Sit back and watch the tapdancing:
Posted on 12/21/2004 7:59:02 PM PST by postitnews.com
HARRISBURG, PA-The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and attorneys with Pepper Hamilton LLP filed a federal lawsuit today on behalf of 11 parents who say that presenting "intelligent design" in public school science classrooms violates their religious liberty by promoting particular religious beliefs to their children under the guise of science education.
"Teaching students about religion's role in world history and culture is proper, but disguising a particular religious belief as science is not," said ACLU of Pennsylvania Legal Director Witold Walczak. "Intelligent design is a Trojan Horse for bringing religious creationism back into public school science classes."
The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United Executive Director, added, "Public schools are not Sunday schools, and we must resist any efforts to make them so. There is an evolving attack under way on sound science...Read More
(Excerpt) Read more at postitnews.com ...
Evolutionists exclude the origin of life from their theory because it's too difficult for them to overcome. Evolution is largely an extrapolation. We see a micro-organism mutate into a slightly different micro-organism, so we theorize that over time those mutations could produce a giraffe. We see variation within the breeding of dogs, and assume the same type of thing. In both cases it's an extrapolation. But some people will accept the extrapolation because they see the event upon which it is based.
In the case of the emergence of life from its absence, there is no record of any such thing ever occurring, so there's nothing to extrapolate from. So evolutionists have deemed the matter to be outside the scope of their theory, avoiding the problem.
Actually, I didn't say all evolutionists were leftists.
I did say that the political left is deeply involved in this fight (on your side) and that's true. I also suggested that there are parallels to how evolution became entrenched in academia and how leftism became entrenched, often involving the same activist groups, and that's true.
I seem to have struck an emotional nerve, so I won't press this issue anymore in this thread.
[*** Sigh ***]
It is outside the theory. The theory proposes to explain the variety of life. That's all it does. No one is ducking anything. It's true that the origin of life hasn't been worked out. This is irrelevant to the theory of evolution. The theory works just fine. It explains what it proposes to explain. It doesn't explain what you want explained.
Similarly, no one knows the origin of electrons. But we deal with electricity quite well.
You've struck a definitely discordant note, by calling the evolution explainers in these threads leftists. I've been doing this for years now, and to my knowledge not a one of them is a leftist. That should -- but I suspect it won't -- affect your "conclusion" about the matter.
You will note that on other debate websites, there's a lot of name-calling about "fundies" and such. You have no doubt observed that none of that goes on here. The evolution side of the debate deals in facts and rational argument. It's your side that slings mud. Not nice. And even worse because it's not true. I don't expect any apology, but it would be the gentlemanly thing to do.
Actually, no.
Actually, that was Lord Kelvin. Maxwell did not, so far as I know, weigh in.
Yes, I goofed on Maxwell/Kelvin. Some daemon in my head only lets Maxwell's name out if the context is wrong.
Well then, do you think there's any analogy between the worldwide spread of AIDS and the increasing popularity of creationism?
Show me where I said the evolutionists in these threads are leftists and I'll apologize.
I said leftists are involved in the "crevo" wars on your side. How can you deny that? Does one conclude from that that all evolutionists are leftists? I said evolution has become entrenched in a way similar to the entrenchment of leftism. You may or may not dispute that but it in no way says that all evolutionists are leftists. I said scientists are subject to the pressure of political correctness as much as anyone else. In what way does that paint all evolutionists as leftist?
You made the charge that I accused the evolutionists in these threads of being leftist. Please back that charge up.
No, but there's an obvious coorelation between the decline of Western Civilization and the rise of fundamentalism. Just look at the dates.
Perhaps you were mistaken for any of half a dozen other creationist posters.
Yeah, we all know that Western Civilization is more likely to survive than ever now that much of the former Christendom is agnostic and secular. Tell that to the Muslims that are set to inherit secular Europe.
There's a name for that, but I forget what it is. What's the name of that disease where you can't remember the word?
;)
####perhaps you were mistaken for any of half a dozen other creationist posters####
Then perhaps I'm the one owed an apology. :-)
I've never once brought up any Nazi issue or accused all evolutionists of being leftists. I did chime in on the matter of 19th century capitalists supporting evolution with the notation that they supported natural selection, not evolution per se. In contrast, the socialist left supports evolution because it likes the idea of random actions leading to progress. But I never said all evolutionists are leftists.
Aphasjklzmbt, caused by sharp bang with silver hammgqx.
It's not terribly difficult. What else do you imagine you were saying? Go ahead and deny it. I told you, I didn't expect an apology.
VadeRetro
Do you think there's any analogy between how most scientists came to support evolution and how most professors at major universities came to be leftists?
[snip]
Isn't there an analogy here with how evolution is treated in the academic world? It fits, even right down to many of the same leftist political groups (ACLU, People for the American Way, Barry Lynn's American's United group) being involved.
[snip]
So over time leftism becomes entrenched in any area where politics plays any role at all. Scientists are no less subject to this pressure than anyone else.
815 posted on 12/27/2004 7:03:12 PM EST by puroresuTo: VadeRetro
No obfuscations at all. I simply noted how leftism operates and how it's deeply entrenched in the "crevo" wars.
819 posted on 12/27/2004 7:42:30 PM EST by puroresuTo: PatrickHenry
Actually, I didn't say all evolutionists were leftists.I did say that the political left is deeply involved in this fight (on your side) and that's true. I also suggested that there are parallels to how evolution became entrenched in academia and how leftism became entrenched, often involving the same activist groups, and that's true.
I seem to have struck an emotional nerve, so I won't press this issue anymore in this thread.
822 posted on 12/27/2004 7:57:42 PM EST by puroresu
Curious etymology on that one - many people aren't familiar with Middle Mixleplotzian, whence it is derived ;)
I fail to see where I said all evolutionists are leftists.
I did say that leftists are deeply involved in promoting evolution. I clearly said that, because it's true. But where did I say that all evolutionists, in particular the ones in this thread, are leftists?
But you brought up the claim of an association and hammered on it for several posts.
What was your point? What conclusion can be drawn from the statement that not all of A is B? Why would you bring the subject up?
Sit back and watch the tapdancing:
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.