Fundamentalism vs Modernism

You have to look at the history of America. Lots of people came here specifically because they wanted to practice their fundamentalist beliefs in isolation. But many others came purely to get rich quick. And the country itself was founded based on the principles of a bunch of liberal humanists. The result is competing ideological traditions that are not really all that compatible.

>>1326589
This

>>1326589
This actually explains it pretty well.

File: aig-adam-monkey-cartoon.gif (45KB, 290x307px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 290x307px

Anyone else wanna put their 2 cents in, or did he sum it up accurately?

File: caf388fa2a158fc31b3ff3c4ccb66279.jpg (135KB, 724x1053px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 724x1053px

Come on, guys.

File: ItsThisSimple.jpg (166KB, 1440x900px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1440x900px

>>1326571
>Gradually accepting less and less dogma on faith
>descent

Oh, that's rich

>>1327460
The cartoon character is confused by the loaded question, not by his own answer, which by necessity must be complex enough to deconstruct the loaded question.

File: shavedChimp.jpg (82KB, 367x550px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 367x550px

>>1329319
Bro, apes are ripped. What's up with that flabby ape?

>>1329816
THAT'S NOT WHAT MARCUS AURELIUS SAID

fucking facebook "reinterpretation" fuccboi bullshit

>>1329816
Christians consider their beliefs to be "Good", not generally good like beneficial or pleasant, but "Goodness" itself.
Therefore if you disagree with them, you must naturally be "evil".

You might point out that this doesn't seem very moral to treat others this way, but Christians have a host of defense mechanisms built in to explain away or override these nagging consideration.

File: 5.png (141KB, 311x226px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 311x226px

>>1329827
WHAT DID MARCUS AURELIUS SAY THEN

also the quote is reasonable whether or not that's *exactly* what Marky Mark said in Latin

fucking 4chan Christfag fuccboi bullshit

>>1326589
This is a good explanation

>>1329820
Supposed to be more related to the Orangs than the chimps. Also, I think it's just the position. Most don't notice ape's potbellies because of hair or being hunched over.

File: YoureRight.png (37KB, 1029x235px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1029x235px

>>1329827
I'm back.

Guess what! You're right about Marcus Aurelius not saying that. I will now only use that quote, and not attach Marcus Aurelius's face to it.

File: 1463203392091.jpg (125KB, 400x1069px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 400x1069px

>>1329835
Humans and chimps, according to evolutionary theory, share a common ancestor. I've heard nothing about us being closer to Orangs. Sorry for my doubt, but do you have a source?

Good point about the bellies, but look at those ARMS

File: 4751489265_9cf8b49d00_b.jpg (349KB, 768x1024px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 768x1024px

>>1329840
Older theory supported by none other than Ernest Haeckel himself. He suggested that since Java Man was the only known primitive human at the time, and possibly since orangs and gibbons tend to look more humanoid walking upright, that we came from Asian apes as opposed to African apes. It was actually quite popular until the mid 20th century.

File: mdmap2.gif (127KB, 632x279px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 632x279px

>>1329857
Ah, groovy.

Thanks for the info.

File: 01_09.jpg (39KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 450x450px

>>1329862
You're welcome. Also, I believe he dubbed Java Man with the title Pithecanthropus Alalus, or "Ape Man without speech."

MFW we're actually descended from Kangaroos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHOGjd7PJY0

>>1329871
Nevermind, it was actually a theoretical species. When they found Java Man, they just gave it the genus name Pithecanthropus.