Well, okay, it’s not mass hysteria. But it is always more than a little odd when Evangelical Christian leaders and scientists agree to work together. Normally the evangelical churches view scientists as heretics at best, anti-Christians at worst. But there’s apparently one issue that is large enough to bridge this gap: global warming:
“Whether God created the Earth in a millisecond or whether it evolved over billions of years, the issue we agree on is that it needs to be cared for today,” said Rich Cizik, vice president of government relations for the National Association of Evangelicals, which represents 45,000 churches.Eric Chivian, director of the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School, agreed, saying: “Scientists and evangelicals have discovered that we share a deeply felt common concern and sense of urgency about threats to life on Earth and that we must speak with one voice to protect it.”
There is actually something that I have never understood: why aren’t ultra-conservative Christians environmentalists? Psalms 24:1 says that the earth is god’s. So by not taking care of the environment, we are destroying god’s property.
I think it is safe to say that Pat Robertson has pretty much lost all contact with reality:
In what has become an annual tradition of prognostications, religious broadcaster Pat Robertson said Tuesday God has told him that a terrorist attack on the United States would result in “mass killing” late in 2007.
“I’m not necessarily saying it’s going to be nuclear,” he said during his news-and-talk television show “The 700 Club” on the Christian Broadcasting Network. “The Lord didn’t say nuclear. But I do believe it will be something like that.”
Now, I’m not saying that Robertson has ever had a firm grasp of reality, but at least he used to seem like he had at least one foot grounded in the real world. But now? I think he’s lost it. Completely and totally. Unfortunately, his delusions are going to scare the hell (and a lot of cash) out of a lot of gullible people. And that’s just plain sad.
Welcome to 2007, I guess.
Well, maybe that’s jumping the gun a bit. But a precedent has been set for Intelligent Design to be kept out of science courses in public schools.
“Intelligent design” cannot be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district, a federal judge said Tuesday, ruling in one of the biggest courtroom clashes on evolution since the 1925 Scopes trial.
Dover Area School Board members violated the Constitution when they ordered that its biology curriculum must include the notion that life on Earth was produced by an unidentified intelligent cause, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III said.
As I’ve said before, there is no doubt that ID is religion or philosophy, not science. The Pennsylvania court is the first to declare this officially, but they won’t be the last. Expect this decision to quickly ripple across the nation.
I knew that I had to blog the Google Video showing a right-wing religious wacko going psycho on Trading Spouses. The only question was whether I posted the link on my political blog, or my livejournal. In the end, I decided to post it on both.
The scary thing is, I know a couple of people like this from the psycho church I used to go to. Unfortunately, this type of insanity isn’t unique to this freakshow of a woman. I feel horrible for her husband and children. He should’ve intervened, cuz the kids are obviously terrified.
Awesome satirical piece on DailyKos: “Dispatch From the War on Christmas”:
This whole war has been a nightmare. I was at Circuit City yesterday, looking for a cheap DVD player. Out front they had a “Happy Holidays” banner that must have been in letters three feet high. I stepped under it, may Jesus forgive me, because I knew I had to get in there, but inside was no better. Some damn wreaths, here and there, and lots of lights, but no tree. I swear to God, no Christmas tree at all — I looked everywhere. It was like being in Iraq or something.
I stumbled around with the rest of the shoppers. Everyone was in a daze, bumping into each other. I don’t think any of us knew what to do, except just keep shopping, but I could tell everyone was thinking what I was. But I wasn’t ready to see the DVD player prices, and I lost it.
“FIFTEEN FUCKING PERCENT OFF?”, I shouted. (Sorry for the language. This war has screwed us all up) — “FIFTEEN FUCKING PERCENT? WE’RE SUPPOSED TO BE CELEBRATING THE BIRTH OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOR HERE, AND ALL YOU CAN DO IS A FUCKING FIFTEEN PERCENT OFF?”
This is bizarre…. apparently, someone is suing the University of California-Berkeley, saying that their Understanding Evolution website is advocating religious beliefs.
In the lawsuit filed last month, the Caldwells contend the site is an effort “to modify the beliefs of public school science students so they will be more willing to accept evolutionary theory as true.”
The plaintiffs are not proponents of “intelligent design” — a theory that living organisms are so complex they must have been created by a higher intelligence — but they object to the teaching of evolution as scientific fact, Jeanne Caldwell said.
How in the hell does evolution qualify as a religion? It’s science, pure and simple, and does not consider any religious beliefs. This lawsuit should be tossed out in less time than it took me to write this brief entry!
How do you handle the current attempt by religious zealots to introduce creationism bundled as Intelligent Design into public school curricula? Well, if you live in Dover, Pennsylvania, you vote the entire school board out of office! “All eight Dover, Pennsylvania school board members up for re-election have been booted out after introducing intelligent design to the science classroom. In their place are a number of those who campaigned against the policy.”
This is absolutely fantastic news. To those school board members in Kansas who voted ID into the curricula, take a look at this story and start sweating. You may not hold onto your jobs long enough to see this policy take effect!
Let me re-iterate my stance once again: if you must teach Intelligent Design in public schools, it should be taught as a religion course, not a science course.
There’s a very good article up at Yahoo! News detailling the origins of Intelligent Design. It’s a pretty fair article, though reading through it I still don’t understand how anyone could not see ID for what it is: creationism with a new name.
The article wraps up with a description of a lawsuit being argued right now. The arguments for both sides are pretty well-put:
The parents, who claim that ID is creationism in disguise, contend that such a requirement is religiously motivated, thus violating the constitutional separation of church and state and the Supreme Court’s ban on creationism in public schools.
Attorneys for the school district argue ID is not a religious belief but a valid scientific theory and that the school district intended only to expose students to views critical of and differing from evolution. The case, in its sixth week, may influence how biology is taught in public schools around the country.
I still maintain my vehement disagreement with the school district in question. ID most definitely is a religious belief, and if it is going to be taught in public schools at all should be taught as such.
(edits made in italics)
This should come as no surprise: Cornell’s head Rawlings said that teaching intelligent design as science is dangerous. Major universities have to see ID as a curse, setting students back by a couple of years in science classes. Don’t be surprised to see Remedial Science become one of the hottest classes in universities, as students struggle to catch back up with what they weren’t taught in high school.
Declaring the question a cultural issue and not a scientific one, Rawlings noted religious groups have disputed the theory of evolution since Charles Darwin published “The Origin of Species” in 1859. He urged Cornell’s staff to object to any blurring of the line between religion and science.
Now, in the interest of fairness, I’ll actually quote someone trying to defend intelligent design’s position:
John West, a fellow at the Discovery Institute in Seattle — a leader in the intelligent design movement — told the Times he’s concerned Rawlings is “fanning the flames of intolerance.”
Ummm… so in other words, West cannot come up with anything to rebut Rawling’s statements, so instead he suggests that Rawlings is being “intolerant.”
I shouldn’t have expected more, actually.
Technorati tags: intelligent design, evolution, schools
I was shocked and horrified that the state legislature is actually going to discuss whether or not Intelligent Design should be taught in Colorado schools. Intelligent friggin’ Design! When exactly did our education system slip back in time 80 years? Fortunately, hopefully, the Democratic majority in the state congress will quickly vote this down. But just the fact that it is being discussed at all is scary.
I would not have a problem if ID were being taught as a philosophy or religion course, and if it were looked at critically. Give opposing viewpoints, and discussing strenghts and weaknesses. But taught as a science course? Nuh-uh. No way.
ID is not science! It’s religious doctrine with a psuedo-scientific presentation. It has no place in the science curricula of public schools.
