Other side's biggest misinterpretation?

So, anyway, this particular congressman really is a brilliant fellow. In fact, he wrote a dissenting Republican opinion against the Iraqi war before our troops were sent over. It was based upon constitutional law and precedent, and was one of the most astute discertations I have ever read regarding congressional powers v. executive powers, and was truly a work of genius. Yet, when it comes to "faith" he apparently does not swerve from the strictest literal interpretation of biblical verse. Imagine that.
So, the story goes, that when he was younger and recently graduated from Rose Hulman, he was challenged by a co-worker to explain dinosaur fossils relative to the Flood myth; and his reply was that which I gave earlier in the thread ... they originated on another planet and collided with Earth just after the Flood, embedding themselves deeply into the layers of muck laid down by the Deluge.
Just goes to show ... sometimes the strictest interpreters of the primary document of American political policy turn out also to be the strictest interpreters of the primary documents of faith. Is this surprising other than with regard to their eductional backgrounds?

You're talking about John Hostettler, aren't you? 8th district? At first, I could have mistaken your unnamed congressman to be my uncle (7th district), although he's no longer in congress, and probably would have supported the Iraq war if he was I had no clue Hostettler was such a nut ------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Now just a second there my friend. It is not my intent to portray my congressman as a "nut." First of all, he has won several intense races here in the "Bloody Eight." And I can attest that he comes from a very hardworking, large, and devoted family. It's just that he and his family share some very fundamental beliefs with regard to faith and constitutional politics. And although I may not share all of his religious and political tenets, it would be very unfair of me not to mention that the story I am repeating was spread originally by political supporters of two of his previous opponents for the 8th Congressional seat. So, the story may be true or may be a fabrication. Either way, it has persisted in local political folklore for over a decade now. My point, I guess if I have a point here, is that a man who is very well educated, extremely intelligent, consistently and repeatedly successful in politics, capable of writing brilliant speaches ... and he does write his own ... and otherwise is very worldly in his views, can still have faith-based beliefs that make some of us scratch our heads in bewilderment.

That SJ GOULD insisted on reading a CONTRAST between Paley and Aggasiz IN THE IDEA that Wrightvs Fisher and Maynard Smith vs Goodwin/kaufman and Gould's Paley vs Aggasiz is only Aggaiz vs paLey trans"morgified". I can not see ANY creational contrast in Gould's reading of both only his unbelief. This does not mean that my reading can not on its face be read for evolution but those here have yet to read it as I write, so... it will still be some time....Gould DID manage in his writing on the VS address A QUESTION I ASKED MYSELF after I caught my first 3ft milk snake.. more on the boy's toys later...[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 12-07-2003]