Posted on 01/16/2006 8:32:58 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Darwinists must be an endangered species. How else to explain their 80-year need for court protection to ensure their survival?
In 1925, an ACLU-driven defense team in the Scopes-Monkey Trial wanted a court to declare that laws forbidding the teaching of evolution were unconstitutional. In recent weeks, in a courtroom in Dover, Pa., the same organization applauded a judge’s ruling that the teaching of ideas contrary to evolution, in this case Intelligent Design, were unconstitutional.
The same ACLU that once advocated for free and open discussion in schools is working to see it stifled today.
Its website boasts, “Intelligent Design is a religious view, not a scientific theory, according to U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III in his historic decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover. The decision is a victory not only for the ACLU, who led the legal challenge, but for all who believe it is inappropriate, and unconstitutional, to advance a particular religious belief at the expense of our children's education.”
Science involves observing nature and producing hypotheses which explain the data -- and of discrediting theories which don’t fit new observations. Having judges decide what constitutes science is as nonsensical as scientists issuing judicial decisions.
And the irreligious left, perpetually misusing the First Amendment, can’t identify which religion is being established. Is it that of the Jehovah’s Witnesses or of Catholicism? Perhaps Mormonism or Orthodox Judaism? Among many others, these disparate faiths all claim as canon the book of Genesis, where the religious version of creation is found.
But ironically, while no particular religion is being promoted by the teaching of Intelligent Design, there’s a belief system, which has established “churches” in several states, that is being favored by ACLU-- and court-imposed censorship: atheism, whose worldview promotes moral relativism and secular humanism.
The left maintains that Intelligent Design is merely creationism -- a literal reading of the Bible’s account of creation -- camouflaged in scientific language. But even a casual perusal of ID demonstrates there is no dependence on Genesis for any of its arguments, nor does it teach any biblical doctrine. It merely demands an examination of the evidence -- or lack thereof -- that uncountable species arose from primordial soup, or that they evolved over time from one to another.
To support Darwin’s theory, the earth should be teeming with myriad transitional specimens, but they are noteworthy, despite incessant extrapolation, only by their absence.
Other modern observations are daunting for Darwinists: digital information -- universally a mark of design -- in the genetic code and irreducibly complex structures such as miniature molecular machines within the cell which Darwin could hardly begin to imagine. Using the eye as an example, he coined the phrase, “organs of extreme perfection and complication” and recognized his theory’s inability to explain them. New discoveries only exacerbate these shortcomings.
And despite frequent references to “organic chemicals” present on the formative earth, neither Darwin nor modern scientists can demonstrate how to get from these compounds to just a single-cell living organism, or even a virus -- let alone the complex life forms. The search for that initial “spark” of life, or an explanation of why it is no longer in evidence, has been forever elusive.
Ironically, the scientific community, which anxiously tries to find evidence of other intelligent life in the universe, blatantly turns its back on the one intelligence we have the most indication of: a creator; a master chemist for whom the DNA code -- a puzzle which even our terrestrial species is just starting to grasp -- is a simple blueprint.
Even though ID relies not at all on the Bible, it does leave open the conclusion that the designer is the biblical God and this implication of God is what the Darwinists seem to fear.
So there may yet be hope for these folks since the Psalmist says, “The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.” Let’s hope they eventually wise up.
Could you please post the Scripture where the Lord states that He "created" evolution?
And still be useless.
Actually, take a second look at his statement. I don't think he's a fanatic at all.
Huh??? You mean Flipper.....:)
Cosby...C-O-S-B-Y.
If I retained you, how the hell could I know that you divorced me from the right woman?
Huh??? You mean Flipper.....:)
OH CRAP!!!!!!! I can't believe I made THAT mistake. Free Willie was an orca. Oh man, now I'm hiding in embarrassment. Can't even tell my own joke.
Well, He created everything.
As far as I am concerned, evolution is included in everything.
He's a fellow lawyer, and I am trained to look beyond the facade in lawyers, their pretty and alluring veneer, and discern their inner self.
And which of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth had the crabs?
Surely one of them God-fearing folk would fess up to having crotch crickets ...
LOL! No, I wouldn't shoot a good FReeper like you... Like you, I have no real problem with the idea of evolution, and it's certainly not a test of my faith.
At the same time, I don't have any problem with ID, primarily because it's demonstrably possible. Humans are getting increasingly good at it, and I predict that in a few decades at most, humans will be creating actual life from scratch. It's probably not the explanation for everything, and may not be the explanation for anything -- but we know it's possible.
Just think of one WORD. :)
There is no single instant in time. There is also no single process line. The field of abiogenesis is complex and no link to evolution CAN be made. Evolution stands by itself. The boundaries are the organisms that can be demonstrated. The link cames in later in the event it can demonstate any organism.
Oh that black dude. I think I have heard of him.
useless?
interesting hypothesis.
show me your null hypothesis and P value.
African-American please.
He's a fellow lawyer, and I am trained to look beyond the facade in lawyers, their pretty and alluring veneer, and discern their inner self.
You aren't a spiritualist are you?:0
By the way, I don't do divorces, so you are safe from my malpractice.
Target rich environment for double entendres....
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.