tkmmorgan, i'm glad who have/ will review the info we have provided you. Ignoring the fact I have seen much of the creationist arguments you presented here before, I did read much of your material. Hopefully, the fact that I was readily able to point to many errors and provide you with documentation will help you think about the evolution debate in a different light.
Nice post, rem.
To address the point about "fatal mutations", basically, the "model" you have of mutations in your head in relation to evolution is wrong, as it disregards the role of natural selection in the mix. Indeed most mutations aren't benefical, but most are neutral, not deletrious, though indeed there tends to be more deleterious ones than benefical ones. The model you have in mind would best be illustrated by imagining a construction worker who makes 99 mistakes for every 100 things he does, and therefore causes more damage on a construction site than positive work. However, in the evolutionary model, the construction worker would have a method called natural selection that automatically disposes of the 99 errors he makes and only implements the one positive move, so, overtime, the worker can build a palace.
The reason my illustration works is because in evolution (as you pointed out), a deleterious mutation causes death, or at the very least very adverse consequences on the mutation carrier. This causes the person with the malady to die off and not have any offspring (or very few), WHICH MEANS THE DELETERIOUS MUTATION IS LIMITED TO ONE PERSON in most cases (before the advent of mordern medicine, at least). But a person/animal with a positive mutation will leave more offspring and will allow it to proliferate in the gene pool. Natural selection therefore weeds out the bad mutations and keeps the good ones, and over billions of years, genetic palaces are built on the positive mutations that proliferate.
The AIDS/ cold virus situation you presented is once again a good case of evolution. Indeed, it would be very odd if a cold virus were to randomly mutate into an AIDS virus, but how do you think the AIDS virus got here to begin with? Unless you believe god created it by divine fiat, then you would have to conclude that the AIDS virus evolved from some other, older virus, as did the cold virus(es). If you trace back the lineage of both viruses (supposing that can be done), you would probably find out that they came from an original virus strain an absurdly long time ago, after which they branched out, and through modifications that take place with a vaste amount of time, they are the two viruses we see (at least microscopically ) today, much like what happened when man and ape branched away from each other 6 million years ago.
Once again, happy reading and see you around.