Dear fellow Americans, what document is more sacred in this land than the one that assigns the formal name known as The United States of America for this nation? You are mistaken if you think this document is the US Constitution adopted in 1787. Let’s read on!
Yes, with bold statement, the US Constitution mandates that the US government must defend Christianity. The First Amendment’s limited scope on religious affair must conform and be inferior to this mandatory principle. Because of this mandatory, the government would have outrageously violated the US Constitution when it expels Christianity teaching from the public schools while protecting the theory of evolution there, which tirelessly attacks religion.
Secularism is an idea; no idea can escape from the contamination of bias. To pursue the end resulted led by biased ideas can introduce irrationality. In asking the government to be separated from the religion of God, secularists force the government to be submissive to atheism, which insists Nothingness having been the creator of the universe. How is a faith insisting to have a creator for the universe not religious? If a God-created universe is of miracle, why a Nothingness-created universe is not of non-sense? Why must the US government switch its respect from one creator enthroned in the Constitution to a creator of non-sense?
With some equation it derives, Special relativity sets speed of light as the speed limit in the universe. However, the same equation can also lead to the exact conclusion that speed can go beyond any limit. Special relativity claims that rigid frames to be necessary and sufficient for its derivation to hold. However, its fundamental equation set must lead to the rigid frame it requires to become frames with elasticity that is speed dependent. All in all, Newtonian laws can lead to equation describing the close loop of movement for some material body around a gravity body, can the "more accurate" relativity do the job?
"Free market is not working but just criminal," declare all socialists. A market is free only if the will of both the seller and buyer in all trades is fully respected. If not, someone must rely on exerting duress to have trades completed―literally robbery. So, pursuing a socialist government, socialists just hope to set up a government to enable robbing— no one can resist duress from a government. In the capitalist society the socialists rob the "rich" for the “poor”, baiting the poor’s support. After they set up a socialist government, no more “rich” to be robbed, the socialists have only the poor to rob, making the poor far poorer.
The astronomical landscape painted by the description of the Big Bang theory must contradict the homogeneous distribution of celestial materials in the sky we observe. A model of movement developed based on an assumed explosion will not tolerate the coexistence of redshift and blue-shift movement of the heavenly objects. If the Big Bang theory claims that nothing but the nature with its laws has created the universe, it needs to prove that these laws are part of the nothingness, which is the nature, so different from the universe it shall have created.
The First Life Starting Evolution from Chaos
No one can convince people to take Darwin’s evolution for granted unless he can at least say “yes” to this simple question: Has he ever found any verifiable source telling people that a corpse can automatically have life reinstalled in it? All evolutionists preach that, without interference of intelligent design, some chaotically spread materials in the wild nature can organize lives by themselves. However, if no life can ever automatically appear with a corpse that nearly perfectly resembles to a live body in material combination, why can life appear with some chaotically spread materials?
Water, Not Trees, Is the Hometown of Our Ancestors
A big picture about the history of life development is that natural selection is a process in which God's intelligent design at work. Atheistic evolutionists have told people for too long that our ancestors came down from some treetops. However, if they cannot at least answer how the primate ancestors were placed on the treetops, they have no credit to make people believe the treetops to have started the origin of our ancestors. Evidence, logic all point to water as the birth place of our ancestors.
Genuine Definition of a Straight Line
As a definition, the statement "the shortest distance between two points is a straight line" is not ideal, and indeed, too loose. 1. Distance is by itself a straight line. The statement as a definition would become "the shortest straight line between two points is a straight line". It entraps itself into a circular statement and makes not much sense. 2. That a distance has been the shortest requires a proof. Definition is set up to prove something else, other than waiting for being proved to be what it says itself to be. The definition proposed in this paper should remove these two pitfalls of the old definition.