Just in case this reply went to the wrong level: What I was searching for were *logical consistency* and *a good model of human behavior* in my religion. Buddhism and Catholicism won out; the other contenders all had logical inconsistencies that made them unbelievable (especially atheistic scientism- the universe is observable except when it comes to morality, which is the only place it is irrational? How does that make anything close to sense? Not to mention, all moral authorities should be rejected but scientific authorities should be accepted and their "proved" hypotheses should never be retested?!?!?!? And they call fundamentalists irrational!)

I have the theorem that 2+2=lambda for given universes. How is that an absolute, immutable, unquestionable truth?

A theorem is just a testable hypothesis.

I fail to see how the sisters and mothers of homosexual men having more children, make that a survival trait for the *MEN*. In fact, that article actually agrees with me, saying the main strategy for spreading genetic homosexuality is to *sacrifice* the men, and make the women more likely to reproduce.

Having said that, I thank you greatly for giving me the evolutionary proof for feminism.

I've got 2000 years worth of observed data that convinced me it is correct, is why I make that assumption.

Atheistic modern science has what, maybe 400 years or so? If that. The grand majority of atheist traditions have a tendency to start with the assumption that people in the past were all idiots and had nothing worthwhile to say at all.

No, because evolution isn't about what is. It is a logical deduction from *clues*, a model of what might have happened, not what actually happened.

It's hard to observe something in the past. But there are ways that give us clues. I'm no creationist. More of a Theistic Evolutionist (TE, unlike ID, holds that *every* observation has to be true, and that where scripture conflicts with science, science wins).

But that's all they are, clues. They can give us a model. They can't give us reality that we can't observe.

Assuming the Catholic theology is correct- God isn't all powerful. And there were some things He had to become Jesus Christ to learn.

Yes it does. All philosophies have moral lessons. The rules that govern the survival and extinction of species can be derived from evolution.

Not always, though I'll admit to being a bit of an exception to the rule, having tried Atheism, Shamanism, Shintoism, Islam, Wicca, and Buddhism before *almost* returning to my Catholic roots (I worship Catholic but still think the Sixth Patriarch had some truths Jesus Christ, despite being God, somehow failed to see, especially the absurdity of human beings thinking they know anything at all).

But as a generalization, for the majority I'd have to say you are correct. I've been called a heretic to suggest that the parables of Christ make more sense as Zen Koans.

Mod parent way up. A very good description of why you shouldn't confuse the model with reality.

I wish more people would accept the moral lessons of evolution! They'd be pro-life and anti-homosexual (because whatever else abortion and gay marriage are, they are most certainly not multi-generational survival traits).

The only thing NOT an opinion in science, IF you actually follow the scientific method, is the certainty that all evidence is biased by the ignorance of the individual putting it forth.

NEVER confuse the model with reality.

My brand new Lenovo Win8 machine is Silver.

Windows 8 + http//ninite.com + selecting Open Office & Clasic Start -> computer usable by anybody who is used to XP, Vista, or Windows 7.

But it should be pointed out that they WILL be punished- just not by another human being. And not in any afterlife either. Such risky behavior contains its own punishment, if not physical then certainly emotional. There is no escaping the fact that sex is indeed addictive behavior- and at the end of any given sexual relationship, comes the neurological chemical withdrawal.

If the sex was procreative- well, that withdrawal is lessened considerably by the existence of the resulting offspring and the emotion that comes from that addition to the relationship.

Then of course there is the physical side of such risky behavior. STDs are the most prominent, but most types of non-procreative sex have a host of other health issues associated with them.

You can't escape punishment merely by the government not punishing you. Punishment *always* comes for risky behavior. Just as if you play Russian Roulette long enough, you will lose and end up with a bullet in the brainpan.