cogadh: That's because atheism is not a proper noun, while Christianity is. Oh, and its not the forum that does that, its your browser.

Arteveld: And i thought this movie depicts Catholicism, not Christianity. Oh well.

cogadh: Its only bashing if it weren't actually true. The creationists have changed their stance on what would be an appropriate way to introduce creationism into schools so many times that I'm not sure any of them actually agree on how to do it. Some wanted the extreme point of view of the likes of the KKK which state that only the white race was created by God, then they wanted Pat Robertson's loony ideas, others wanted it to have a more Catholic tone, which riled the non-Catholic faiths (that was the Pope he was calling the anti-christ) then they realized the only way to get it in was to drop some of the religious aspects of it, hence Jesus being "inappropriate".

Gundato: So basically, "You talk smack, but I talk facts"? :p

Wishbone: To the best of my knowledge, Catholicism is a part of Christianity.

cogadh: I don't know what you mean by that, but you seem to have a fundamental lack of understanding of what parody is. The entire cartoon was a parody of exactly what the Christian right has been doing with the whole creationism in schools movement. It is no more offensive than a Weird Al Yankovic song parody. If you fail to see that, then I don't think there is any hope of this discussion going any further.

Gundato: Personally, I feel that "parody" and "satire" are some of the most misunderstood terms out there. People are under the assumption that smiling while you rape and murder someone makes it "funny". Or, more pointedly, that if something is funny, it isn't an attack.
There IS a line between parody and attack. Honestly, Weird Al usually does a good job, but only because he is parodying things people don't care about. Then you have something like South Park, that has often gone beyond humor and parody into outright soapboxing and personal attacks.
Again, how is having KKK members and the Anti-Christ give a lecture on creationism parody? It is just an outright attack in an attempt to make the other side look foolish.
And I am still curious as to how this video summed up the arguments against teaching Creationism :p

Faithful: This only proves the point that creation or evolution cannot be empirically proven and thus they are both as much in your words a "fairy tale idea."
If there were proof of evolution then it would only need be presented and this would be a non-issue, but there is none.

Gundato: I was not aware that the KKK had a noteably different perspective on how the world started. They may have slightly different beliefs on how the world is, but they still (to my knowledge) are pretty much in agreement with regard to the whole Adam/Eve thing.
As for the "foolishness" regarding treating Creationism as science: pretty sure that is kind of the entire argument itself. Those who follow the scripture of "science" feel that creationism is evil. And vice versa.
But nah, maybe I should read your pamphlets so that I can get the same sense of humor as you. Although, could I suggest you read the pamphlets of those crazy Buddhists to learn what THEY think? And maybe read the pamphlets of them coo-coo-cachoo Muslims to figure out what THEY think.
Hell, isn't that the whole point of this? Having people learn about the beliefs of another group so as to be more tolerant of their beliefs and "jokes"?
Personally, I feel that if that video had stopped on the first Christian speaker, it would have done a pretty good job. It would still be drastically oversimplifying the manner and providing a VERY biased viewpoint, but it would be a great parody of the absurdity of specifically teaching Creationism (although, it would also call into question the absurdity of teaching evolution as a scientific fact, rather than a theory. but whatever :p). But it then felt the need to transition into a bashing of Christianity and an attempt to make them all look like crazy idiots.

Faithful: Wow, I am not a scientific person by a long shot, but this long story is based on taking several things for granted and starting from a point of view where things are already "evolved." He wants his readers to believe him because he thinks things are so, nothing more.

Gundato: And I am still curious as to how this video summed up the arguments against teaching Creationism :p

stonebro: If you can't see it, well, then I guess you're not intelligent enough to see it, or choose to ignore it in order to play devil's advocate.

stonebro: The story of evolution starts when the first complex molecules (the predecessors to proteins, the basis of all life) evolved by random chance in the earths primordial soup. Certain combinations of molecules were more suitable for longevity and eventually formed increasingly complex structures, ending up in the first single-celled organisms. Which in turn have led to the forming of human beings, of some now feel it's their business to "debate" whether all this really happened or not because it's just so much easier to understand that intelligent design excretion, you know. Don't have to stretch my mind for that one, instead I can go home early and watch Bill O'Reilly.
Isn't life grand?
This is not debatable, unless you choose to ignore the truth. If you do, you have no place in the discussion.

Navagon: Gundato 'plays devil's advocate' in pretty much every thread they post in. Some might mistake that for trolling.