Evolutionists Fear Academic Freedom

Townhall.com ^ | July 5, 2008 | Floyd and Mary Beth Brown

[Soliton]

Last I heard, Christian churches are not supported by my tax dollars like public schools are.

So your objection to evolution is economic and not based on academic freedom?

[ShadowAce]

I think academic requirements imposed by the state should only be imposed on those entities beholden to the state.

Public Schools falls in that category. Churches do not.

[Soliton]

I think academic requirements imposed by the state should only be imposed on those entities beholden to the state. Public Schools falls in that category. Churches do not.

Aren't churches financially beholden to the state because they enjoy tax-paid services and infrastructure without paying taxes?

[gusopol3]

colleges, schools too?

[ShadowAce]

Nope. A church, like any incorporated entity, does not “enjoy” anything. It the people who make up the church who enjoy those benefits. Since they already pay taxes, the church is not beholden to the state.

[reasonisfaith]

What do the evolutionists say—to those who would like to be certain that their belief in evolution is based on firm science—about the lack of fossil evidence for transitional forms?

[Soliton]

Nope. A church, like any incorporated entity, does not “enjoy” anything. It the people who make up the church who enjoy those benefits. Since they already pay taxes, the church is not beholden to the state

But churches are a corporate entity just like any corporation. It has financial assets and owns property. These assets can appreciate over time and belong to the corporate entity, not the members individually. These assets are not taxed but they receive police protection, they impact our traffic and harm our roads. Why should tax payers who are not religious have to pay the churches' share?

[ShadowAce]

Why should tax payers who are not religious have to pay the churches' share?

For the same reason those of us who homeschool, or send our kids to private school have to pay personal property taxes to support the public schools.

[lonestar67]

Is the theory of Evolution falsifiable?

[Soliton]

For the same reason those of us who homeschool, or send our kids to private school have to pay personal property taxes to support the public schools.

If this was a refereed debate, you would have just lost by stating my position. Thank you.

[ShadowAce]

OK, so you think that because individual church members pay taxes, then a church should be subject to the same strictures and oversight as public schools, who receive tax money from the state?

Is that a correct assessment of your position?

[Soliton]

Why should tax payers who are not religious have to pay the churches’ share?

For the same reason those of us who homeschool, or send our kids to private school have to pay personal property taxes to support the public schools.

[Soliton]

Why should tax payers who are not religious have to pay the churches’ share?

For the same reason those of us who homeschool, or send our kids to private school have to pay personal property taxes to support the public schools.

[gusopol3]

you’re supposed to answer; he asked you twice.

[reasonisfaith]

“Ironically, Darwin’s evolutionary theory is based is atheistic naturalism, a religious belief.”

My impression of the evolutionist approach is that it includes a fervent desire to ignore, and if ignorance doesn’t work, to suppress and ridicule, any and all inquiry into an examination of the circumstances described by the comment quoted above.

Darwinism is a religion, but this fact cannot be adequately discussed because Darwinists know it would hurt their credibility.

[ShadowAce]

you’re supposed to answer; he asked you twice.

LOL! Actually, he asked me twice, and posted my own answer twice.

Soliton: Getting back to the subject of this thread--You believe that churches should be required to teach what the state dictates to them. Is this correct? Yes, or no, please.

If so, then there is no value in the diversity of our educational backgrounds, is there? We're all supposed to be robots, fed information the state wants us to have. No debate allowed on subjects that the state has deemed true.

If not, then your whole argument falls down, as your original question becomes moot.

[happydogdesign]

http://tinyurl.com/6f96ux
Elvis Costello-Monkey To Man YouTube

[Neoliberalnot]

The NYTimes would have served better in times past defending the Roman Empire, the Nazi socialist, and as a corrupt mouthpiece for the former USSR. The times never did like alternative and diverse opinions.

[L98Fiero]

I’m sick of these moronic discussions. People have some nerve. The argument always boils down to:

“The very people who demand undeniable proof from “evolutionists” when faced with a variety of evidence supporting the theory but do not hold themselves to the same standard. Matter of fact, they think their argument is the strongest even though there is zero science to support it.

It must be nice to engage in an argument where your opponent is the only one bound by any burden of proof.

“Academic Freedom” is nothing more that people on the losing side of a debate running to Uncle Sugar and calling foul, like good liberals.

[L98Fiero]

Corrected last post:

“Academic Freedom” is nothing more that people on the losing side of a scientific debate running to Uncle Sugar and calling foul, like good liberals. Think "Global Warming". Those guys have piles more evidence to support their notion than young earth creationists.