Ann Coulter Quotes

There is an immediate payoff to intelligent design: it destroys the atheistic legacy of Darwinian evolution. Intelligent design makes it impossible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.

Intelligent Design opens the whole possibility of us being created in the image of a benevolent God.

The world embarrasses me, and I cannot dream that this watch exists and has no watchmaker.

The burden of proof is on those who don't believe that "Genesis" was right, and there was a creation, and that Creator is still involved.

The writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity.

Evolution is a myth. God creates the future the way he wants it.

The belief in God is not therefore based on the perception of design in nature. Belief in design in nature is based upon the belief in God. Things are as they are whether there is a God or not. Logically, to believe in design one must start with God. He, or it, is not a conclusion but a datum. You may begin by assuming a creator, and then say he did this or that; but you cannot logically say that because certain things exist, therefore there is a God who made them. God is an assumption, not a conclusion. And it is an assumption that explains nothing.

Well, creationism, in essence, is believing that the world began as the Bible in Genesis says, that God created the Earth in six days, six 24-hour periods. And there is just as much, if not more, evidence supporting that.

I believe in Darwin and God together.

... the wing of a fly is proof enough of the existence of God for me.

Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors. Can it be by accident that all birds beasts and men have their right side and left side alike shaped (except in their bowels) and just two eyes and no more on either side the face and just two ears on either side the head and a nose with two holes and no more between the eyes and one mouth under the nose and either two fore leggs or two wings or two arms on the sholders and two leggs on the hipps one on either side and no more? Whence arises this uniformity in all their outward shapes but from the counsel and contrivance of an Author? Whence is it that the eyes of all sorts of living creatures are transparent to the very bottom and the only transparent members in the body, having on the outside an hard transparent skin, and within transparent juyces with a crystalline Lens in the middle and a pupil before the Lens all of them so truly shaped and fitted for vision, that no Artist can mend them? Did blind chance know that there was light and what was its refraction and fit the eyes of all creatures after the most curious manner to make use of it? These and such like considerations always have and ever will prevail with man kind to believe that there is a being who made all things and has all things in his power and who is therefore to be feared.

This [the intelligent design movement] isn't really, and never has been, a debate about science, it's about religion and philosophy.

Belief in God is an act of faith. But so is believing our existence is simply the result of chance.

There is the Watchmaker Theory that God wound up the universe and let it tick. That may be. or it may be that he takes a hand in things from time to time. But whatever it is, I am sure that there is something out there.

The scientific argument advanced for intelligent design at the Dover trial, those arguments collapsed, scientifically and intellectually.

Uh, do I believe in evolution? I embrace the view that God created the heavens and the earth, the seas and all that's in them. The means that he used to do that, I can't say, but I do believe in that fundamental truth.

Evolution and creationism both require faith. It's just a matter of where you choose to place that faith.

Traditional arguments for the existence of God and contemporary attempts to use fine-tuning and cosmology to back up the case for his existence always strike me as kinds of games, since hardly anyone believes on the basis of these arguments at all.

So I see that Christianity in believing in a Creator pulls together more facts, data, inner experience and ability than any mechanistic view could hold for me.

Some theists in evolutionary science acquiesce to these tacit rules and retain a personal faith while accepting a thoroughly naturalistic picture of physical reality.

No one will presumably ever be able to prove or disprove such fundamental religious principles as the existence of God.

Man did not evolve but was created.

No matter what argument you make against evolution, the response is, 'Well, you know, it's possible to believe in evolution and believe in God.' Yes, and it's possible to believe in Spiderman and believe in God, but that doesn't prove Spiderman is true.

I believe that God created the Earth. I wasn't there, I don't know how long it took. I don't know how he did it exactly.

I can understand how evolution says, "don't believe in God", but I've never had this problem. I've always loved His creation. Unfortunately, this doesn't mean any_thing to some people, and I just don't get that! After all, if you just read the Bible plainly, it tells you everything. From Creation, to the Flood, to Jesus. I can't see how you can come to the conclusion, there is no God.