A rhetorical question

I know this one fundie woman who used to bug the crap out of me. Her father was a doctor who protested at women's clinics against freedom of choice, and whose mother passed away when the daughter was about 10, from breast cancer.

This woman also has a daughter she homeschools, she tries to make herself out to be a victim like the rest of us, and, of course, believes in the full-throttle literalist bible crap about the earth being somewhere in the vicinity of 10,000 years old.

At one point, she wanted more babies, and it was not happening. So she went to her doctor and started taking fertility pills until such a moment where she did get pregnant, and ended up having twins.

So now here's the question:

How can these people possibly justify this? How can they continue to cite biblical inerrancy and the failure of evolution, and use the science whenever--and only--it suits their own purpose?

I know, I just answered my own question. It still pisses me off that these people are such hypocrites in every single action and deed they do, love pre-birthers, hate borners; love fertility drugs, hate non-white orphans; love the death penalty, claim that Jesus would kill those who didn't worship him.

And anyone wonders why the founding fathers wanted to keep religion OUT of politics! The minute this religious fervor took over our country, we lost. The secular government was used to keep people all on the same page. It meant that very single person could--and would--be heard on their own merits, and not on a "favored nations" type platform.

But the thought for the day for me is I DESPISE fundies, the radical religious morons, and anyone else who cherry picks the science they believe in, as long as it's to their liking. If consistency were needed, they would fail big time. Come to think of it, they have failed: their boat has a hole in it, and they're taking on water fast. We need only lean back and watch them devour themselves, I suppose. But it's a smaller leak than we thought, and it's going to be awhile before they notice it.

couldn't have more kids'.

They claim to take the bible in the most literal sense, but they are so selective in which parts they take literally you really have to laugh about it. They claim homosexuality is a mortal sin, yet the bible is actually quite vague on the subject. They also ignore the fact that the bible frequently advocates slavery throughout the old and new testaments and few today would argue that slavery is one of the most morally repugnant crimes any person can commit against another. They claim abortion is a moral sin, yet the bible has even less to say about that. They also completely ignore what is perhaps the most common and singular theme throughout the entire old and new testament. Concepts like 'I am my brother's keeper', go right out the window with them. They completely ignore that Jesus was a pacifist and an advocate for the poor first and foremost.

Instead they use the bible as a manifesto for furthering their own oppressive and bigoted views. These people aren't Christians. They are simply morally repugnant people who go to church on Sunday to make themselves feel less guilty.

But evil scientists went out and learned 'bad' science stuff, too.

But it's easy to distinguish the results of 'good' from those of 'bad' science: it's whatever serves the ends, or even whims, of rightwing nutcases -- that's the result of 'good' science.