Posted on 12/21/2005 2:06:09 PM PST by Zionist Conspirator
Since recycling, resource conservation and other 'green' activities are tenents of the earth mother and wiccan 'religions', does this mean that these gov't mandated programs are in violation of the Constitution?
Which Bush?
If you are referring to how I pen "G_d", then you are sadly mistaken.
That said, I do have a hard time separating the Creationists from the ID folk. I'm new to the subject of ID, but not Darwin's observations. I've come to my own conclusions in my own ways. Honestly it was the wave/particle debate that opened my eyes. There's a much bigger picture out there than any book or books (Old or New) can explain or even allude to. And for me, that makes it all the more marvelous.
George W - appointed 2002.
"Since recycling, resource conservation and other 'green' activities are tenents of the earth mother and wiccan 'religions', does this mean that these gov't mandated programs are in violation of the Constitution?"
No, I don't think so. Such activities may reflect the tenets of certain religions, but they can be taught without reference to Wicca or other religious beliefs. In the same way that, say, personal responsibility, not cheating on tests, not stealing from other kids, and other behaviors can be taught without reference to any particular religion, or even to religion in general.
The way I see it, even if G_d is influencing and has influenced things along the way, He DID something. Something happened, even if He only knows the "science" behind it. There is a manipulation of space, matter, and time in some manner or another.
I think the challenge of existing in the universe is to figure out how G_d works. I'd personally like to know if this experiment is being tried elsewhere in the galaxy and the rest of the universe. What other cool stuff has G_d done out there? If we have "brothers" out there, I'd sure like to meet 'em.
David Klinghoffer, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute and a columnist for the Jewish Forward. His most recent book is Why the Jews Rejected Jesus: The Turning Point in Western History.
Discovery Institute...I'm shocked!
You obviously haven't read the posted article.
So you're saying the difference between anti-ID Theistic evolutionists and pro-ID Theistic evolutionists is that the former keep their opinions about the Creator to themselves?
ID'ers start with their literal religious conclusion and then use scientific sounding language to conjure up supporting evidence. That's religion in my book and doesn't belong in science class.
ID-ers are Theistic evolutionists. They consider Genesis to be a "metaphor" for a Divinely-guided evolutionary process. And since their anti-ID Theistic evolutionary critics believe the exact same thing, I don't see what they're arguing about.
"Science" deals with the way the world works. Science can speculate all it wants about finch beak variations or "survival of the fittest" or "descent with modification." However, the moment "science" moves from these things to speculation as to how finches came into existence in the first place (by assuming that observable evolution in the fully created universe is the continuation of the creation process itself) it has jumped into metaphysics.
No theory of origins can be scientific by its very nature. "Origins" (like eschatology) is an inherent metaphysical/religious field and outside the scientist's purview.
BTW, your contribution to humanity will also never amount to a fraction of that of Abraham. Do you also have fantasies of travelling back in a time machine and murdering him, like one of the evolutionists quoted (and hyperlinked) in the article?
His official biography is here:
Jones, John E. III
Born 1955 in Pottsville, PA
Federal Judicial Service:
U. S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania
Nominated by George W. Bush on February 28, 2002, to a seat vacated by James F. McClure; Confirmed by the Senate on July 29, 2002, and received commission on July 31, 2002.
Education:
Dickinson College, B.A., 1977
Dickinson School of Law, J.D., 1980
Professional Career:
Private practice, Pottsville, Pennsylvania, 1980-2002
Law clerk (part-time), Hon. Guy A. Bowe, Schuylkill County Court of Common Pleas, 1980-1984
Assistant public defender (part-time), Pennsylvania Public Defender's Office, 1984-1995
Executive officer, Phoenix Contracting Co. & Affiliated Corporations, 1980-2002
Director, Union Bank and Trust Company, 1993-2002
Chairman, Liquor Control Board, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1995-2002
Race or Ethnicity: White
Gender: Male
From http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/jonesbio.htm
Judge John E. Jones III commenced his service as a United States District Judge on August 2, 2002. He is the 21st judge to sit in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Judge Jones was appointed to his current position by President George W. Bush in February, 2002, and was unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate on July 30, 2002.
Just because NRO doesn't mention it doesn't mean it's not a fact.
This guy is a freakin' braindead nut.
So let's see: if we take everything that exists, which we used to believe was created by God and as such was supposed to be evidence of God's existence, and then come up with a way to explain its existence 100% without reference to God, so that suddenly everything in the universe can be understood without the slightest attribution to God as its creator, this does not "in any way" diminish in our minds' the notion of God as its creator????????
Where the heck did this guy get his law degree? Some sort of mail-order Evolution U?
So we've got a creator who never created anything? Or maybe he creates things somewhere else, just not in our universe. Or maybe he creates them and destroys them again really quickly where no-one can see them. Or he creates things in a way is massively inefficient, morbid, and actually doesn't require his involvement at all, and then tells everyone to look at it as evidence of his existence an greatness?
I'm starting to think this entire ruling was posted by someone from scrappleface. If I was that dumb I'd shoot myself.
No, no, no, that's not possible. He said he wasn't an activist judge. So he must not be.
The old evolutionist argument: "It's true because I said so. Don't believe the facts in front of your face."
This is a very interesting point. Alas, the left doesn't think rationally enough to figure this out. As I've said before, Darwinism appeals to liberals for the same reason running away from home appeals to children: if you don't think it through, it seems to provide you with a way to live life on your own terms.
It is enough for them that Darwin gives them a way to be their own gods. They don't realize that when they killed the root of the tree of morality and meaning, they killed the whole tree too. When you kill the roots of a great oak, the branches will still support you for some time.
The fact that without God there is no coherent basis for objecting to human suffering eludes them. It is very ironic to me that Darwin was vehemently against slavery; apparently even he didn't figure out all the ramifications of his own ideas.
The fact that people may believe in something has absolutely no bearing on whether or not that belief has any philosophical coherence.
Not being a Biblical literalist is hardly the same thing as "negating religion".
Sure, there are a thousand ways to be religious. But Darwinism is completely incompatible with Christianity. Christ came and died so that we could be forgiven for our sins. The Christian understanding of sin is 100% rooted in the doctrine of human depravity, original sin, and Adam. With no literal Adam, no literal garden, no literal first sin, no literal curse, the entire doctrines of Christianity are reduced to fairy tales. Christ died for NOTHING. If only he had consulted Darwin first.
One of the principal scientific witnesses for the plaintiffs in the Dover trial, btw, was a practicing Catholic.
It would appear he/she needs more practice.
Archival ping.
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.