Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

LOUISIANA UPDATE

Quote:

Litigation is on the way

0 Replies

LOUISIANA UPDATE (breaking news from state legislature)

Quote:

Committee OKs science ed bill
(Advocate Capitol News Bureau, May 21, 2008)

In a packed hearing room, a House committee Wednesday approved a bill that backers said would revamp the way science topics are taught in Louisiana public schools.

The measure, Senate Bill 733, won approval without objection from the House Education Committee after more than two hours of testimony. The bill, which won Senate approval last month, next faces action in the full House.

Supporters said the legislation is needed because some science teachers are afraid to stray from traditional science theories on evolution and other topics.

"This bill is about science education, period," said Sen. Ben Nevers, D-Bogalusa and sponsor of the measure. "There is no hidden agenda."

Opponents charged that the bill is designed to inject religious teachings in public classrooms, including creationism and intelligent design.

"There is absolutely no need for this bill," said Tammy Wood, a veteran educator in the Zachary School District.

"I am begging you here today to kill this bill," Wood told the committee.

0 Replies

Ben Nevers, Hmmm.... oh look, he's the deacon of his church, and he was asked by The Louisiana Family Forum, a state affiliate of James Dobson's Focus on the Family (creationist front) to sponsor the bill, how sweet. I'm sure freedom of speech is their real motivation (not).

0 Replies

That's for the public to decide ros.

We all know what freedom of speech would look like if you were the definitive authority.

0 Replies

LOUISIANA UPDATE

Quote:

Louisiana Bill Sneaks Religion Into Science Classes, Says Americans United

0 Replies

wandeljw wrote:

LOUISIANA UPDATE

Quote:
Louisiana Bill Sneaks Religion Into Science Classes, Says Americans United
(AU Press Release, May 22, 2008)

Oh goody, another court thrashing for ID, just like in Dover. I can't wait.

Quote:

The Louisiana bill is one of several so-called "academic freedom" measures introduced in legislatures around the country this year at the behest of Religious Right forces. Bills were also introduced in Florida, Alabama, Missouri and other states.

If there really is a problem with academic freedom, how come we don't hear about it from the science teachers. Instead it's always a bible thumping politician. Just coincidence I guess.

0 Replies

wande quoted-

Quote:

"If this bill passes, and religious materials are brought into Louisiana public schools as a result, we will go to court to seek justice for the state's children," Lynn concluded.

Which is hardly a scientific conclusion if other reasons can be shown to exist, as they easily can, of why "we will go to court" other than seeking "justice for the state's chldren."

And why does this weaver of the winds use the word "sneaking" when the whole subject, apart from those other reasons, is out in the open being debated. That usage knocks Mr Lynn's scientific credentials all around the ring until he comes to rest in a cocked hat.

And he cheats even more than that. He talks about bringing religion into the classroom when he must mean, as I have shown at length, into the school as a whole. The classroom, even the science classroom, is not separate from the school and the neighbourhood.

And if he doesn't know that he shouldn't be spouting in public. And if he does know he is caught carpetbagging.

One assumes that Louisiana's legislators have been elected so why would parents vote in people who will harm their children's education?

Because parents are stupid he is left with having to say. Implying that Mr Lynn is not stupid and thus ought to be elected himself and, as most people go to extreme lengths to get elected, he should put himself forward for election rather than sitting in some shadowy office of which we know very little outside of their carefully considered public utterances.

0 Replies

This trick of continually referring to the science classroom cut off from it's surroundings is sneaky.

Anyone who has an aquaintance with Jewish history will set you straight on that. Mr Churchill was educated enough to know what Hitler's first attacks on Jews would lead to if they blossomed. And the Holocaust is only a part of it.

And enelected self-appointed busybodies are sneaky by definition.

And you can tell it's just a game to ros from his last post.

0 Replies

And the game ros plays is winning points in arguments with people who don't know enough to fight back. When somebody does he shuts his ears.

He's dumbing his bloody self down. He argues with the people wande quotes on this thread, who can't answer back, and he picks bits out as well which he is comfortable with. And even when he has smoothed his own path in these ways he still only has assertions in his quiver.

0 Replies

AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT... THE EVOLUTION OF A WORD CREATION BECOMES INTELLIGENT DESIGN

0 Replies

And the evolution of the word classroom becomes career enhancement for fm.

0 Replies

Thomas Jefferson was the main man in the Declaration of Independence rebellion and an important "Founding Father". (As in finding a goldmine). He was also a number of other things as well which may be summed up in this cut and paste which I assume to be authentic-

Quote:

Having satisfied the meanest of curmudgeons as to Mr Jefferson's peer-reviewed credentials I will quote the man in the role of a man not wrestling with the affairs of state. When he could be himself I mean.

Quote:

The writings of Sterne, particularly, form the best course of morality that ever was written.

That is Laurence Sterne, author of Tristram Shandy and other works. A clergyman.

This gives an objective example of how far from the thoughts and spirit of the Founding Fathers AIDsers have drifted and they have the nerve to throw at us just those words of their's, derived from compromises, that they choose to throw and taking them totally out of context. To see how much out of context one has to try to imagine being an Average American in those days and compare it to today.

Mr Jefferson obviously meant that anyone who is not familiar with Sterne had been on a second-best course of morality. At the most. There's a hierarchy. Darwin is at the bottom. There is no morality in Darwin. They **** where they are.

And is this much vaunted "giving our children the best" brigade pressing Tristram Shandy on it's innocent little charges? Or the less innocent ones?

Not likely I would guess from the prose I read on here. No chance actually. Too near the knuckle. Not PC to put it mildly.

Right on the funny-bone in those who have had a shot at "the best course of morality that ever was written".

We have Mr Jefferson's word for it that these so called educators, very few who will ever have heard of Sterne, are providing second-best courses in morality. At the most. I doubt they could understand truth to tell. Nobody who can understand it would sit down every night with the paper and read the sort of drivel wande quotes incessantly.

It is pitifully plain that neither Mr Behe or Mr Dawkins have ever provided themselves with the "best course in morality that ever was written". Judge Jones as well I would guess.

If we are to take Mr Jefferson seriously all of the time then shouldn't Sterne's writings be included when AIDsers quote him at their convenience.

Put that to a critical analysis.

0 Replies

Don't tell me that "critical thinking" was just a word formulation with no meaning outside the golden glow it conjures up, for those who refer to it all the time, in the eyes of their captives.

0 Replies

The fun thing for most Americans is to pick a Jeffersonian quote to prove any position, he wrote so much, don't you know, but in the end Thomas knew that reason always trumps dogma and he said that in many ways on many occasions.

Spendius: so many people have held your pitiful, full of fright, position before now, going back to the Peace of Westphalia which was, in the Pope's opinion, going to lead to the destruction of Western Civilization and allow the Turk to invade unimpeded. What it did was free government in Europe from the bonds and bans of religion and allowed Science to flourish in ways it couldn't have with the Church Fathers breathing down it's neck.

This was 200 years before Darwin and the whole panoply of thinkers, who brought to our modern world the ability to dispense with anything supposedly divined and concentrate on what it actually real. Nothing is easy about being human, we have to dodge the obvious evils -- Marxism--Fascism--but anything is better than being yoked to your superstition.

Joe(ask the Saudis)Nation

0 Replies

Joe ( I have not read Tristram Shandy with attention) wrote-

Quote:

Nothing is easy about being human, we have to dodge the obvious evils -- Marxism--Fascism--but anything is better than being yoked to your superstition.

It isn't a superstition that it's wrong to quote a bloke selectively.

That was all I had said. Are you a bit rattled and have had to descend to bluster and bombast.

I don't think you have any idea of what "anything" means in your post. If you had you wouldn't have written such drivel.

0 Replies

Well, how about this? Anything written, a soup can label, the instructions on operating an Ipod in Swedish, the little sign in the trash chute indicating which color bag the glass bottles go in, makes more sense and is far more enlightening than anything you have written in these many pages.

Drivel? It doesn't even rise to the level of drivel, it's more the delusionary ravings of someone who ought to be in the care of some really intense, as in strapped-down, restrictions.

Joe(really.)Nation

0 Replies

That sounds a bit Laventri Beria to me.

Is that typical of the AIDser's "reason"?

Quote:

anything is better than being yoked to your superstition

You said. I think most people would consider that to be drivel and any reader of this thread will know it to be.

Your post is a disgrace to yourself, your station and your office.

Quote:

When to gratify a private appetite, it is once resolved upon, that an innocent and an helpless creature shall be sacrificed, 'tis an easy matter to pick up sticks enew from any thicket where it has strayed, to make a fire to offer it up with.

Laurence Sterne. Tristram Shandy. Volume 1. Chapter X11.

I used italics as Mr Sterne did for that sentence.

0 Replies

spendi

Quote:

That sounds a bit Laventri Beria to me.

Spendi 's world is measured in arpents, not feet or cgs.

0 Replies

The reference, while perfectly explicit, should read : - Lavrenti Beria.

0 Replies

fm-

I'm a little surprised that you have failed to distance yourself from Mr Nation's post. Perhaps "liberal" is a word you interpret with a wide degree of latitude.

I don't think there has been a post on this thread as damaging to the AIDser's position as that one was.

In the last analysis we have H.M. Queen to resist such an argument.

Scientists must have cringed to see their calling defended in such a fashion. Democrats for Darwin too I shouldn't wonder.

What is your take on my post about Mr Jefferson?

I never said that I thought Mr Jefferson's statement was correct. It is a powerful statement. It joins up Church and State unless the State has no interest in morality and is going to proceed on regulations and enforcement exclusively. Or hypnotism.

There's only Francis who has a grasp on my position and has an open enough mind to listen to the case, without reaching for the violence, and seeing that it has, or might have, some merit.

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know