Stop invoking Newton. Newton was the equivalent of an atheist in his day. He rejected the supernaturalism of Jesus and was an ardent Arian. This tactic of taking credit for every person who makes a discovery just because they are nominally "Christian" is beyond annoying and disingenuous, considering the opposition they faced from the religious communities at the time of their discoveries. They didn't make these advances because of religion, but in spite of it.

**sorry** faulty editing there. I wrote atheists, but I don't see atheists are inherently against religion. There is nothing about being an atheist that means you have to oppose theists. Rather than saying atheists above I should have said antitheists as a more descriptive term. As I see it an atheist doesn't believe in any god, and antitheist wants to work against others believing in gods. It's not in any way used as a negative term merely a more descriptive term to acknowledge that most atheists don't care what others believe.

They care when your Christian co-religionists force their beliefs down our throats and make draconian social policies out of it.

Yet Newton wasn't the only name invoked. Mendel, Dobzhansky, etc. These are people who neither made their discoveries because of nor in spite of their religious faith. They were all able to be productive as scientists and as Christians. So, I don't find it easy to see them as either science or religion hating people.

But Christians are oppressed.
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/101/6/1189/

Dobzhansky didn't believe in any personal god.

Try again.

Sure as anybody would, There is nothing wrong with voicing your disapproval. Just as I am voicing mine about the idea that sience and religion have to be at odds. It's an idea that doesn't work when faced with the many scientists who are religious. There is a big difference between claiming those advances for religion, and noting that many scientists haven't bought into the idea that science and religion are mutually exclusive.

Why would it be necessary for religion to intervene in the physical in order to be real? It is not necessarily so. It is primarily a subject experience which by definition is not demonstrable. Which is why proving the existence or non-existence of God is an exercise in futility. So making a case for religion based on supernatural intervention in the physical world to be a non-starter. One can always come up with alternate explanations none of which would have any proof. You don't see the value in religion good enough. But all of your polemics may as well be tilting at windmills for all the good they do.

Mendel attended a monastery that the church felt was a source of radical ideas and many wanted shut down. It was more about research than prayer. Mendel's work was attacked by his co-religionists for being heretical.

I can understand why someone who wants to oppose religion would want to characterize Christians as anti-science. It doesn't meet with my experience and I'm willing to bet as I'm doing be making the statement that others will be able to think of someone who is Christian and like me wouldn't have the slightest qualm about signing up for either a Sunday School or an Astronomy class.

"Why would it be necessary for religion to intervene in the physical in order to be real? It is not necessarily so. It is primarily a subject experience which by definition is not demonstrable"

Then you're a Deist. If god doesn't intervene then what the hell is the point of believing in it? Theists used to have the courage of their convictions enough to claim that their god intervened in the world, even proposing theistic explanations for physical phenomenon. But since that enterprise has failed utterly, now they must resort to nothing but unaccountable mysticism.

"It doesn't meet with my experience and I'm willing to bet as I'm doing be making the statement"

I'm willing to bet that you don't pay much attention to the withering attacks on science education being waged by Christians on an annual basis, or the withering attacks on the "hidden agendas" of scientists because they don't subscribe to certain dogmas, or the withering attacks on any scientist who speaks out about religious interference in their work.

Not to speak of the huge percentage of Christians who reject basic scientific truths like Darwinian evolution, common descent, and the BBT.

Non-demonstrable mysticism..Religion is about self-transcendence. One doesn't need God to give them money, power or a new washing machine...rather to free oneself from the selfishness that desires such things. But you are a materialist and so you see value only reflected in the material world. That's a judgement that is everyone's to make..you can't PROVE it......

And yet Mendel was a monk and remained a Christian and the Church still finded the monastery even over the objections of some. You just helped prove that the church helped the science of genetics in a real way over the objections of some within it's own organization. Therefore, by your own anecdote, they aren't mutually exclusive nor do religion and science have to be odds.

"But all of your polemics may as well be tilting at windmills for all the good they do."

You mean asking questions that you refuse to answer? I think it reveals a lot. And sorry, atheists aren't going to shut up anymore while you people ruin people's lives. Vaginal probes, personhood amendments, planned parenthood defunding, anti-gay resolutions, etc. We're done with this. You're no longer going to able to peddle fear & hate with impunity.

**funded**

"And yet Mendel was a monk"

According to his own admission, he was not a monk out of conviction, but because he needed a stable income and this was the best chance to get it.

"Therefore, by your own anecdote, they aren't mutually exclusive nor do religion and science have to be odds."

But they were at odds. What has to happen, the monastery burning down for it to count as an example of religious obstruction of the advancement of knowledge?

As for Christians who reject proven scientific fact......what can I say, ideologies are a dime a dozen, they hide more then they reveal...all of them do. It's a common human error that I'm sure you have some familiarity.

"One doesn't need God to give them money, power or a new washing machine."

What a strawman. Nobody asked for you to demonstrate that your god is a Djinn, but how about something simple like a supernatural explanation for why plants grow. How does god make plants grow.

Your a hero in your own mind, Putin...of this I have little doubt. And I did answer you, actually.

"It's a common human error that I'm sure you have some familiarity."

Why are you coddling it and defending it then?

"Your a hero in your own mind, Putin...of this I have little doubt. And I did answer you, actually."

I'm glad you have a monopoly on respect. No you did not answer me. Theists make claims about how god has made miracles happen, among many other things. You haven't provided me any examples of supernatural interventions. Maybe you don't believe in such things, then why you are interjecting when these questions aren't posed to you, as I have no use or concern for Deists, is beyond me.

Judging from the Christians speaking in this thread it doesn't seem that any of them is peddling hate or fear. They've been pretty polite. Again I'm with you on anti-gay resolutions and probably half of the things you've mentioned. Any number of Christian churches agree that those political resolutions and initiatives are wrong. You can hardly lay them at the feet of every Christian. It would be like saying every Muslim is a terrorist. It's simply not true.

"Vaginal probes, personhood amendments, planned parenthood defunding, anti-gay resolutions, etc. We're done with this. You're no longer going to able to peddle fear & hate with impunity." as far as this is concerned not all people of all religions go for this sort of thing...I don't.....though vaginal probes....really.....use a different example next time....people can have WAY too much fun with that one.

Fun? About as fun as jamming a massive rod through your urethra. I'm glad you're the sensitive and compassionate type of religious fellow.

And I told you why I thought such examples were futile....Miracles may have happened...maybe they are simply symbol....I wasn't there, and even if I was I couldn't provide proof..why is that so difficult for you to see....it's so damned obvious.

missed the point as usual.....

Really, which churches would those be. Your own sect split into pieces because a large segment wanted to maintain the anti-gay positions of Anglicanism. BTW, do you belong to the Anglican Church in North America? or Episcopal USA?

Putin is on a quest to destroy religion in everyone's mind...the sad thing is that he thinks he is making an impact. People that believe as he does will cheer, people that don't will boo.....It's all about winning for his cause. oh well.