Thank you. So what you fault others for in your #11 was what you were guilty of in your #7.
Okay.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
Posted on 11/01/2005 6:42:25 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
On Nov. 4, 2003, Republican candidates made a strong showing in York County, Pa. Among the winners were Republican Heather Geesey, who was the top vote-getter among candidates for the nine-member Dover school board, with 2,674 votes. Democrat Aralene Callahan finished out of the running -- dead last, with 1,276 votes.
School board members voted 6-3 in 2004 to include these books as an optional supplement to freshman biology classes.
To hear Mrs. Callahan tell it, the school board thereby surrendered Dover's science curriculum to a Bible-thumping theocracy. If all you know about the case is what you've seen in the New York Times, then you might imagine that freshman science classes in Dover now resemble a Pentecostal revival meeting, complete with snake handling, faith healing and speaking in tongues.
But fear not, ye lovers of science, for Mrs. Callahan quickly rode to the rescue, sparing Dover's 14-year-olds a one-way ticket to the 13th century. The unpopular Democrat, who a year earlier had told the York Daily Record that her post-election plans included spending more time with her family, instead decided she needed to spend more time with the ACLU. And so it was that the board's plan became the object of a federal lawsuit, with Mrs. Callahan among the plaintiffs and Mrs. Geesey among the defendants.
The Dover evolution trial, then, represents the effort of Mrs. Callahan and her allies to win in court what they could not win at the ballot box.
...I'm pretty sure the Constitution doesn't say anything about schools or scientific theories. In fact, I think it fair to say that James Madison and his fellow Founders would have been horrified at the prospect of a federal judge telling folks in Dover what they should or should not teach their 14-year-olds.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Thank you. So what you fault others for in your #11 was what you were guilty of in your #7.
Okay.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
I wonder where the ACLU is when local governments have Halloween parades. Halloween is a holiday in the Wiccan religion and is in fact their most revered holiday. Wicca is considered a religion by all definitions, therefore a town sponsored Halloween parade should set off the same ACLU alarms as any other government "endorsement" of religion.
I'm shocked!
I never knew that the Dover school board had the power to establish a religion.
What religion are they trying to establish?
You ever see a public school on Halloween? In our district all the seniors from the high school went to the grade school, IN COSTUMES to celebrate Halloween with the kiddies. But, but, but,.... seperation of church and state.......can't endorse religion. It's a Catch 22 because even atheism can be considered a religion. By prohibiting one, they automatically endorse the other. Now what? The mistake is in assuming that a lack of belief in God, or belief in no God, is a neutral position. It's not; but we have been brainwashed into believing that it is. There can be no neutral position when there are only two points of view.
Atheism is a religion and has been ruled so by the Federal Courts - as has Wicca. The ACLU only touts the alleged "separation of church & state" when it concerns Christianity.
It's only natural though since Wiccans and Atheists generally vote with the left, so the ACLU won't rain on their parade. Christians on the other hand (and I mean born-again Christians not "I go to church on Christmas and Easter" Christians) vote with the right.
Is a person of character who washes toilets for a living better than a person lacking character smugly doing big deals with a cell phone glued to their ear?
Or:
A man is a Janitor for eight hours a day and comes home to his apartment to be with his children every evening; whereas another man spends seventy hours a week working so he can own a mansion and afford the Janitor.
There is a big error in a lot of these arguments that intelligence is everything. You're right; character is more important. When someone dies, are people more likely to remember how smart someone was or what a good person they were? What good is intelligence without morals, ethics, or integrity? What would this world be without someone who is willing to do the menial jobs? For example, I really appreciate our trash collectors. If it weren't for them being out in all kinds of weather, we'd have all kinds of problems with rats and disease. While medical science can cure a lot, trash collectors can prevent a lot. Which is more important?
More and more it seems the answer is to set up private schools and remove out children from the clutches of these kooks.
That's my definition of Christian also.
Your words here reflect what Booker T. Washington said with, "Cast down your bucket where you are." Very good, metmom. I completely agree.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
And where is the evidence that there is no Easter Bunny? Or bigfoot? Or the Tooth Fairy? Or Santa Claus? Time to make those science classes a lot longer to cover these theories as well...
There's a difference between knowledge and intelligence. A high quality education can lead to a great deal of knowledge, but a low level of intelligence.
Conversely, a rough life without decent formal schooling can render one short on knowledge, but long on intelligence.
I would argue that true intelligence leads to strong morals, and a life of integrity.
That's not evidence, it's ridicule. And it does nothing to support the claim that there was no design. The evidence that most people use for ID is the orderliness and complexity of the creation around us but scientists seem to consider that unimportant for some reason. Funny, because without it, there would be no science. If everything came into being by chance, where did orderliness come from? How could order come from disorder? Even if the argument that life could have evolved on one planet because statistically, it had to happen somewhere, why is there so much order in this HUGE, almost infinite universe of ours? So on what basis does the scientist claim that there is no design?
God became a man so that we could properly relate to Him. The resurrection authenticated Christ's claim as our Creator.
Rom 1:4 And declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Jhn 1:1-3
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
They couldn't get a real religion into science class so they created a totally new bogus charlatan religion they call "ID". Now, just to show how gullible some people can get, there's quite a rush of folks dropping to their knees praying to "ID".
Perhaps after sein posts #2, #4, #5, 2ndreconmarine assuned this was the cheap attack thread.
Really, ID is a new religion?
I hadn't heard of it as a religion before. Can you point me to the core religious beliefs of ID, and the people that claim to be clergy?
Seriously, if you believe ID is a religion, you've gone further over the edge than Reid, Dean and Pelosi put together.
The Dover school board couldn't establish a religion if it tried, and ID, while you can argue it has religious undertones, is in no way a religion.
Use common sense.
As an evolutionary theory, Intelligent Design Theory accepts that evolution does in fact occur, and is therefore fundamentally opposed to biblically literalist "creationism."
I believe in intelligent design but the way we decide if something is scientific is by consensus in the scientific community and, except for a very small percent of fringe scientists, the scientific community of every major country have concluded that at this point there is not sufficient eveidence to consider intelligent design as a scientific theory.
As a Christian and a person with a strong interest in science (and a physics degree) I know that intelligent design is far preferable to claiming that the creation story is word for word literal. But Christians need to take that next step and acknowledge that if God has left scientific evidence of ID then we have not found it yet.
Belief in God requires faith and that is not a problem because that is how God wants it. He could remove all doubt if wanted to. He wants us to have faith.
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.