Posted on 12/22/2005 1:41:44 PM PST by jennyp
"But one day after a federal judge ruled that the district's policy on intelligent design was unconstitutional, Santorum said he was troubled by court testimony that showed some board members were motivated by religion in adopting the policy."
Is there any other motvation?
Santorum decides which way the wind is blowing on any particular day to decide what side to take. No more votes for this waffler.
This one might be ping-worthy. WWtGMD?
Truth
Wait! Let me see....
Hmm, a politician changed his mind based on public opinion.
Nope, nothing to see here!
Is there any other motvation?
Just science that shows the pillars of Darwinism to be dead wrong (Miller Urey, the Finches). Oh, and probably the total lack of any evidence of one species turning into another. But that's it.
Sunlight hit some amino acids and created life, and humans and maple trees have a common ancestor. It's rock solid science and questioning it is like questioning heliocentrism.
Owl_Eagle(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,
"Truth"
I have yet to see a non born again Christian advocate forcing the teaching of Intelligent design in science class. There may be a few but this is almost entirely about whether or not to use this method to get religion back into public schools.
Even though I believe in Intelligent design I don't like this method because it doesn't feel honest. And it certainly doesn't feel like a search for truth so much as it feels anti-science anti-intelectual.
Looks like it's a loser? It is a loser, plain and simple.
There's a reason that the Discovery Institute didn't want to be a part of this case. It was doomed from the start. Now even the politicians are running away from it.
"Just science that shows the pillars of Darwinism"
There are thousands of scientific theories..how man y of these people are also trying to force schools to teach other scientific issues one way or another? Their interest in this issue is that they think it contradicts their religion.
Evolution and Christianity are not in conflict...which makes this particularly sad.
--But one day after a federal judge ruled that the district's policy on intelligent design was unconstitutional, Santorum said he was troubled by court testimony that showed some board members were motivated by religion in adopting the policy.
I take it the PI does not endorse Santorum.
Truth is not a question for science. It is for philosophy.
Science is limited to the search for natural causes to explain natural phenomena. It rejects the appeal to authority, and by extension, revelation, in favor of empirical evidence. In deliberately omitting theological or ultimate explanations for the existence or characteristics of the natural world, science does not consider issues of meaning and purpose in the world.
While supernatural explanations may be important and have merit, they are not part of science. This self-imposed convention of science, which limits inquiry to testable, natural explanations about the natural world, is referred to by philosophers as methodological naturalism and is sometimes known as the scientific method. Methodological naturalism is a ground rule of science today which requires scientists to seek explanations in the world around us based upon what we can observe, test, replicate, and verify.
"So religion is automatically anti-intellectual? Only Darwin's truth is allowed in schools?"
you know the answer to that..no and no. But forcing schools to teach science that scientists don't believe in is anti-intelectual.
As for Darwin - he was 100 years ago and most of his work has been superceded.
No, only some of the more bone-headed practitioners and failed concepts.
Only Darwin's truth is allowed in schools?
I have no trouble presenting ideas like ID where they belong: in theology or philosophy classes.
Evolution and Christianity are not in conflict
Neither is evolution (in that organisms change and adapt over time) and ID. But watch how often the opponents of ID (Darwinists) refer to ID as "creationism" (literal belief in The Book of Genesis) in order to cloud the waters so that they may continue to preach this distortion of science. Darwinism is the icon of materialism.
Owl_Eagle
(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,
Why do you assume God and/or supernatural is not testable? And every scientific inquiry must start with ideas. What is your definition of "nature"?
I don't think it matters much what subject we call it, so long as it is allowed to be taught. Students can decide for themselves if it's science or not.
"IDer" is to "creationist" as "liberal democrat" is to "socialist".
Frankly, I am fed up with the creationists trying to push their curriculum on the public schools. It didn't have to happen, they could have handled the situation without putting it into the courts. We lost a lot more than the right to include intelligent design in the curriculum. We set a precident of court interference in local school curriculum. This is not good.
I remember my very fundamentalist Sunday school teacher explaining that evolution could not have happened without God's hand in it. If we could handle it that way, there is no reason, that parents can't do the same today.
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.