Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: gondramB; P-Marlowe
I have an additional article sent my by a relative. However, the title of one of the courses questioned was something like: "Christianty's influence on American History."

That course teaches straight American History and examines the influence on it of Christianity as an ADDITIONAL level of interest.

Try doing the same thing to "African American Influence on American History."

Why is Christianity allowed to be discriminated against....and Christianity's influence is tremendous?

127 posted on 11/20/2005 1:56:44 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies ]


To: xzins
Try doing the same thing to "African American Influence on American History." Why is Christianity allowed to be discriminated against....and Christianity's influence is tremendous?

I'd like to dump all of these hyphenated American history courses, Christian-American, African-American, etc., etc.. Let's teach American history, period, and leave specialization for advanced undergraduates.

128 posted on 11/20/2005 3:15:48 PM PST by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies ]

To: xzins; gondramB; Right Wing Professor
5) The Christian right is anti-Scientific.

This charge emerges from secular America’s docile homage to the doctrines of Darwin. Wise and educated people today realize that the borderline between cutting-edge science and religious belief is fuzzy. One need only examine the work of cosmologist Stephen Hawking, British scientific philosopher Antony Flew, or Israeli physicist Gerald Schroeder to hear the language of theology. Only propagandists and ideologues think that Darwin ended the discussion.

The truth is that two incompatible beliefs can account for mankind’s presence on the planet. The first is that God created us in His image and placed us here. The second is that through a lengthy process of unaided materialistic evolution, primitive protoplasm became Bach, Beethoven, and the Beatles.

Many scientists, including the 40% who are religious according to a University of Georgia study cited by the New York Times in February of this year, accept the first view. Many scientists accept the second view and some scientists await further evidence. The issue is hardly cut and dried because a great deal of modern science flows as much from scientific philosophy as it does from laboratory experiment. This is particularly true of non-replicable science such as that dealing with cosmology and origin of the universe questions.

This leaves only one question: Are secular liberals or Christian conservatives more dogmatic and closed-minded? To any fair-minded person, the answer is startlingly simple. It would be tough to find a single Christian high school, college, or university in the nation that does not treat Darwinian evolution seriously. However, it would be even tougher to find a single public high school or secular university that grants a respectful hearing to intelligent design, let alone a religious view of creation.

It is also only on secular campuses that truth is frequently suppressed in the interests of political correctness.

If science means being open to all ideas, judging those ideas on the basis of evidence rather than belief, and withholding judgment in the absence of evidence, there can be no doubt at all. Christian conservatives are far less anti-Scientific than others.

Rabbi Daniel Lapin

136 posted on 11/20/2005 11:15:27 PM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson