|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 0/65 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Should a Creationist be allowed to hold a position of Authority? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: From the First Amendment to the Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.... And applied to the state governments via the Fourteeth:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The commonly accepted interpretation of these clauses are that no governmental body of the United States may promote, in any way, any religion nor to discourage it. -
quote: I don't know where you live, but where I am I see a lot of bumper stickers that positively gloat at how the unsaved are going to burn in hell forever. I have had Jehovah's Witnesses come to my door. I have also been stopped on the street by Mormons. I have coworkers who, during break times, talk to each other about the events that have happened in their respective churches. I teach at a college -- I see flyers all over the place advertising meetings of various religious student organizations. My neighbor has invited me to attend church with her. If you are speaking of individuals' who are offended by your religious views, then leave them alone; it is their right to be left alone. If they are bothering you, then tell them to leave you alone; it is your right to be left alone. Edited to correct a typo and to expand the quote from the 14th Amendment. This message has been edited by Chiroptera, 13-Feb-2006 05:59 PM "Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
jar writes: No, it isn't. It is about whether or not the YEC willfull ignorance related to ignoring evidence that conflicts with their beliefs should be in decision making positions. It is not about their ideology, it is about their limitations and handicap. Jar, if you wish to change the topic please go back an revise your OP and title. Here's what you started out with:
jar writes: Topic: Should a Creationist be allowed to hold a position of Authority?While there is a definite seperation of Church and State, should ANYONE that believes in the literal Creation story as laid out in Genesis be allowed to hold a position of authority and influence such a US President or Prime Minister of England? Although this should not be seen as a religious test, is it a valid test of the person's capability to assimilate data, form rational conclusions, accept new information, and formulate policy? So this is the question you asked:
Jar writes: should ANYONE that believes in the literal Creation story as laid out in Genesis be allowed to hold a position of authority and influence such a US President or Prime Minister of England? Is that still your question? That's what I responded to when I said:
buzsaw writes: The thead is about whether YEC ideology disqualifies one to be given authority. My proposition is that based on the track record of evolutionists in authority as heads of state, your fobia about YECs in authority is unfounded. Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Not quite Buz. Somewhere back in the thread I admitted that the OP was worded poorly. It should be "Anyone that believes in a Young Earth" is not qualified to hold a decision making position.
There was additional discussion. For example, if someone who believed in a Young Earth could say "Yes, I realize that the weight of evidence is that the universe is old and I could teach that to others but cannot accept it personally", they would be capable of holding a decision making position. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
It would be very bad form to change the topic title and/or message 1 content at this point. I suggest that this topic be closed.
Is there a calling for a new version of this same topic? A sort of variation on the theme Is Fundamentalism a Mental Disorder? is currently in the Proposed New Topics (PNT) forum. At this stage of the topic, I feel this situation can be discussed right here. No need to go to the "General..." topic, below in the ever popular signature. Adminnemooseus New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures Thread Reopen Requests Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Imo, this thread was a looser from the gitgo, no matter how Jar doctors it up.
Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3956 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
i quite agree. if one is going to fight for religious freedom and equality, we have to defend the fundies, too. hence the word equality.
i recommend it be closed.sorry jar. it's just not working out this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Actually, you can do it over. Here is message 1 in its entirety:
While there is a definite seperation of Church and State, should ANYONE that believes in the literal Creation story as laid out in Genesis be allowed to hold a position of authority and influence such a US President or Prime Minister of England? Although this should not be seen as a religious test, is it a valid test of the person's capability to assimilate data, form rational conclusions, accept new information, and formulate policy? What revisions would you like to have been in that message 1? Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I'd change "While there is a definite separation of Church and State, should ANYONE that believes in the literal Creation story as laid out in Genesis be allowed to hold a position of authority and influence such a US President or Prime Minister of England?" to read
"While there is a definite separation of Church and State, should ANYONE that believes a Young Earth be allowed to hold a position of authority and influence such a US President or Prime Minister of England?" I would keep the second paragraph as in the original. "Although this should not be seen as a religious test, is it a valid test of the person's capability to assimilate data, form rational conclusions, accept new information, and formulate policy?" Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Like I said, Jar, no matter how you doctor it up, it's a looser.
Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3956 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
that still doesn't take into account the ammendments you made as concessions to me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
No, it doesn't.
The question was how would I change the OP, not how the discussion would proceed. If you brought up the example of the professor, I would still agree that if a YEC could say "Yes, the weight of evidence is on the side of an Old Earth and I could certainly support teaching the Earth is old", they would be capable of hold a decision making position. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
inkorrekt Member (Idle past 6110 days) Posts: 382 From: Westminster,CO, USA Joined: |
The Exercise And Establishment clause only suggests that the government shall take a neutral position on matters pertaining to faith and religion. This has nothing to do with the Separation of God from the society. Separation of church and state is not a part of US constitution. However, it was the part of the constitution of the former soviet Union. It is so interesting that the Russian Government now is vigorously promoting Christianity where as in America, the Government is punishing christians. The recent role of the Government has been to separate God from the Society which is not the proper role of the Government.
Really, try to stick to the topic. The establishment clause has absolutely nothing to do with the question. This message has been edited by AdminJar, 02-18-2006 08:19 AM
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024