But allow me to make this observation. In an Islamic country if you presented Darwin you'd probably be killed.
I have no problem with the theory of evolution being presented, it may ultimately be moved from the theory box and put into the fact box, but I do think, and I realize that there are disagreements on this, is that there are still questions.
Given that I don't see why there should be such a demand to suppress any questioning of it nor should the ACLU and an activist Federal judge override a local school board that put a sticker on a book that said it was a theory.
It appears to me that Darwinist (and I guess they're talking about Charles' granddaddy since old Charlie pretty much lifted everything from him in the first place) can't tolerate 1) any questioning of the theory or 2) allow others to gather wool on other possibilities.
I'm a tolerant Muslim but I have rarely, no, I think it's fair to say I've never seen a tolerant Darwinist. Thus I have been called all those things in my previous message as well as a couple more that weren't quite so entertaining.
That's unfortunate and frankly I suspect it's one of the reasons that Darwinist are getting their butts kicked in the court of public opinion. When a position of squelching all other ideas is taken there's usually a push back from the American public. My counsel, for what it's worth, is that "we're confident enough in the theory, and so much has been established already, that we're sure that ultimately it will become established scientific fact" would be much more effective.
Instead anyone who isn't a believer are called all those things in my previous message. They may be true, but it's a very poor way of winning people over.