lol!

      May 11, 2012 at 2:32 pm |
    • A Serpentine's Thought

      Hell has no more fury than a momoya scorned!

      May 11, 2012 at 3:35 pm |
  15. Bootyfunk

    "What should Mitt Romney say at Liberty University?"

    he should tell them there's no such thing as god and to grow up.

    May 11, 2012 at 2:01 pm |
  16. thomas

    Romney is a bigot. Falwell was a bigot. Seems like a perfect fit.

    After all, nothing says "Jesus" like bigotry and hate!

    May 11, 2012 at 1:36 pm |
  17. No Truth, Just Claims

    Here is what he should say....

    "I know to you it seems that the Mormon belief system is really odd and crazy, but I talked to people who are completely outside of all religion and they agree....both our belief systems are completely nuts.......goodnight"

    May 11, 2012 at 1:29 pm |
  18. Reality

    Dear Liberty students:

    – from a guy who enjoys intelligent se-x-

    Note: Some words hyphenated to defeat an obvious word filter. ...

    The Brutal Effects of Stupidity:

    : The failures of the widely used birth "control" methods i.e. the Pill ( 8.7% failure rate) and male con-dom (17.4% failure rate) have led to the large rate of abortions and S-TDs in the USA. Men and women must either recognize their responsibilities by using the Pill or co-ndoms properly and/or use safer methods in order to reduce the epidemics of abortion and S-TDs.- Failure rate statistics provided by the Gut-tmacher Inst-itute. Unfortunately they do not give the statistics for doubling up i.e. using a combination of the Pill and a condom.

    Added information before making your next move:

    from the CDC-2006

    "Se-xually transmitted diseases (STDs) remain a major public health challenge in the United States. While substantial progress has been made in preventing, diagnosing, and treating certain S-TDs in recent years, CDC estimates that approximately 19 million new infections occur each year, almost half of them among young people ages 15 to 24.1 In addition to the physical and psy-ch-ological consequences of S-TDs, these diseases also exact a tremendous economic toll. Direct medical costs as-sociated with STDs in the United States are estimated at up to $14.7 billion annually in 2006 dollars."

    And from:

    Consumer Reports, January, 2012

    "Yes, or-al se-x is se-x, and it can boost cancer risk-

    Here's a crucial message for teens (and all se-xually active "post-teeners": Or-al se-x carries many of the same risks as va-ginal se-x, including human papilloma virus, or HPV. And HPV may now be overtaking tobacco as the leading cause of or-al cancers in America in people under age 50.

    "Adolescents don’t think or-al se-x is something to worry about," said Bonnie Halpern-Felsher professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco. "They view it as a way to have intimacy without having 's-ex.'" (It should be called the Bill Clinton Syndrome !!)

    Obviously, political leaders in both parties, Planned Parenthood, parents, the "stupid part of the USA" and the educational system have failed miserably on many fronts.

    The most effective forms of contraception, ranked by "Perfect use":

    1a. (Abstinence, 0% failure rate)
    1b. (Masturbation, mono or mutual, 0% failure rate)

    Followed by:
    One-month injectable and Implant (both at 0.05 percent)
    Vasectomy and IUD (Mirena) (both at 0.1 percent)
    The Pill, Three-month injectable, and the Patch (all at 0.3 percent)
    Tubal sterilization (at 0.5 percent)
    IUD (Copper-T) (0.6 percent)
    Periodic abstinence (Post-ovulation) (1.0 percent)
    Periodic abstinence (Symptothermal) and Male condom (both at 2.0 percent)
    Periodic abstinence (Ovulation method) (3.0 percent)

    Every other method ranks below these, including Withdrawal (4.0), Female condom (5.0), Diaphragm (6.0), Periodic abstinence (calendar) (9.0), the Sponge (9.0-20.0, depending on whether the woman using it has had a child in the past), Cervical cap (9.0-26.0, with the same caveat as the Sponge), and Spermicides (18.0).

    May 11, 2012 at 1:04 pm |
  19. Bob

    He should admit that his whole religion is a fraud based on fictional events. But then, so is Christianity.

    May 11, 2012 at 12:41 pm |
    • Huebert

      He should mention that as well.

      May 11, 2012 at 1:18 pm |
  20. Peikovianyi

    He merely has to say he's not Barack Obama. The applause will take up most of the next thirty minutes.

    May 11, 2012 at 12:39 pm |
    • Dell

      Well, that's one of the few issues that he'd have a hard time flipflopping on, given that he has on so many others.

      May 11, 2012 at 12:42 pm |
    • Bob

      Round 1 goes to Dell. Possibly a TKO.

      May 11, 2012 at 12:46 pm |
    • Jake

      Obama has never flip flopped... He just evolves or revolves... Like in 1996 when he said he was for gay marriage, 2008 when he said he was against it and then now saying he has evolved to be for it again.

      May 11, 2012 at 2:41 pm |
1 2

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.