Ann Coulter weighs in on Darwinism

uncommondescent.com ^ | William Dembski

[Tribune7]

I’m happy to report that I was in constant correspondence with Ann regarding her chapters on Darwinism — indeed, I take all responsibility for any errors in those chapters. :-)

[Ken H]

Where is the Gospel of Jesus Christ mentioned in the founding documents?

Didn't find such a reference, but I did find this:

The Congress shall have Power to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

--Art.I,Sec.8,Cl.8

[Junior]

It is the first governing document produced by our founders.

It was produced by the founders of a British colony; not by the founders of the United States. By your lights we should consider any institutional documents introduced by the Spanish colonies of Florida and California as "founding documents."

[EveningStar]

I've always been conservative and I've always believed in God. Also, I've always believed in evolution. Until this year, I had no idea that a belief in evolution was incompatible with conservatism and a belief in God.

[PatrickHenry]

The Mayflower Compact is given credit for mentioning "just and equal Laws," but otherwise it's quite irrelevant. Those people established a theocracy, practiced communism until they nearly starved, and a couple of generations later their descendants were killing witches in Salem. The Federalist Papers make no mention of the Mayflower Compact.

[DocRock]

"It was produced by the founders of a British colony; not by the founders of the United States."

It was a founding document. The first governing document of the country. I'm beginning to think you don't like what it says about "Advancing the Christian Faith", as you want to keep beating this dead horse.

"By your lights we should consider any institutional documents introduced by the Spanish colonies of Florida and California as "founding documents."

I'm not familiar with any such documents, but I'm always ready to learn. Can you provide any links or details for these documents which would attain the status of governing or founding documents?

[Junior]

Until this year, I had no idea that a belief in evolution was incompatible with conservatism and a belief in God.

It isn't. A small group of religious zealots are attempting to redefine conservatism to match their own particular beliefs.

[daysailor]

"so you are saying the physical movement of indivuals is analogous with divergent evolution?"

If you phrase it:

physical movement and isolation of populations is a factor in evolution

Then sure, I'll accept it.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"It was a founding document. The first governing document of the country."

What country? Not the USA, our country. The founding document of the USA is the Declaration of Independence.

[Tribune7]

Coulter always gloms onto things that she thinks will win her support from the conservative base.

Or maybe it's something she believes.

[PatrickHenry]

This is the official founding document for the Massachusetts colony: The Charter of New England :1620.

[DocRock]

"What country? Not the USA, our country. The founding document of the USA is the Declaration of Independence."

"Source: The Federal and State Constitutions Colonial Charters, and Other Organic Laws of the States, Territories, and Colonies Now or Heretofore Forming the United States of America Compiled and Edited Under the Act of Congress of June 30, 1906 by Francis Newton Thorpe Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1909.

From PH's link in 424 (above)

[Oztrich Boy]

Coulter always gloms onto things that she thinks will win her support from the conservative base.

Or maybe it's something she believes.

Nitpicky.

Coulter always gloms onto things that she believes will win her support from the conservative base

Happy now?

[DocRock]

"This is the official founding document for the Massachusetts colony: The Charter of New England :1620.

Second sentence of this document clearly states...

"We according to our princely Inclination, favouring much their worthy Disposition, in Hope thereby to advance the in Largement of Christian Religion, to the Glory of God Almighty, as also by that Meanes to streatch out the Bounds of our Dominions, and to replenish those Deserts with People governed by Lawes and Magistrates, for the peaceable Commerce of all, that in time to come shall have occasion to traffique into those Territoryes, granted unto Sir Thomas Gates,

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Organic Laws of the States, Territories, and Colonies Now or Heretofore Forming the United States of America"

All that means is that Mass. was a colony that became part of the USA. The Mayflower Compact is still not even close to being a founding document of the USA. That would be the Declaration of Independence.

The Mayflower Compact is 180 degrees off from what the real founding documents of the USA stand for (The Declaration and the Constitution).

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Second sentence of this document clearly states..."

The Charter of New England is not a founding document of the USA either. It's the founding document of a British colony.

[PatrickHenry]

Second sentence of this document clearly states...

Yes, it does. And the Constitution of the United States clearly states:

Article VI, Clause 3: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

The First Amendment is icing on the cake:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...

So I guess you've got a bit of a conflict going. Whatcha gonna do? Support the Constitution, or a royal charter from 1620?

[DocRock]

"The Mayflower Compact is still not even close to being a founding document of the USA. That would be the Declaration of Independence."

The Mayflower compact is a founding document, like it or not. I'm very familiar with the communist "common store house" which they are not teaching my children about in history class. I do my part to teach them the dangers of this type of thought process, but what kind of though process discredits one our nations first founding documents? This is dangerous, also. Facts are facts. This nation was settled and founded by people seeking religious freedom.

[DocRock]

"So I guess you've got a bit of a conflict going. Whatcha gonna do? Support the Constitution, or a royal charter from 1620?"

What conflict do I have? How does my answering a question about founding documents with a fact now transform into my supporting said document?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"The Mayflower compact is a founding document, like it or not. "

Not of the USA.

"I do my part to teach them the dangers of this type of thought process, but what kind of though process discredits one our nations first founding documents?"

It isn't even close to being a founding document for our nation. It's the unofficial founding document of a British colony. It's contents do not appear in our nation's real founding documents, the Declaration and the Constitution.

"Facts are facts. This nation was settled and founded by people seeking religious freedom."

Which they finally got when our nation was founded with the Declaration and the Constitution.

[Oztrich Boy]

Whatcha gonna do? Support the Constitution, or a royal charter from 1620?

True Conservatives are the Loyal Subjects of the dread Sovereign Lord, King James, by the Grace of God, of England, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, - and a True Conservative Gvernment is a Communist Theocracy -