Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: AyashiKaibutsu
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
I pose the same question to you. Where is your faux outrage over expressly pushing one "religious" viewpoint in schools (Evolution/Secularism) and expressly banning another (Intelligent Design/Christianity)? Why aren't you for equal rights and opportunity in this case? Schools should be able to teach both, if they choose, but instead, they are forced to teach one and banned from teaching another.
Hypocrisy much?
ID has 0 evidence supporting it. It's introduction requires a redefining of what science is to make it fit into a science class. It's creators have admitted to coming up with and pushing it with the agenda of using it as a stepping stone towards bringing religion into schools. How it's been treated has no sympathy from me. 404 hypocrisy not found.
No evidence, eh? So, if I Google up "Intelligent Design", I will find zero results?
Also, links to back up your claims that the creators have admitted that it was just a Trojan Horse to get religion in schools?
Please note: actual quotes from the creators saying this, not liberal blogs where they try and read the minds and intent of people.
"Advocates of intelligent design argue that it is a scientific theory,[11] and seek to fundamentally redefine science to accept supernatural explanations.[12] The unequivocal consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design is not science.[13][14][15][16] The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science."[17] The U.S. National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it pseudoscience.[18] Others in the scientific community have concurred, and some have called it junk science.[19][20]"
U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents", and that the school district's promotion of it therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[23]
-from wikipedia (you can go there to find the original sources if you want. all of the points are sourced)
Sure you can google up a bunch of fake science evidence from google if you want.
"Phillip E. Johnson has stated that cultivating ambiguity by employing secular language in arguments that are carefully crafted to avoid overtones of theistic creationism is a necessary first step for ultimately reintroducing the Christian concept of God as the designer. Johnson explicitly calls for intelligent design proponents to obfuscate their religious motivations so as to avoid having intelligent design identified "as just another way of packaging the Christian evangelical message"
^ Phillip Johnson (April 1999). "'Keeping the Darwinists Honest' an interview with Phillip Johnson". Citizen Magazine. "Intelligent Design is an intellectual movement, and the Wedge strategy stops working when we are seen as just another way of packaging the Christian evangelical message. [...]
The evangelists do what they do very well, and I hope our work opens up for them some doors that have been closed".
Yea...
Facebook
Twitter