• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Kansas Evolution—Again

krobone

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
359
Once again the fundies in Kansas are trying to put religious 'theories' in the classroom:

The hearings in Topeka center on two proposals. The first recommends that students continue to be taught the theory of evolution because it is key to understanding biology. The other proposes that Kansas alter the definition of science, not limiting it to theories based on natural explanations.

They better watch what they ask for - if we allow religious dogma to replace science, what's to stop the Raelians from promoting their theories in classrooms?

America - I love it, but sometimes... :nooo:
 
Perhaps I'm being slightly naive, but I've never understood this Creationsim Vs Evolution malarky in the US.

I was taught both, and left to make my own mind up as I grew up. Never was I told "THIS is the one you should believe.". And when all is said and done, both versions are theories and depend upon a belief system.
 
Mr Snowman said:
Perhaps I'm being slightly naive, but I've never understood this Creationsim Vs Evolution malarky in the US.

I was taught both, and left to make my own mind up as I grew up. Never was I told "THIS is the one you should believe.". And when all is said and done, both versions are theories and depend upon a belief system.

Well, the biggest problem is the 'all or nothing' mentality that seems to pervade American evangelicals. If the teaching of evolution cannot be outlawed or refuted by evidence, it can at least be classified as simply an 'alternative belief system' by insisting Creationism (or the 'Intelligent Design' theory, which is the same basic thing) should be taught alongside it. That brings evolution down to the level of a 'false religion'; in other words it becomes just another religion like Buddhism or Islam, which any good Christian would reject.

The chief difference, of course, is the fact that there's a lot of conclusive physical evidence to support evolution, while to support Creationism you have to believe the earth is only 10,000 years old (at least, if you're an American fundamentalist. The Bible says 7 days to create existence, and it means 7 literal, 24-hour days).

And since most of modern biology is based on the theory of evolution, you're really short-changing the education of kids (not to mention the future).

And it's doubtful it would stop there. Fundies in America aren't interested in simply speaking their viewpoint and let people decide for themselves. If they were allowed to, they'd happily outlaw evolution, homosexuality, rock and roll, non-Bibilical science, and whatever else disturbed their worldview.

In Europe, the religious discourse seems to be much more intellectual and civil, and I get the feeling people there realize that just because I believe a certain thing doesn't mean your beliefs are wrong, or under attack. But in America it's a screaming contest. We're in the middle of a culture war.

And we all know which side our President is more supportive of... :(
 
quote="Mr Snowman"]Perhaps I'm being slightly naive, but I've never understood this Creationsim Vs Evolution malarky in the US.

I was taught both, and left to make my own mind up as I grew up. Never was I told "THIS is the one you should believe."[/quote]

It is about socio-political power, it is also about the First Amendment's religion clauses. Note the plural clauses, it seems many of the neo-Dwarwinists invoke the anti-establishment clause and act like the freexercise clause doesn't exist. Together they create a difficult legal position for the state, it is not suppose to promote or inhibit religion.

Scalia gives a brief overview
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html ... 78_ZD.html

First, since we have consistently described the Establishment Clause as forbidding not only state action motivated by the desire to advance religion, but also that intended to "disapprove," "inhibit," or evince "hostility" toward religion, see, e.g., ante at 585 ("‘disapprove'") (quoting Lynch v. Donnelly, supra, at 690 (O'CONNOR, J., concurring)); Lynch v. Donnelly, supra, at 673 ("hostility"); Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist, supra, at 788 ("‘inhibi[t]'"); and since we have said that governmental "neutrality" toward religion is the preeminent goal of the First Amendment, see, e.g., Grand Rapids School District v. Ball, 473 U.S. at 382; Roemer v. Maryland Public Works Bd., 426 U.S. 736, 747 (1976) (plurality opinion); [p617] Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist, supra, at 792-793; a State which discovers that its employees are inhibiting religion must take steps to prevent them from doing so, even though its purpose would clearly be to advance religion. Cf. Walz v. Tax Comm'n of New York City, supra, at 673. Thus, if the Louisiana Legislature sincerely believed that the State's science teachers were being hostile to religion, our cases indicate that it could act to eliminate that hostility without running afoul of Lemon's purpose test.

There are fundamental issues at work here. The 1st Amend is why I support the Creationists efforts, Scientists need a reminder that we have a well established social contract, and they are not the final arbitrators of it.
 
the 1st amendment may be worth defending, but not as an excues to teach something that is less provable than evolution. there does seem to be a weird fundamentalist bent to America at the moment that is possibly heading anti science
 
Makes me even happier to be on this side of the pond :lol: . Speaking as a christian, I totally fail to understand the american christian fundamental viewpoint - in fact it seems to me damn unchristian!
Actually I think I do understand; it seems to be based on an Old Testament view, but not really in accord with the teachings of Jesus (ducks for cover)
 
horik said:
Makes me even happier to be on this side of the pond :lol: . Speaking as a christian, I totally fail to understand the american christian fundamental viewpoint - in fact it seems to me damn unchristian!
Actually I think I do understand; it seems to be based on an Old Testament view, but not really in accord with the teachings of Jesus (ducks for cover)

An interesting point, if the christians stick to the old testament doesn't that actually make them more of a breakaway Jewish Sect?
 
Entia non multi said:
horik said:
Makes me even happier to be on this side of the pond :lol: . Speaking as a christian, I totally fail to understand the american christian fundamental viewpoint - in fact it seems to me damn unchristian!
Actually I think I do understand; it seems to be based on an Old Testament view, but not really in accord with the teachings of Jesus (ducks for cover)

An interesting point, if the christians stick to the old testament doesn't that actually make them more of a breakaway Jewish Sect?

lol yeah I suppose it does - but you try telling them that; I'll go hide somewhere safe a long, long way away.
 
Mr Snowman said:
Perhaps I'm being slightly naive, but I've never understood this Creationsim Vs Evolution malarky in the US.

I was taught both
I doubt you were taught both in science lessons. No-one objects to biblical literalism being taught where it belongs - in Religious Education lessons.

My suggestion: if Christian creationism needs equal time with evolution, why shouldn't Muslim creationism get equal time? And Buddhist creationism. And Aboriginal Australian creationism. And so on and so on. With so many religions, each requiring equal time in science lessons, there might not be much time to teach the fundy Christian version. What a pity that would be.

But hey, let them teach their children nonsense in place of science. The economic penalties associated with producing a generation of idiots might persuade Kansas to think again.
 
JamesM said:
Mr Snowman said:
Perhaps I'm being slightly naive, but I've never understood this Creationsim Vs Evolution malarky in the US.

I was taught both
I doubt you were taught both in science lessons. No-one objects to biblical literalism being taught where it belongs - in Religious Education lessons.

My suggestion: if Christian creationism needs equal time with evolution, why shouldn't Muslim creationism get equal time? And Buddhist creationism. And Aboriginal Australian creationism. And so on and so on. With so many religions, each requiring equal time in science lessons, there might not be much time to teach the fundy Christian version. What a pity that would be.

But hey, let them teach their children nonsense in place of science. The economic penalties associated with producing a generation of idiots might persuade Kansas to think again.

Just remember that one man's nonsense is another man's science and vice versa. The able mind is capable of seeing that nothing is nonsense, and everything is there to be learned and evaluated.

To brand one above the other is the height of arrogance. Scientists get it wrong as frequently as religious people do, so both are deserving of the same respect as the other i.e. little, but enough to keep the sensible ones perky.

And as for multi-religious creation theories; do all these still not get taught in Humanities?
 
Mr Snowman said:
Just remember that one man's nonsense is another man's science and vice versa.
It's not easy to pin down an exact definition of what science is and isn't, but even within a very tolerant description, your statement is not correct. Some things are definitely not science. Not all worldviews need be equal in value, depending on how you define "valuable".

But let's be clear what the Kansas Kreationism kerfuffle is about. It's not about teaching religion in schools. It's about teaching religion in science lessons.

If you think one man's nonsense is another man's science, what about geography? Is one man's nonsense another man's geography? What about maths? Is one man's nonsense another man's maths? For that matter, is one man's geography another man's science? Can you see no meaningful difference between academic disciplines? Should we abandon any attempts at teaching different types of lesson?

To brand one above the other is the height of arrogance.
It's not about creationism being above or below science. Creationism, biblical literalism, intelligent design, is not science. If you teach children that they are the same, then they will be at a huge disadvantage in a scientifically and technologically-oriented workplace.

And as for multi-religious creation theories; do all these still not get taught in Humanities?
I don't know, but where they shouldn't be taught is in science lessons.
 
Hear, hear.

The Fundies believe they are ascendant; it's been brewing for quite a while. It's still astonishing that the American Jihad still believes itself to be oppressed. I guess in their eyes oppression is anything short of total dominance.
 
This is a little OT in regards to evolution, but I think it helps illustrate the political/religious climate in America that is causing such contention:

Church boots 9 over politics

Politics divides Baptists in Waynesville

By KRISTIN COLLINS, Staff Writer

A Western North Carolina church expelled nine members this week because they refused to support their pastor's Republican views, members say.
The members, three of them deacons at East Waynesville Baptist Church, were voted out Monday night at the church in Haywood County, just west of Asheville.

All nine walked out after Pastor Chan Chandler told them he expected them to sign forms supporting his political and moral beliefs. After they left, members who remained voted to boot the dissenters.

"He went on and on about how he's going to bring politics up, and if we didn't agree with him we should leave," said Isaac Sutton, 75, a deacon who was voted out after 12 years at the church. "I think I deserve the right to vote for who I want to."

Chandler could not be reached for comment.

Now, the church, which sits in the mountains nearly 300 miles west of Raleigh, is in turmoil. Several members are talking with a lawyer.

Waynesville attorney David Wijewickrama said at least nine members have called his office. He said he doesn't yet know the details of the case but has agreed to review it.

"They sound like the upstanding members of the church who have been there for decades," Wijewickrama said. "These are not the type of people who would scream wolf."

Sutton, of Clyde, and other members said the pastor often told the approximately 100-member congregation, from the pulpit, that they should not vote for candidates who support abortion rights. In October, just before the presidential election, Chandler said anyone who planned to vote for Democratic candidate John Kerry should leave the church, two members told The News & Observer.

Since then, Chandler's frequent political sermons have caused a deep rift in the congregation, said Selma Morris, 78, a member for more than 30 years.

"I told him, 'You owe God an apology, and you owe the congregation an apology, because you used his pulpit for political purposes,' " said Morris, the church treasurer. "You don't do that in a Baptist church."

She said Chandler was undeterred.

Although she was not at the meeting Monday and is still a church member, Morris, of Waynesville, is among the members who called a lawyer. She said the votes violated church bylaws. She also said that she expects the church to lose its tax-exempt status because, under federal law, tax-exempt organizations cannot endorse political candidates.

National interest

On Friday, when news of the incident broke, the church became the subject of a nationwide furor. Internet chat groups were abuzz, and politicos began making statements.

People for the American Way, a national group that advocates for the separation of church and state, released a statement condemning the pastor's deeds and demanding action from President Bush.

"What have we come to when the doors of a church are closed to longtime members because of their political beliefs?" said Ralph G. Neas, president of People for the American Way. "When a pastor equates political support for the 'wrong' candidate with a sin before God?"

N.C. Democratic Party Chairman Jerry Meek also criticized the church.

"If these reports are true, this minister is not only acting extremely inappropriately by injecting partisan politics into a house of worship, but he is also potentially breaking the law and threatening the church's ... nonprofit status," Meek said in a statement.

Efforts to reach the N.C. Republican Party and the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina failed. Baptist churches are autonomous and answer to no central authority.

Several church members, including Morris, spent most of Friday talking to reporters.

"I've been in church all my life," Morris said, "and I've never witnessed anything like this."

The separation of church and state is not just good for the state - it insures freedom of religion, too. :!:
 
I agree--this is nothing more than an attempt to have religion taught in science classes.

As far as the Fundie Jihad feeling repressed--I guess some of them do. On another message board I advocated for separation of church and state, and was immediately accused of persecuting christians. ??? :roll: Um, NO. I would no more consign a christian to a hidden room or basement than I would anyone else (unless they're annoying gits, but that's another religion entirely, and one to which many people apparently subscribe wholeheartedly).

If you want your child to learn about Creationism or Intelligent Design or whatever it's being called nowadays, then TEACH IT IN YOUR PLACE OF WORSHIP OR AT HOME.

Of course this kind of thing is probably to be expected in Kansas, where it seems like every major highway has crosses and billboards to remind you that 'the wages of sin is death' and 'disbelief is a cancer on the nation'. Eesh.
 
Personally, I'm sick of all this theory of evolution crap. Calling it a theory just paints a big red bullseye on science, and opens up the floodgates for every halfwit to say "But it's just a THEORY." What they ought to do it just change the name, officially, to the LAW of evolution, and put it right up alongside the law of gravity. It might not be 100% accurate, but at least it would shut them up for a while.
 
This was mentioned in the article on the JREF conference in FT196. Evolution isn't a scientific law.

The problem isn't that it's called a "Theory", the problem is that a large number of people don't know what a theory is. A theory does not mean it is simply conjecture. That would be a "hypothesis".

If, however, you feel that the nomenclature hurts your argument, refer to it as the "Principle of Evolution". Evolution is a principle, it's not a law.
 
Yes, exactly--which is why (beyond the separation of church and state issue) creationism should not be taught in science classes. The theory or principle of evolution is still, well, evolving. It is a model which changes as new verifiable data is received. Creationism (imo) is a set of unalterable beliefs unsupported by verifiable data. Oil and water, y'all, oil and water.
 
This thread has been dormant for a little bit, so I hope you don't mind me going OT and sharing a letter to the editor that appeared this morning in my hometown Lawrence (KS) Journal-World. The background being that here in Lawrence, the defiant home of liberalism in Kansas, one can see cars being driven around with a happy yellow bumpersticker reading 'Kansas: As Bigoted as You Think', which is a) a play on the new state tourism slogan and b) a reaction to the recent anti-gay marriage vote, which passed 70%-30% statewide and 104-105 counties, while we rejected it 68%-32%. :D Now the evolution insanity again, which, as you might guess, a number of people who live here are in the thick of. Anyway, a ground-level view of 'What's the Matter With Kansas".

Oh, need to add, this is not me nor do I know this person.

Inclusive slogan

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

To the editor:

Like many other Kansans, I am less than enthusiastic about our new state slogan "Kansas -- As big as you think." In fact, the more news I read, the more I doubt that Kansans are thinking at all, never mind thinking "big."

But as I read about the recent events surrounding the Terri Schiavo case, it occurred to me that her medical condition might offer Kansans a more current, honest and accurate state slogan. In fact it covers all the "big" issues important to Kansans today: the legislative failure to fund state schools; Fred Phelps; the Kansas Board of Education's push to replace science curriculum with Christian theology; the overwhelming passage of the gay marriage ban; the Kansas wheat crop and the state's agricultural economy.

"Kansas -- The persistent vegetative state."

Randy Austin,

Lawrence

http://ljworld.com/section/letters/story/204842
 
Hang in there, lopaka. The American Taliban will not triumph.

Oh, and thanks to Kansas for being the latest national embarrasement. I'm from North Carolina, and we're still living down Jesse Helms!
 
Yup . . . nice big wheat crop due this year . . . we're bein' blessed for wantin' t'teach the TRUTH in our classrooms instead of this ee-volution nonsense.

God Bless America, hoo-rah!

*snort*

"Kansas: the persistent vegetative state." AMEN.
 
I like that slogan. :D
Pennsylvania's pretty scary, too, when you're in the middle of it. *shudder*



Minor Drag said:
Hear, hear.

The Fundies believe they are ascendant; it's been brewing for quite a while. It's still astonishing that the American Jihad still believes itself to be oppressed. I guess in their eyes oppression is anything short of total dominance.

I've encountered this attitude, too, which is especially infuriating when you live in a little town in the middle of nowhere where nearly EVERYONE but you is of the Fundie mentality. There was only a tiny handful of people who *weren't* very religious, and it was interesting how quiet they stayed about everything. I seemed to be the only one who would disagree out loud with things, and I was pretty much shot down every time.

I don't have a grudge against ALL Christians. I've met a (very important!) few who are very kind and understanding. It makes me sad that there aren't more people like that in general. :cry:

Sorry... rant over.


Anyway, kudos to the people in the article (eariler in this thread) who called a lawyer about their preacher. I'm glad to see that people on all sides are trying to keep up the whole "seperation" thing. :)
 
fundies

did anyone hear about the woman who wanted to get the word 'evolution' taken out of all biology books, and replaced with 'physical changes over time'? Thats still the most rediculous thing i've ever heard.

Aparently 'fundies' are the prevelent type of christian in my area...I attend church with my boyfriend on wednesday nights. the preacher likes to give sermons on why all homosexuals are satanic wiccan liberals. Though i thought all christians were like that. i've never met any other kind.
 
Unfortunately the kind, quiet, moderate Christians tend to be, well, quiet; I don't think all Christians are fanatical fundamentalists any more than I think all Muslims spend all their time in the streets waving burning items and fists toward a camera.
 
Leaferne said:
Unfortunately the kind, quiet, moderate Christians tend to be, well, quiet; I don't think all Christians are fanatical fundamentalists any more than I think all Muslims spend all their time in the streets waving burning items and fists toward a camera.

Sadly, one only has to look to Islam to see what happens when the quiet, sensible majority lets radical fundamentalists take over. American Christians, take note!
 
Both from today's paper. I should know better than to type stuff before I've had at least one full cup of coffee, but **** these people, already. This used to be a state, however conservative, where people were could reasonably differ about stuff. These neo-facist theocrats want to run Kansas in the 12th century and, fine. Whatever. I can no longer spend the energy required it takes to fight these people. They very deliberately are trying to destroy public education in this state, and I guess that's what a majority wants. Enjoy. There are other places to live.

State Board of Ed’s Morris causes stir with newsletter

By Scott Rothschild (Contact)

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Topeka — State Board of Education member Connie Morris has issued a newsletter that criticizes evolution as an “age-old fairytale” and describes board members who disagree with her as liberal, rude, disruptive and phony.

Morris, a conservative Republican from St. Francis in western Kansas, on Monday declined to speak with reporters about the taxpayer-funded newsletter, but she was confronted about it by one of the board members whom she criticized — Carol Rupe, a moderate Republican from Wichita.


“You really hurt my feelings,” Rupe said to Morris after a board committee meeting at the State Department of Education. The two briefly hugged, but Rupe was still emotional.

“She can say what she wants about her own position, but I don’t think it’s fair to say that about me,” Rupe said.

On two occasions, reporters asked Morris to comment on the newsletter, but both times Morris said she didn’t have time because she had to attend meetings in the education building.

‘Gutterball politics’

The blistering, four-page letter under state Board of Education letterhead was brought to the attention of the media by board member Bill Wagnon, a Democrat from Topeka, whose district includes Douglas County.

Wagnon, who has often opposed the conservative side of the board, said Morris’ comments were hypocritical.

“She has clothed herself in a certain kind of righteousness and refused to admit she is involved in gutterball politics,” he said.

The newsletter focuses on the recent fight about science standards in Kansas schools. The 6-4 conservative majority on the board favors standards that criticize evolution.

Morris’ comments

In the newsletter, Morris says she is a Christian who believes in the literal depiction of the origin of life contained in Genesis. She said “poor science” insists it has all the answers “with anti-God contempt and arrogance.”

She said supporters of evolution were in “panic mode.” She described Wagnon as a liberal and Sue Gamble, a moderate Republican from Shawnee, as “continually most disruptive and rude.”

She said her favorite “blooper” during board debate on evolution came from Rupe who said “with psuedo-innocence” that she was mystified by opposition to science.

During a hearing last month on the science standards, Morris said opponents of evolution presented extraordinary testimony.

“In short, Darwin’s theory of evolution is biologically, genetically, mathematically, chemically, metaphysically and etc. ‘wildly’ and ‘utterly impossible.’”

She said mainstream scientists who boycotted the meeting acted cowardly, and she criticized the media.

She asked her constituents to pray for the conservatives on the board as they fought liberals.

“As we forge every bit of our being for the battles ahead, I humbly ask for your prayers. It’s certain you have plenty for which to beseech the Lord — but if you think of us, please request strength, wisdom and courage on our behalf,” she wrote.

Morris also wrote about the recent order by the Kansas Supreme Court to increase school funding by $285 million by July.

Discussion expected

She said schools didn’t need any funding above the $142 million that Republicans had approved, and she was disturbed that the Legislature had increased funding for non-English speaking students.


Morris has said before she doesn’t believe the state should educate the children of illegal immigrants in Kansas.

Wagnon said it was inappropriate for taxpayers to be paying for the kind of message Morris had in her newsletter.

“It’s partisan. I think she has crossed the line,” he said.

During the full board’s meeting this week, Wagnon said he would bring up the issue of newsletter expenses.

Education Department officials said they did not know how much the newsletter cost because they didn’t know how many people received it and Morris had not turned in a reimbursement form for it yet. Because it mentions the June 3 state Supreme Court decision on school finance, it had to have been sent recently.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2005/jun/1 ... egislature

Evolution hearings tab nearly $30,000

By Scott Rothschild (Contact)

Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Topeka — Kansas taxpayers are being asked to pick up the tab for more than two dozen witnesses who flew here from across the country to disparage evolution during science standards hearings last month.

State records released Monday showed the witnesses have requested $4,987.73 for travel, lodging and — in some instances — meals and parking.

The science standards hearings, convened by three State Board of Education members for four days, drew international attention as critics of evolution testified for school standards that question the theory.

Add security for the hearings, which cost about $20,000, and a court reporter to transcribe the testimony, which cost about $5,000, and the tab for the science hearings is running about $30,000, state education officials say.

And that doesn’t take into account the time of State Department of Education personnel who staffed the hearings.

Harry McDonald, a member of a coalition of mainstream science groups that boycotted the hearings, said the expense and time was a tremendous waste because the conservative majority on the State Board of Education had already made up their minds to adopt standards that will criticize evolution.

“They are going to do exactly what they were going to do all along,” McDonald said. “The only difference now is, 30-some thousand dollars of Kansas taxpayers’ money has been spent.”

Anti-evolutionists, however, have said the expense was minimal and necessary in order to ensure that Kansas science standards were of high quality.

John Calvert, the head of an intelligent design organization, and who summoned all the witnesses, has defended the expenses.

“This is one of the most important issues facing education in the entire country,” he said.

The pro-evolution side had no expenses because they boycotted the hearings, and Topeka lawyer Pedro Irigonegaray, who cross-examined anti-evolution witnesses, said he would work for free.

Mainstream scientists boycotted the hearings, saying it was simply a forum to give publicity to proponents of intelligent design, which says that science cannot explain certain complexities of life and that the world is evidence of a master planner.

The full State Board of Education is expected to consider the science standards this week. Because conservatives have a 6-4 majority on the board, it is expected that the criticisms of evolution will be included in the standards, which are the basis for instruction that Kansas students will be tested on.

Board member Bill Wagnon, a Democrat from Topeka whose district includes Douglas County, supports the teaching of evolution.

“It was a gigantic waste of money,” Wagnon said of the hearings. “This is an abuse of the responsibility of board members for allowing this to happen,” he said.


Contents of this site are © Copyright 2005 The Lawrence Journal-World.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2005/jun/1 ... egislature
 
No offense to any religious people here, and this is jmho, but . . . evolution is utterly unbelievable? As opposed to what? Believing that some bearded old guy in a white robe took a lump of primordial matter or clay or play-doh or whatever, smacked it with his magic twanger, and boom! Instant earth! :confused:

I swear, if I hear one more fundie bleat on about how they're 'oppressed' even while they attempt to truly oppress others, I'll get my Remmy and a bag of rock salt and go patrollin'.
 
Brighid45 said:
No offense to any religious people here, and this is jmho, but . . . evolution is utterly unbelievable? As opposed to what? Believing that some bearded old guy in a white robe took a lump of primordial matter or clay or play-doh or whatever, smacked it with his magic twanger, and boom! Instant earth! :confused:

I swear, if I hear one more fundie bleat on about how they're 'oppressed' even while they attempt to truly oppress others, I'll get my Remmy and a bag of rock salt and go patrollin'.

If it's any umm, consolation?, here in Larryville most every pastor from a non-fundie church (Roman church excepted) came out publicly against the marriage amendement: Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran, Episcopalian, United Church of Christ, Mennonites, the Jewish Community Center....so I think as long as people don't make gross overgeneralizations about "Christians" or "religious people" or whatever, and you didn't, nobody here is going to get offended. :)
 
I know this kind of uproar tends to be generated by the vocal minority and mainly those who are fanatics. They don't speak for the majority--but I do wish the majority would make that clear now and then.

Good to know there are some religious leaders in your community with some compassion and sense, Lopaka. Too bad we can't extend it to the battle over what's being taught in our schools here.

If you want your child to learn creationism, teach it at home or in church, imo.
 
Back
Top