There is a controversy regarding evolution among the general public, and the general public is who the schools are for. I know the standard retort to that is if some in the general public don’t believe organisms change over time, then their beliefs don’t matter, but the controversy is largely how the word evolution changes definitions so easily. Does it mean change over time, or does it mean common ancestor Genesis is wrong? It can never be identified - it can switch definitions within one sentence. Science can seamlessly transcend into philosophy (worldviews), and if common ancestor evolution is the only game in town in science classrooms, then there’s nothing that keeps Genesis is wrong from being the topic of the day in science classrooms, and parents have a right to object to it. An anti-evolution law doesn’t only have to be about promoting religion, it can also be about lessening the promotion of the religion of atheism, which also violates the constitution.
Utter nonsense. The whole damn paragraph: nothing but nonsense.
It’s always interesting how religion/ID must be kept completely out of science classrooms, because, we’re told, it will lead to all sorts of cheapening of science, of establishment of religion, etc, yet if someone claims that studies of only evolution will lead to atheism, the slippery slope fallacy bell is clanged.
No one clangs the bell. If it leads to Atheism, who cares?
When one side has more political clout than the other, free passes for double standards seem to come easily.
The side with 'more political clout' happens to be the creationist side; the only reason they keep losing is because they are just so so
so wrong.
Jon
Love your enemies!
™ Version 4.2
(1)
