Posted on 11/25/2005 6:19:05 AM PST by labette
LAWRENCE (AP) - Critics of a new course that equates creationism and intelligent design with mythology say an e-mail sent by the chairman of the University of Kansas religious studies department proves the course is designed to mock fundamentalist Christians.
In a recent message on a Yahoo listserv, Paul Mirecki said of the course "Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design, Creationisms and other Religious Mythologies:"
"The fundies want it all taught in a science class, but this will be a nice slap in their big fat face by teaching it as a religious studies class under the category mythology."
He signed the note "Doing my part (to upset) the religious right, Evil Dr. P."
Kansas Provost David Shulenburger said Wednesday he regretted the words Mirecki used, but he supported the professor and believed the course would be taught in a professional manner.
"My understanding was that was a private e-mail communication that somehow was moved out of those channels and has become a public document," Shulenburger said.
The course was added to next semester's curriculum after Kansas Board of Education adopted new public school science standards that question the theory of evolution.
The course will explore intelligent design, which contends that life is too complex to have evolved without a "designer," presumably a god or other supernatural being. It also will cover the origins of creationism, why it's an American phenomenon and why Americans have allowed it to pervade politics and education.
State Sen. Karin Brownlee, R-Olathe, said she was concerned by Mirecki's comments in the e-mail.
"His intent to make a mockery of Christian beliefs is inappropriate," she said.
Mirecki said the private e-mail was accessed by an outsider.
"They had been reading my e-mails all along," he said. "Where are the ethics in that, I ask."
When asked about conservative anger directed at him and the new course, Mirecki said: "A lot of people are mad about what's going on in Kansas, and I'm one of them."
Mirecki has been taking criticism since the course was announced.
"This man is a hateful man," said state Sen. Kay O'Connor, R-Olathe. "Are we supposed to be using tax dollars to promote hatred?"
But others support Mirecki.
Tim Miller, a fellow professor in the department of religious studies, said intelligent design proponents are showing that they don't like having their beliefs scrutinized.
"They want their religion taught as fact," Miller said. "That's simply something you can't do in a state university."
Hume Feldman, associate professor of physics and astronomy, said he planned to be a guest lecturer in the course. He said the department of religious studies was a good place for intelligent design.
"I think that is exactly the appropriate place to put these kinds of ideas," he said.
John Altevogt, a conservative columnist and activist in Kansas City, said the latest controversy was sparked by the e-mail.
"He says he's trying to offend us," Altevogt said. "The entire tenor of this thing just reeks of religious bigotry."
Mirecki said intelligent design proponents are pushing indoctrination, not education.
O'Connor countered that it is not indoctrination to give permission to teach what somebody believes to be the truth.
"He wants me to say thank you by giving more money," O'Connor said. "Who is the ignoramus here? Who is the uninformed one here? The professor with the degree or this high school graduate?"
Brownlee said she was watching to see how the university responded to the e-mail.
"We have to set a standard that it's not culturally acceptable to mock
I'd prefer that didn't happen as well, because I think everyone's faith should be respected, even if they're wrong. But creationists have organized themselves to attack science at it's foundation using political and legal means (since they can't do it via genuine science). So paybacks are hell. Get religion out of the science classroom, and I'll support removing any disparaging remarks about religion from classrooms. Until then, fire at will.
First of all, as I had hoped my post made clear, I wasn't supportive of the State Board beginning this fight in general. I was, however, stating that many generally conservative people thought that because the pedulumn had swung too far in the anti-Christian direction in general that such a bludgeon was to be expected and, perhaps, almost necessary if we are to control our own children's education.
My son is a Kansas science teacher. I have nothing but true sympathy for what they have been put through. But even he has said that since he rarely teaches biology, he sees this is a fight outside his field and that it is being waged on the social science and political field of battle. Neutrons, fulcrums and metamorphic rock don't eveolve through natural selection might be his view now that this is seen for a battle outside the field of most science and even really outside the field of biology when you look at the true causes.
I have always understood my religous views as not being in conflict with my religous views. I have also felt that the problem of leftist propoganda being taught should be faced head-oin rather than in the oblique. But there is something to be said for the fact that before a student is developed enough to understand the issues of rationalism, Secular Humanism and the like, he as already been led, and even forced to "choose" science "or" religion rather than making the understanding that most religious people have made since the time of Thomas Aquinas: that the two aren't really in conflict.
...my religous views as not being in conflict with my religous views...
...my religous views as not being in conflict with my scientific views...
Proof, proof, proof...dang it.
A theory in science never becomes a law no matter how much evidence is accumulated. Thusly, gravitational theory will always remain a theory.
A theory in science is the end point.
You noticed that eh? And I did know where it came from when I used it.
When I was young, I intended to be a Southern Baptist missionary, and even studied for it in college for a while. But when I discovered that not everything I studied as "truth" was actually true (things like evolution), then I was forced to decide that none of it was true.
This is the tragedy of teaching creationism and literal old-testament history. There's just no way to rationalize it with the physical evidence in hand. So what to believe, an old book, with zero physical evidence behind it? Or physical evidence I can hold in my hand?
As far as I can see, the Catholic Church has a sustainable philosophy behind their faith. They make no claims that any part of their faith contradicts physical evidence found in science (at least they do that today). Therefore Catholics are free to believe in their interpretation of God without fear that He will ever be disproven by science.
The creationists aren't nearly as bright.
So you get to pick which denominations are acceptable and which are not? Is that your idea of religious freedom? If your "scientific" theory says that the Bible is mythology and you force that as the official government position then you have just ended religious freedom -- that's not a neutral position.
"Science" cannot give evidence on the claims of the supernatural either pro or con. By definition the supernatural, being outside the ability to observe, can't be studied. Anyone claiming that science has "proved" the existence, or non-existed of God is out of bounds.
However science can evaluate claims such as a worldwide flood and demonstrate its falsity.
" because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: " - 2Th. 2:11
Amazing is the arrogance of the little critter on the planet earth that thinks God is wrong and he is right.
It seems like an attempt to reconcile evolution and creation.
"What affirmative evidence for biblical creation of species?"
The Word Of God
Oh. There aren't any amphibious reptiles?
I am dealing with it to your chagrine. Faith is dependent on what or who you believe in. You believe men, who have been known to lie, and I believe God, who never does.
That's precisely what's being taught here. AFAIK a higher precentage of Muslims than Christians are creationists. 100% of Scientologists are
Wellll..... not necessarily, and certainly not "by definition." You're assuming way too much.
For example, if there were points of contact between the supernatural and "natural" worlds (as would be the case if God were to do something within history), then one might be able to infer the existence of "something else," even if knowing the full characteristics of that "something else" were beyond us.
Your epitaph.
Why take someone Else's word for it. Look at the evidence yourself! The scripture is excessively clear on these issues. You are deciding to underestimate reality by living in a modern science box.
BEWARE, unleashing the Lion of the Tribe of Judah can be harmful to your worldview! (Red letters indicate words spoken by Jesus)
During the Millennium, the Bible teaches that animal life we go back to it's original (Non-evolutionary) state.
Isa 65:25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust [shall be] the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.
Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses,...
Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
1Cr 15:54-55
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?
Mar 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Isa 45:12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, [even] my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.
Zec 12:1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.
Isa 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:
Isa 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I [am] the LORD; and [there is] none else.
Isa 40:21-22
Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?
Isa 64:4 For since the beginning of the world [men] have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, beside thee, [what] he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 5:1 This [is] the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Deu 4:32 For ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee, since the day that God created man upon the earth,
Gen 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.
New Testament references to Adam.
Luk 3:38 Which was [the son] of Enos, which was [the son] of Seth, which was [the son] of Adam, which was [the son] of God.
1Cr 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul;
Jud 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
1Ti 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.