What Next for Conservatives (Creationism and spending are destroying the Republican Party)

townhall.com ^ | 11/17/2005 | George Will

[curiosity]

The storm-tossed and rudderless Republican Party should particularly ponder the vote last week in Dover, Pa., where all eight members of the school board seeking re-election were defeated. This expressed the community's wholesome exasperation with the board's campaign to insinuate religion, in the guise of "intelligent design'' theory, into high school biology classes, beginning with a required proclamation that evolution "is not a fact.''

[af_vet_rr]

I have no problem with this, as soon as a scientific alternative is proposed.

And I think the debate would die down if parents could get either evolution-oriented or creation-oriented science taught to their kids - whichever they prefer. For those parents who can't home school or can't afford private education, I think it would help them out a lot.

From a logistical/financial standpoint it would be a little rough at first, but most high schools and jr. highs have more than one science teacher. You would just work on adjusting the ratio of teachers to either subject over a couple of years, and then revisit it every 3 or 4 or 5 years, perhaps through a polling of parents of kids in elementary school.

The problem is, there would still be a small small minority of parents that just plain don't want the opposing viewpoint taught in school at all, and they are very vocal cores of both sides.

[moog]

atheist liberal indoctrination that is rampant in many public school systems, from sex ed classes to no prayer in school to no Christmas celebration to skewed teaching of history and polisci. The sad state of public school education is indeed an important issue; this is just a convenient though perhaps ill-chosen vehicle for objection.

Being a teacher, I appreciate your point. That's why I feel blessed to get the opportunity to see many miracles happen in my own classroom (and in my own school and area). There are many hardoworking teachers out there, but there are some meatheads that make the rest of us look bad. I don't have time to teach that "other stuff" because I've got to concentrate on teaching reading, writing, phonics, math, and some science and social studeits. If a teacher has time to teach that "other stuff" then it's not teaching in my book. BTW, we do celebrate Christmas.

I feel fortunate to be assoiciated with many good parents too.

Being a first grade teacher, I don't have to worry aobut the creation issue, thank goodness.

[highball]

if parents could get either evolution-oriented or creation-oriented science taught to their kids - whichever they prefer.

Again, the problem is there hasn't yet been a "creation-oriented science" proposed. Once one has, then you might have something.

[moog]

I do think that parents are as capable as anyone in teaching about the creation to their own kids.

[highball]

to the GOP becoming very religious-oriented

It is already.

The question is whether or not the GOP should promote ignoring evidence when it conflicts with religious dogma.

[Ohioan]

The key is certainly not to select a myopic spokesman of any sort, religious or secular, but a genuine Conservative, who can articulate the enduring values of America with balance and perspective (but no apology), in a manner which makes sense to most people, and does not suggest the suppression of anyone's pursuit of knowledge or truth.

There are plenty of intelligent Conservatives, who could be trained to represent us. It is not hopeless. But the pursuit is being hampered by the inside the "Beltway" mentality, which is terrified by any fresh approach, which might break people out of the neat little ideological boxes, that the established "brain trusts" (not to be confused with actually intelligent people) in each party, feel they understand and can control.

[moog]

Still, religion is and will continue to be a big part of the GOP in any case.

[af_vet_rr]

This debate should be kept out of Republican politics. There is no upside to making this a political issue.

And that is what frustrates many of us - like moog said: If creationism becomes the biggest issue, then it is unfortunate. There are far more bigger and more important issues out there to act upon.

There are people in this country on both sides, that would make this a national issue, at the expense of true national issues.

At the rate this has been building up, you will see the party split, and it will be vicious, and then the liberals will have a free ride into office.

I'm probably an exception, but my family has been Republican for generations, and I have the insight of my father and even my grandfather, as well as my own experience as a Republican over the past several decades, and the party I joined and voted for when I was of age, is no longer the same party that calls itself the GOP.

It's very hard for me to feel loyal to a party that is not loyal to me - that does not have the same Conservative beliefs I had when I joined, and that I still have to this day.

[highball]

I do think that parents are as capable as anyone in teaching about the creation to their own kids.

Which is exactly where I happen to think one's religion ought to be taught.

[little jeremiah]

When even noted evofundie scientists admit their lack of evidence but don't want us sheeple to know, it's time to fold.

Check the letter and quotes at the bottom of Scripter's profile page.

Evofundies can't stand debating rationally, they want to force the TOE down our throats, one way or another. Where's freedom of thought? Where's freedom of expression?

And the fact that only 35% of Americans believe in the TOE (and more are D voters than R voters no doubt) this whole Will whining is just an elitist moaning that us knuckledraggers aren't going with the program.

[highball]

Still, religion is and will continue to be a big part of the GOP in any case.

Of course. Just so long as the GOP doesn't advocate requiring all scientific fact to be politically correct, there's no problem.

[rootkidslim]

I'm not qualified to comment on George Will's knowledge of either baseball, or science. My misapprehension of your post aside, do you think I raised an interesting question about the President's motives in my post #70? Maybe you would rather not get drawn into that. I didn't start questioning his forthrightness until he tried to sell me on the Miers nomination. But now I scrutinize everything he says carefully.

[moog]

Thanks for the "quote." I just worry that people will use the "little issues" rather than other issues that we could be worrying more about. For me, that is the War on Terror that dwarfs everything else. For others, it probably is different.

[M203M4]

There are ways.

[highball]

You still haven't shown any physical evidence for sidereal astrology.

Until you do, kindly stop making the silly claims.

[moog]

Which is exactly where I happen to think one's religion ought to be taught.

I can see your point somewhat. I do believe that parents should be the main source of religious teaching for their own children. Mine were.

[moog]

all scientific fact to be politically correct

I hate the PC stuff.

[highball]

I hate the PC stuff.

I do too, which is why I dislike ID.

[colorado tanker]

Parts of my family have been Republican since the Civil War.

I guess the "straw" for me was the Harriet Meyers nomination. I'd overlooked a lot of stuff I disagreed with until then in the name of good politics. But that nomination told me the President doesn't understand his own base, and how important those nominations are to us.

I read an interesting interview recently with Wm. Buckley, who observed Bush is a conservative man, but is not "a" conservative.

[js1138]

I think Bush was trying to straddle the fence. This is one of those issues that the democrats are trying to use to divide Republicans, and it appears to be a successful strategy. It's almost like the Discovery Institute is being funded by the DNC. Science goes where it goes. It's an entirely materalistic enterprize, and always will be. The ID issue is stupid on so many counts. The main proponents of ID accept common descent and a 4.5 billion year old earth. What do fundamentalists have to gain by pushing ID? It's a lose lose proposition.

On one hand they are asserting that religion should submit to the tests of scientific materialism. On the other hand they are splitting a political coalition that elects Republicans.