Replies

Faculty in universities are overwhelmingly liberal because the university campus is a cacoon where faculty are largely sheltered from the demands and realities of the world as it is and operates. I believe that being a "liberal" has nothing to do with intelligence, and has everything to do with the worldview one has. The kind of worldview that develops inside the cacoon of academia is contrary to the way the world actually is, and actually works. University professors may be highly intelligent, but many of them are also highly deluded, and highly foolish.

I taught for a semester at a 'left coast liberal arts' university. I could probably still be teaching Computer Science there. What soured me was a department dean's daughter was in my class who NEVER showed up for class, NEVER turned in coursework, and NEVER took a test. I gave the young woman a F for the course. Someone in the Registrar's office showed me the offical grades listed in the computer. The F had been corrected by her dad to an A. Needless to say the young lady graduated with honors and a 4.0 GPA.

Now when I hear someone graduated with a 4.0 or honors, I wonder what their daddy did for a living.

I am a faculty member of a University. The reason most faculty are liberal is because the faculty that has been liberal for generations are the ones who pick new faculty. Hence it is self-perpetuating. Now when did this liberal 'take over' take place? I suggest it took place in the 1800's. Up until that point you had a good conservative voice on campus. But when Darwin came up with his explanation of origins, the pressure was on to conform to a non-created beginning to all things and a non-designed human nature. This became popular in the materialistic view of some top scientists and it became fashionable for faculty to toe the line. This resulted in people who believed in a designer being eyed with suspicion. Notice the writer's statement:

teaching creationism as the explanation of man's existence on Earth, ignoring more than a century of anthropological discoveries because they conflicted with biblical teachings

Do you see that believing in a Creator and Designer is considered STUPID by this ignoramous.

He either hasn't read Behe and other top scientists of our age who see that there is a scientific basis for hypothesizing there was a designer.

Here is a letter I wrote to Dear Abby and it could be well directed to this writer and to all faculty who think design theory is stupid:

Dear Abby,

Biomachines bubbled up from below?
Shedding scales and gills, acquiring strange skulls?
Craniums mounting backbones spinely wired?
Convoluted conscious cerebrums coincidentally conjoined?

Once upon a nothing something blew apart?
Swirling molecules of matter mindlessly amassed?
At random-assembling atoms split at the start?
Explosions are, despite the mess they make, mothers of us all?

Confused