Should creationist speakers be arrested for giving false information?

I would like to say that


A) Every Creationist ';theory'; and ';contradiction'; is NOT supported by concrete science........Do you IDiots wonder why that instead of your ';science'; being taught at classrooms and universities, the best you have are merely inaccurate websites and Youtube videos?





B) When Creationist ';scientists'; that ';there is no proof'; of (missing link, evolution, etc.) they tend to ignore all information that can be found on every biology book known to man. This is considered lying becuase most often or not, Creationist Scientists claim to have a PhD in Biology, if that is true they can't claim that they ';forgot'; some of the most crucial elements of evolution. Since they would have spent a good portion of time STUDYING it. Therefore, they are simply lying and abusing their degrees and freedom of speech to manipulate the masses for the further advancement of their own political gain.......Should creationist speakers be arrested for giving false information?
Might not be a bad idea. Sooner or later, one of them is going to assert something that's not only blatantly false, but also manages to get somebody killed because they believed it instead of valid science. When that happens, I hope they sue the socks off him.Should creationist speakers be arrested for giving false information?
Religion isn't all about political gain... Also it isn't against the law just to lie. Since religion has been around for so so so long, everyone will not stop believing at once. Oh well, though, with religion some people have better morals so that's good, right?
You cannot arrest someone for talking nonsense.





It is not against the law unless it falls under the categories of slander or libel.





I don't always agree with what people say but I still respect their right to freedom of speech.
It is the evolutionist who should be arrested for false information not creationists. Yet Kent Hovind has been put in jail on trumped up charges because he dared to speak the truth. what are the evo's so scared of?
I don't use inaccurate websites or youtube... i use the Bible to prove my faith, thank you... and if you don't want to hear of it, then shut your ears and leave us alone.
Nobody should be arrested for giving false information.





Unless it causes harm.
Once you start arresting people because you ';know better than they do,'; the next phase is goose-stepping through the streets...
I think stupidity is protected in the Bill of Rights, isn't it?





If it were illegal, we'd all be in jail.
No, their beliefs should simply have no social currency and should be ridiculed for the nonsense it is.
I would love them to have them not speak, but I'd say free speech wins the battle.





If people want to be stupid, let them be.
...intrestingly enough, your answer is found in Scripture.
I also wondered the same thing about evolution..
ROFL... First Amendment is beautiful, isn't it?
haha. real funny. but hey, live and let live...
it's all in the eye of the beholder.
No.
I stopped reading when you said, ';do you idiots';....have some respect for yourself and others.
What gives you more rights to voice your beliefs than I have to voice mine ?
Have a nice rant? Feel better now?





Of course, many of us would say the same thing about neo-Darwinists.





The answer is, we simply think you guys are coming to the wrong conclusions.





The Darwin Party M.O.


• Step 1: Assume evolution.


• Step 2: Observe a fact.


• Step 3: Make up a story to show how the fact might fit in with the assumption of evolution.


• Step 4: Attack, ridicule, and persecute anyone who doesn’t toe the Darwin Party line.





From what I've seen, I have to agree with T. Wallace: “A major reason why evolutionist arguments can sound so persuasive is because they often combine assertive dogma with intimidating, dismissive ridicule towards anyone who dares to disagree with them. Evolutionists wrongly believe that their views are validated by persuasive presentations invoking scientific terminology and allusions to a presumed monopoly of scientific knowledge and understanding on their part. But they haven’t come close to demonstrating evolutionism to be more than an ever-changing theory with a highly questionable and unscientific basis. (The situation isn’t helped by poor science education generally. Even advanced college biology students often understand little more than the dogma of evolutionary theory, and few have the time [or the guts] to question its scientific validity.)”