To: Coyoteman
my point was that you utilized a faulty definition from a adversary of ID for the definition of ID. If that's too subtle for you I apologize. Opposing views, of course, can and must examine the validity of other views...but did you consider, perhaps for just a moment, to take a definition FROM ID advocates as to what ID is?
119 posted on
03/31/2007 4:40:06 PM PDT by
highlander_UW
(I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
To: highlander_UW
...but did you consider, perhaps for just a moment, to take a definition FROM ID advocates as to what ID is? The closest I have seen to a real definition is in the Wedge Strategy.
It seems clear from that document that the modern iteration of ID is a ruse to sneak creation "science" back into the classrooms, after it was eliminated by a Supreme Court decision in the late 1980s.
132 posted on
03/31/2007 5:17:46 PM PDT by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson