What's alarming about the whole thing is the failure to recognize or acknowledge what is being done in the name of their theory.
Anyone so concerned about *just teaching science* or *keeping science pure* should be just as alarmed at the misuse of the ToE by the left as a weapon with which to destroy the Judeo-Christian heritage and belief system as they are with the perceived attacks against the theory itself by the conservatives/Christians/creationists/ whoever they label their foe as.
Instead the evos line themselves up with and defend aggressively anti-Christian groups like the ACLU and NEA as they use science as a weapon to eat away at Christian belief. They should be as interested in rescuing science from groups like those as they are about "rescuing" science from those *fundies* who allegedly want to put us back in the dark ages and impose a theocracy on the country.
For the claim that evos are making that they are conservatives, they are fighting the wrong foes. If they'd take back science from the leftists who have hijacked it, the conflict with the religious conservative element would fade into the woodwork. Science shouldn't be political and yet that's the very thing that it's become.
We creationists have seen that and that is what we're fighting, not the science itself. It would be good if some of the evos saw that as well.
Thank you so very much for sharing your insights, dear metmom!
You know metmom- I just wrote several replies to Gondram- once again shooting down his rediculous claims- but it’s become apparent that no matter how many times they have their false accusations shot down- they simply will NOT put aside their pat petty accusations- they simply are unwilling to bring ANY sort of itnellectual honesty to discussions here on FR. Coyoteman was here for a good many years, and every one of his charts were disputed, refuted, and everyone of his false accusaitons about ID were shot odwn time after time, but he left here no doubt screamign about ID beign ‘antiscience’ and nothign but a ‘religious practice of apologetics’.
It has becoem clear that intellectual honesty is not somethign Macroevolutionsits hold very dear- at least not the Macroevolutionist apologists like Coyote and others who constantly show they are unwilling to even cede the bovious FACTS about the issues. They come here complaing that DC isn’t ‘objective’ anymore, and feigning disgust with subjective bias, but then turn right aroudn and wallow in that very same subjective bias they complain about- all while denigrading ID and Creationists in not so subtle rhettoric.
How will teaching creationism as science help against the ACLU and the NEA?
As Ken Ham has stated in his lectures and books,
while we conservatives are “shooting” at the “issues” such as abortion, promiscuity, children’s character issues, the homosexual agenda, out of wedlock births, and other morally rooted social problems,
the left has been working hard to undermine our very foundation. That is the Word of God, and that begins in Genesis.
Obviously the liberals posing as conservatives could care less, and those in the death grip of that cult are equally as hopeless, which, IMO leaves a very small number of people, by the looks of FR anyway.
There is a thought that stops thought. That is the only thought that ought to be stopped. That is the ultimate evil against which all religious authority was aimed. It only appears at the end of decadent ages like our own: and already Mr. H. G. Wells has raised its ruinous banner; he has written a delicate piece of scepticism called "Doubts of the Instrument." In this he questions the brain itself, and endeavours to remove all reality from all his own assertions, past, present, and to come. But it was against this remote ruin that all the military systems in religion were originally ranked and ruled. The creeds and the crusades, the hierarchies and the horrible persecutions were not organized, as is ignorantly said, for the suppression of reason. They were organized for the difficult defence of reason. Man, by a blind instinct, knew that if once things were wildly questioned, reason could be questioned first. The authority of priests to absolve, the authority of popes to define the authority, even of inquisitors to terrify: these were all only dark defences erected round one central authority, more undemonstrable, more supernatural than all -- the authority of a man to think. We know now that this is so; we have no excuse for not knowing it. For we can hear scepticism crashing through the old ring of authorities, and at the same moment we can see reason swaying upon her throne. In so far as religion is gone, reason is going. For they are both of the same primary and authoritative kind. They are both methods of proof which cannot themselves be proved. And in the act of destroying the idea of Divine authority we have largely destroyed the idea of that human authority by which we do a long-division sum. With a long and sustained tug we have attempted to pull the mitre off pontifical man; and his head has come off with it.
The above quote was from Chapter 3, for those playing along at home.
Cheers!