Let's talk about intelligent design. The producers of intelligent design are always changing up on the scientists like Lawrence Krauss, the arguments they make in support of intelligent design ever evolving. Krauss, an astrophysicist at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland and a "Trekkie," reconciles the existence of a Supreme Being with evolution by natural selection and also modern research by the scientific method.
The problem with the purveyors of the idea of intelligent design is that they categorize all scientists as anti-God and anti-religion. The distrust of science, of intelligent discourse, of research methodology is not a new phenomenon.
The Cultural Revolution in China in the late 1960's was partly a campaign against intellectuals and those considered elitists, who were killed or herded into the countryside to be re-educated by the peasants. Works of art and historical artifacts were destroyed. Books were burned. Universities were closed. school curricula were changed. This was a triumph over intellectualism.
In Cambodia, in 1975, Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge seized power and began a pogrom, exterminating more than two million Cambodians, out of a total population of just over 6 million. The Khmer Rouge outlawed stores, banks, hospitals, schools, religious groups, and families, killing anyone who was educated, who was of a different ethnic or cultural group, who resisted being transported to re-education camps, who resisted the breakup of their family unit, or who was disliked for any reason whatsoever. This was a triumph over intellectualism.
Are these historical events of the recent past too remote in time to be considered valuable lessons from which those who believe intellectualism and scientific thought are threatening their way of life can learn?
I give up. If God had meant for mankind to play golf, He would have given us all swings like Annika Sorenstam.
Tomorrow: A list of those Americans sent to their deaths in Iraq in the continuing Bush Crusade.
Posted by Bill at August 20, 2005 01:45 AMYesterday, Bill Frist told a Rotary Club gathering that he felt that it was important to present alternative ideas in schools and let the students decide.
I think, therefore, it is high time for us to demand the teaching of Marxist political theory without comment as part of the Civics course. We can then let students decide for themselves....
Posted by: Joel at August 20, 2005 03:13 AMwell, that was my experience in high school in NY in 1983. Some districts are open to teaching EVERYTHING and letting the kids decide. other districts teach to the demands of the local populous.
I went to an evangelical Christian college (do you still love me bill and stacey?) and we had an awesome biology/physics program that had a clear and wonderful balance between Darwin and Big Bang and God. It wasn't called "Intelligent Design" but the marriage of biblical philosophy and thought to scientific theory was perfect. Seven days to God is not the same as Seven days to Man. The creation story is allegorical, it didn't just happen in a week. We also learned about the creation stories of other cultures, and I love looking at turtles now because i imagine earth carrying us all like a momma turtle with her entire universe on her back.
I don't know. I monitor what my kids are being taught and the thing i have the BIGGEST problem with is history.
Posted by: christine at August 20, 2005 11:09 AMi heard about bill frist's remarks too ... a) should HE be considered anti-God and anti-religion because he's a medical doctor? b) if they teach intelligent design, i'm going to push to have all other religious beliefs of creation, the beginning of the universe, etc. to be taught as well. i would LOVE to have the schools explain to our children that the first man and woman grew in the armpit of a frost ogre and that the planet was formed from that very same frost ogre, his blood formed the seas, his flesh the earth, his hair the trees and his bones the mountains. and that, children, is REALLY how the world and people came to be. hehe.
Posted by: tj at August 21, 2005 08:44 AM(trying to avoid the possibility of offending someone)
Well as a Christian, I don't feel that scientists are the enemy. As with any group there are factions bent on having their way. Scientists are no different from those who seek religion in that aspect. As there is infighting with different denominations there is also infighting between different groups in the science field. (yes I have a point, just be patient)
What I am getting at is that while we all may disagree from time to time, that is not a good reason to dislike or even hate someone. While I agree that there are certain things that should not be taught in school, such as religious doctrine since they are ill equipped to handle it, We should all still have the freedom to follow our own religious beliefs. If someone wants to pray before class, that is their right, as long as they are not forcing anyone else to do the same.
The liberals have drawn a line in the sand, unfortunately they keep pushing the line forward whenever someone cries foul.
(hoping I didn't offend anyone, too much)
Posted by: Jeff A at August 22, 2005 09:22 AMi was going to blog about ID and the "bet" by the blogosphere in retaliation of kansas's state board of education's decision to allow so-called intelligent design to be taught in science classes
they are offering $750,000 if they "can produce empirical evidence which proves that Jesus is not the son of the Flying Spaghetti Monster."
craziness
http://www.boingboing.net/2005/08/19/boing_boings_250000_.html
Posted by: mark at August 22, 2005 12:46 PMMy uncle, a college biology professor and the author of a decidedly NON-creationist college biology textbook, said in a awed tone after his daughter (my favoritist cousin) gave birth to his first grandchild: "I know the science of how, but she's a miracle."
Exactly.
Posted by: lucy at August 24, 2005 11:28 PM