Posted on 07/24/2009 11:23:21 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
In a recent post, I explained how James Carville’s new book, 40 More Years: How the Democrats will Rule the Next Generation, badly misrepresents intelligent design (ID) as merely a negative argument against evolution. Carville somehow failed to notice that the passage he quoted from our Briefing Packet for Educators made an entirely positive argument for design. But Carville, a longtime Democratic strategist, has a game plan and he’s not going to let the facts get in his way.
The point of Carville’s chapter on evolution is to turn the debate into a club that he can wield in his war against Republicans. Not one to shy away from a rhetorical flourish, Carville writes: “the so-called debate over evolution boils down to the Republicans invisible-angel theory of gravity against the Democrats’ 150 years of science and the U.S. Constitution position.” (pg. 93) Of course there’s plenty of credible scientific dissent from neo-Darwinian evolution. More interestingly, Carville’s book completely fails to recognize how members of his own party feel about the evolution debate. Polls show that self-described “liberals” and Democrats support academic freedom in evolution-education just as much as (and in some cases more than) self-described “conservatives” and Republicans!
For example, Mr. Carville would probably be horrified to learn that...
(Excerpt) Read more at evolutionnews.org ...
James WHO?
This is bad news for Charlie!
Hasn’t that been one of the hallmarks of the crevo debate here on FR? That it is us liberal (commie, God-denying homo loving kickers of small dogs) pushing evolution?
Ummm..., what is Carville doing commenting on “Intelligent Design”... he is neither intelligent or derived from design, but simply an accidental accumulation of all the worst things you can find in a human being... LOL...
I’m thinkin’ that were I to debate against evolution, I’d use Carville as an example.
Such logic belongs in a kindergarden.
Oh, forgot, we’re talkin’ the Clinton/Obamaloon folks here.
Of course it's necessary to respond, but not on his territory. Frame and post your own form of the subject matter.
Bottom line, best to not respond or even acknowledge their attempt.
It would appear that the Dem party leadership is way out ahead of their base on this issue. It’s not looking good for the Temple of Darwin!
Anyone reading your posts can see that is all it is.. Jeeze, I mean anyone can search posts by GodGunsGuts, try to keep the fiction somewhat plausable.
So is he declaring the "invisible angel" Holy Ghost to be a myth and Christianity to be a lie?
Careful of those lightning bolts, James.
Does that SCIENCE include racist Democrats' theories of eugenics and racial superiority?
Perhaps Mr. Carville might better learn the distinction by reading something that addresses his level of understanding: the defunct comic strip Calvin and Hobbes. My young daughter loved it as a child, no less than I did as an adult, with different levels of understanding.
Even the most famous atheist (whose name I can't recall) in a moment of intellectual weakness allowed for the possibility of intelligent design in the creation of the universe, albeit by every name possible short of the "G" word.
“James Carville Wrongly Frames the Evolution Debate as a Democrat vs. Republican Issue”
—Wow, I’ve always been fruitlessly attempting to argue against Creationists that the evolution debate is not a dem vs. rep issue. I should save this link for the future. heh
“Even the most famous atheist (whose name I can’t recall) in a moment of intellectual weakness allowed for the possibility of intelligent design in the creation of the universe, albeit by every name possible short of the “G” word.”
—It’s intellectual weakness to allow for the possibility of being wrong? Wow
Carville has never followed an evolution vs creation debate here, has he?
I think you are referring to Anthony Flew. Although, I view his change of mind one of intellectual strength, not weakness.
Snakehead Knows! :o)
If we are here by evolution, throw out the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, disregard the founders as nutjobs. But, do remember, we then are all gods and anarchy will prevail. I will take anyone out that thinks he has a right to any aspect of my life, no one is supreme except me!
“If we are here by evolution, throw out the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, disregard the founders as nutjobs. But, do remember, we then are all gods and anarchy will prevail. I will take anyone out that thinks he has a right to any aspect of my life, no one is supreme except me!”
—Why would they be crazy? Because they weren’t evolutionists? What’s so crazy about not believing a theory before the theory existed?
And why would the Constitution be thrown out? If it isn’t thrown out for it’s blatant racism I don’t see why it’d be thrown out for not including a scientific theory that a) didn’t exist at the time and b) is irrelevant to the matter at hand.
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.