ID isn’t a theory. It is religion. I cited the SCOTUS case. It shouldn’rt taught in school only because it is illegal to do so.
IDers should promote the IDA (Intelligent Design Amendment. Conservatives and Christians normally obey the law.
And you believe evolution ISN’T a religion?
It isn’t just happening in science, it’s happening in language and history as well. “Liberal” education czars are more and more ensuring that only one interpretation of events may be discussed — no more of that pesky questioning and debate stuff. It’s all part of ensuring that we all think “correctly.”
And another big reason why America just keeps getting dumber and dumber.
The real question is, why dose ID scare you terribly?
Christians are under no obligation to follow immoral or unethical law.
I find it ironic those who disagree with ID will cite law to boost their incorrect opinion wrt whether it can and should be taught in schools, then turn around and tell Christians they should follow whatever is unethical.
Since you ignored the previous post, evolution is a form of religion. It’s just that people are not allowed to disagree with it, because of its human origin.
People are waking up to this reality, which has the other side shaking in their boots. But you already know this.
That is unsupported and only a claim by evos. What if a Hindu brought forward the idea of I.D.? Or an agnostic?
I thought we bumped heads last night on the Catholic position but was mistaken. Evolution is a mechanism and what is the attempt by evos is to extend that back to the origins of life.
Science isn't advanced enough to exclude I.D. It is advanced to examine the potential evidence of it. The point we diverged on was science is only as good as the person paying for it. Science isn't necessarily honest. See the whole global warming agenda (which you wouldn't comment on last night) where data is fudged in the name of an agenda.
What is seen is the personal destruction of those seeking to examine evidence of whether there is proof of I.D. To even suggest it the person is tagged as a fundamentalist and banned. Your post is a great example of the fascist mindset.
As for quoting a court case, are you serious? Then I guess you feel great about Kelo v. New London, or Lawrence v. Texas. Or how about Roe v Wade?
No, bring all the I.D. folks in from all walks of life. Fund them. Let them do the research. Then review it honestly on its merits. Until the witch hunt ends no one should trust the high priests of academia. For they are not honorable.
You’re posting on a conservative forum, apparently agreeing with a liberal activist USSC that public schools should not be allowed to teach anything related to religion? Sounds like you’ve been brainwashed by the ACLU.
The 1st Amendment says that Congress shall not pass any law respecting religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. In plain language, that means that if Congress were to pass a law that did either of those two things, that law would be null and void for its violation of the 1st Amendment.
Therefore, the laws the Congress really has passed that have been interpreted to restrict schools receiving federal money from teaching religion ought be be null and void.
Instead, liberal activist Courts have turned that Amendment on its ear, and caused it to say the exact opposite from what it actually says.
And you agree with that subversion of the United States Constitution. That makes you, and those who agree with you, an enemy of the Republic.
I loved Ben Stein’s movie, and no matter what you believe, you should be outraged about the attack on academic freedom.