Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Santorum: Don't put intelligent design in classroom
Beaver County Times & Allegheny Times ^ | 11/13/5 | Bill Vidonic

Posted on 11/13/2005 3:49:41 PM PST by Crackingham

U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum said Saturday that he doesn't believe that intelligent design belongs in the science classroom. Santorum's comments to The Times are a shift from his position of several years ago, when he wrote in a Washington Times editorial that intelligent design is a "legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in the classroom."

But on Saturday, the Republican said that, "Science leads you where it leads you."

Santorum was in Beaver Falls to present Geneva College President Kenneth A. Smith with a $1.345 million check from federal funds for renovations that include the straightening and relocation of Route 18 through campus.

Santorum's comments about intelligent design come at a time when the belief that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher power, an alternative to the theory of evolution, has come under fire on several fronts.

A federal trial just wrapped up in which eight families sued Dover Area School District in eastern Pennsylvania. The district's school board members tried to introduce teaching intelligent design into the classroom, but the families said the policy violated the constitutional separation of church and state. No ruling has been issued on the trial, but Tuesday, all eight Dover School Board members up for re-election were ousted by voters, leading to a fiery tirade by religious broadcaster Pat Robertson.

Robertson warned residents, "If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected him from your city."

Santorum said flatly Saturday, "I disagree. I don't believe God abandons people," and said he has not spoken to Robertson about his comments.

Though Santorum said he believes that intelligent design is "a legitimate issue," he doesn't believe it should be taught in the classroom, adding that he had concerns about some parts of the theory.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: 109th; creationism; crevolist; evilution; evolution; goddoodit; havemercyonusohlord; intelligentdesign; monkeygod; santorum; scienceeducation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 651-686 next last

1 posted on 11/13/2005 3:49:43 PM PST by Crackingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

You have been pung.


2 posted on 11/13/2005 3:51:47 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Spectre-Part-II-BUMP!


3 posted on 11/13/2005 3:52:55 PM PST by LibertarianInExile (Let O'Connor Go Home! Hasn't She Suffered Enough? Hasn't The CONSTITUTION Suffered Enough?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

If faith baised issues should not be taught in schools, then evolution (as it applies to the origin of man) should not be taught there either.

If one unsustainable theory can be taught there, then all unsustainable theories should be able to be taught there.


4 posted on 11/13/2005 3:54:20 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

I can't imagine why Santorum would even stick his foot into this one way or the other. No wonder he's so unpopular lately.


5 posted on 11/13/2005 3:55:53 PM PST by marsh_of_mists
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
Spectre-Part-II-BUMP!

Yeah, no kidding!

When did Santorum lower his britches to get his onions pruned!

6 posted on 11/13/2005 3:57:31 PM PST by Fruitbat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marsh_of_mists
I can't imagine why Santorum would even stick his foot into this one way or the other. No wonder he's so unpopular lately.

A lot of conservatives have been raving about how great Santorum's been since he got elected. But I see nothing indicative that he's any sort of real conservative.

7 posted on 11/13/2005 3:58:52 PM PST by Fruitbat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

"If faith baised issues should not be taught in schools, then evolution (as it applies to the origin of man) should not be taught there either."

He didn't say that faith based issues should not be taught in schools, he said they shouldn't be taught in a science classroom. Your use of the construction 'faith based issues' demonstrates why this is eminantly correct.


8 posted on 11/13/2005 4:00:17 PM PST by Canard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Ah, this is just typical MSM pitting one religious person against another. Santorum is Catholic so he is pro-evolution. No surprise there. Of course he won't argue in favor of teaching a theory he disagrees with, though it would be nice if he had the class to support debate. Clearly the media long ago gave up on true political debate. In the media, the deck is always stacked in favor of liberals.

At this point I do not care whether intelligent design wins or not. It's not my theory entirely either. I just like the debate. But I don't care because I do not believe in the public school system. They are anti-Christian in every way -- every last one of them.

9 posted on 11/13/2005 4:00:56 PM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people. Ps. 14:34)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Intelligent Design has an elegant answer to all problems posed to it: God did it!

What about gravity? God did it!

What about the moon? God did it!

See how easy that is?

10 posted on 11/13/2005 4:04:19 PM PST by dbb (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Canard

Fine, then remove the unproven 'theory' of evolution from science classrooms. I have no problem with it. Thanks.


11 posted on 11/13/2005 4:07:04 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Fruitbat

I think most of his conservative reputation is built on the fact the Left savaged him that one time when he suggested (quite correctly) that homosexual marriage would lead to other deviances being similarly accepted. The Left biliously hates him for that and says he's a "radical, extremist right-wing nut". Hence, we like him.


12 posted on 11/13/2005 4:07:09 PM PST by marsh_of_mists
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Santorum - watch how fast this guys scrambles for anyone to like him.

Run Ricky run...


13 posted on 11/13/2005 4:07:29 PM PST by Jake The Goose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dbb
See how easy that is?

Almost as easy as calling you a troll. Almost.

APf

14 posted on 11/13/2005 4:08:29 PM PST by APFel (Loose ships sink lips.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
You have been pung.

Thanks. I'll crank up the list. This is important because: (a) it's Santorum; and (b) it shows how the GOP is learning from the Dover fiasco.

15 posted on 11/13/2005 4:14:57 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Expect no response if you're a troll, lunatic, retard, or incurable ignoramus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Doctor Stochastic; js1138; Shryke; RightWhale; ...
Evolution Ping

The List-O-Links
A conservative, pro- evolution science list, now with over 320 names.
See the list's explanation, then FReepmail to be added or dropped.
Two links to assist beginners: But it's "just a theory"
and How to argue against a scientific theory.

16 posted on 11/13/2005 4:16:16 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Expect no response if you're a troll, lunatic, retard, or incurable ignoramus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dbb

Yes, God DID do it. That gravity, thermodynamics and all the laws of physics can mostly be explained does not negate the God Who created it or sustains it.

That you do not believe it is not the universal measuring stick for others. That you deny it does not invalidate it. And the in-your-face simpleton labels you throw back at the believer is a purely sanctimonious retort. Faith required in the astronomical possibility of evolution is far greater than a faith required to believe in God, but the God Whom I choose to believe in is far more complex and powerful than that of evolution….so, why is that so simpleton?


17 posted on 11/13/2005 4:16:30 PM PST by ICE-FLYER (God bless and keep the United States of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham; Victoria Delsoul
The ROT of "itching ears" Spreads:

Santorum said flatly Saturday, "I disagree. I don't believe God abandons people,"

Remember these verses, Rick?

Remember the Garden of Eden?
Genesis Chapter 3, verse 4. "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:"....Gen. 3:23-24 "23. therefore Jehovah God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden the Cherubim, and the flame of a sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

Or how about the Flood?
Genesis 6:13-14 "13. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. 14. Make thee an ark..."

And perhaps you also don't believe in Sodom & Gomorrah?
Genesis 19:24-25. "Then Jehovah rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Jehovah out of heaven. 25. And he overthrew those cities, and all the Plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground."

I wonder if this habit of supposedly Christian-subscribing politicians reading out of existence these clear expressions of God's righteousness...and previous practice of "abandonment" of sinning people (those who consciously abandon God)...is a good indication of a similar inclination by these politicians to disregard the U.S. Constitution?

18 posted on 11/13/2005 4:19:13 PM PST by Paul Ross ("The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the govt and I'm here to help)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Though Santorum said he believes that intelligent design is "a legitimate issue," he doesn't believe it should be taught in the classroom, adding that he had concerns about some parts of the theory.

That's a big flip-flop from the Santorum admendment he proposed in the No Child Left Behind act

Too bad he learned a little too late that replacing science with mythology is a losing issue

19 posted on 11/13/2005 4:20:13 PM PST by qam1 (There's been a huge party. All plates and the bottles are empty, all that's left is the bill to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fruitbat
But I see nothing indicative that he's any sort of real conservative.

Being conservative has nothing to do with evolution or ID. For you to suggest otherwise is not correct.

20 posted on 11/13/2005 4:21:47 PM PST by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Vain weathervane.


21 posted on 11/13/2005 4:22:57 PM PST by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I hate to break the news to you, but evolution has been sustained as a scientific theory for 146 years. That's longer than most current scientific theories of physics and chemistry have been sustained.

Intelligent design has been sustained as a scientific theory for a grand total of zero years. To be clear, that's zero followed by an infinite number of zeros.


22 posted on 11/13/2005 4:24:03 PM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Fruitbat

I've been leery of Santorum ever since he supported Scottish Law SPecter over Toomey.


23 posted on 11/13/2005 4:25:05 PM PST by Malacoda (Islam = deranged, evil suicide cult)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: marsh_of_mists

Lately? This pig eyed politician is not even liked by lots of committee people. He is singing the song that he thinks will get him elected.


24 posted on 11/13/2005 4:25:24 PM PST by oldironsides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: qam1
Too bad he learned a little too late that replacing science with mythology is a losing issue

Actually it is the other way around, since Darwinian origin is in fact pure religion, and the case for Intelligent Design is based in science. Hence Santorum is merely running with the shallow-thinking herd of hard-core secularists who oppose true science and open inquiry.

25 posted on 11/13/2005 4:26:05 PM PST by Paul Ross ("The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the govt and I'm here to help)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past

I fail to see how Catholic automatically = pro-evolution.


26 posted on 11/13/2005 4:26:35 PM PST by Malacoda (Islam = deranged, evil suicide cult)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Evolution is not faith based. It is the basis for modern biology.

Creationism, on the other hand, involves the supernatural and requires a tremendous amount of faith on the ancient scriptures.


27 posted on 11/13/2005 4:26:41 PM PST by sagar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

You're arguing the wrong point. The real issue -- the one that will have consequence -- is what it looks like to the rest of the world, including the scientific and business communities, if a state adopts ID.


28 posted on 11/13/2005 4:27:22 PM PST by durasell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: All
Announcing The All-New, Improved Evolution Troll's Toolkit!
Are you inadequate online? Are you feeling inferior because you have no education? Are you so stupid that no one will respond to you? When they do respond, is it only point out your errors in spelling, grammar and logic? Would you like to become the life of the thread? Then be a troll! Yes, now you too can be a real internet troll!

Trolls always have a good time, and their posts get lots of responses. As a troll, you're sure to be the center of attention. Other trolls will praise your posts. Never again will your comments be ignored, merely because you don't know what you're talking about. And as a troll, you'll enjoy the power you have to ruin any thread just by showing up and trolling. Oh, the fun!

Trolling is easy. It's simple. And the beauty of it is ... you don't have to know anything! Here's a complete catalog of an evolution troll's intellectual inventory. Just print out this toolkit, and use one or two items at random every time you post. Don't worry if someone refutes you. Just repeat your earlier post. Then keep on trolling! They'll go crazy! Guaranteed!

Evolution Troll's Toolkit
A
B
C
D
1 You have no evidence Stalin, Pol Pot, etc. Darwinism is dogma! I never said that!
2 Hillary homosexual Piltdown Man You're no Christian!
3 liberal science God-hater government grants What are you afraid of?
4 Hitler, nazi, etc. You have no proof communist tactics 2nd Law of Thermodynamics
5 atheist, materialist, etc. What made the Big Bang? evolution causes immorality gaps in fossil record
6 Prove the origin of life! You're Christian-bashing Darwin worship I'm not [.....], you are!
7 arrogant jerk Take your meds [quote any scripture passage] You're foaming at the mouth
8 It's only a theory! Were you there? Noah's Ark Macro-evolution is impossible
9 It's all speculation! [quote any creationist website] Darwin leads to Marxism My granddaddy was no ape
10 Stop the censorship! That's a "just so" story! Darwin was a racist The odds are against evolution
11 Cambrian explosion No transitionals! All mutations are harmful Speciation is never observed

29 posted on 11/13/2005 4:27:57 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Expect no response if you're a troll, lunatic, retard, or incurable ignoramus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

This “Theory Explained” for its “misuse” is common for the evolutionist. It is accurate but slick in its presentation. It leaves itself an out if you read it with the word phenomena.

Just because something is observable does not mean it is fully explainable. This is the wiggle room the evolutionist needs to keep their “theory” as the only acceptable form of knowledge describing our origin. Yet in all of this I have never heard why there can be laws of physics that had to be violated to make it possible. The 2nd law of thermodynamics had to be violated for the theory of evolution to move from idea to fact. Things had to go from disorder to order for it to have happened. Oh, I do get “explanations”, but they are point of view, not based upon the law they firmly believe in.


30 posted on 11/13/2005 4:28:45 PM PST by ICE-FLYER (God bless and keep the United States of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

"Robertson warned residents, "If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected him from your city."

What an idiot.


31 posted on 11/13/2005 4:31:00 PM PST by WildTurkey (True Creationism makes intelligent design actually seem intelligent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

There is no proof whatsoever that man evolved from a single celled organism. There are plenty of fairy tales, but when push comes to shove, it's nothing more than a pipe dream.

Those who have swallowed that pipe dream hook line and sinker are experiencing nothing more than a faith based experience.

Even definitive proof of how the one celled organism originated is up for grabs.


32 posted on 11/13/2005 4:31:14 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

LOL!

I love your world view table of replies. The flat earth folks thought the same way...they were closed minded on the subject all the while accusing others of the same.


33 posted on 11/13/2005 4:31:41 PM PST by ICE-FLYER (God bless and keep the United States of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
You have been pung.

Spontaneously laughter and giggling. Thanks.

34 posted on 11/13/2005 4:33:05 PM PST by LogicWings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: qam1

Too bad for us conservatives that some in our ranks have decided to use a political forum to decide scientific issues. From my experience on these forums, those who push for the exclusion of evoution or the inclusion of ID or creationism in the curriculum, demonstrate a very limited understanding of, and education in, science. Then there are those who feel their religious faith is threatened by science...they are our equivlaent to the Taliban and, as such, represent a real scourge to the Conservative Movement.


35 posted on 11/13/2005 4:33:19 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
"What an idiot"

I have to agree. Who is Robertson to say such a thing because a few folks in a courtroom and on a school board have made such actions? I be a lot of folks in that area don't even know about this whole hub-bub.

36 posted on 11/13/2005 4:33:20 PM PST by ICE-FLYER (God bless and keep the United States of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sagar

Evolution is a theory. The lineage of single cell to man is not a solid line. Evolution does occur. That is an observable fact. That still does not prove that man evolved by the theory of evolution. Therefore, anyone who believes in the theory is merely accepting it on faith.


37 posted on 11/13/2005 4:33:54 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Fruitbat

I guess Santorum doesn't want to be re-elected after all.


38 posted on 11/13/2005 4:34:20 PM PST by infidel29 ("We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid." --Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Malacoda
I fail to see how Catholic automatically = pro-evolution.

This is a creo thread. On creo threads, Catholics are not even Christians.

39 posted on 11/13/2005 4:34:26 PM PST by WildTurkey (True Creationism makes intelligent design actually seem intelligent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

LOL, stooping to calling others the Taliban are we? Very powerful arguement...


40 posted on 11/13/2005 4:35:32 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

Rudder, I would be careful with the "Taliban" label. I think thats garbage. You would have to call the founders that because they did not see God in the classroom as an enemy to Science and that evidence is pleantiful.


41 posted on 11/13/2005 4:35:45 PM PST by ICE-FLYER (God bless and keep the United States of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
If faith baised issues should not be taught in schools, then evolution (as it applies to the origin of man) should not be taught there either.

Evolution is not a "faith based issue" THEREFORE your conclusion is false.

42 posted on 11/13/2005 4:36:03 PM PST by LogicWings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: All
Have no fear that I'll be spamming future threads with the Toolkit. It's now posted at my freeper homepage:
Evolution Troll's Toolkit.
43 posted on 11/13/2005 4:36:27 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Expect no response if you're a troll, lunatic, retard, or incurable ignoramus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

he's cracking up. whats next? Rick's gonna say is Roe v Wade is cool too!!
now he's just one more Rino in the herd.

I can't believe I once touted lil' Rickie as presidental material. Evan sported a "Santorum08" tagline till the 04primary. Now he doesn't miss a chance to rub my nose and conservative values in the sh*t.


44 posted on 11/13/2005 4:36:34 PM PST by gdc61 (see ya later GOP.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ICE-FLYER

The YEC creos are the fanatical radicals of the Christian sect.


45 posted on 11/13/2005 4:37:07 PM PST by WildTurkey (True Creationism makes intelligent design actually seem intelligent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: durasell; DoughtyOne
You're arguing the wrong point. The real issue -- the one that will have consequence -- is what it looks like to the rest of the world, including the scientific and business communities, if a state adopts ID.

It will look ridiculous; that goes without saying. BTW, the laws of thermodynamics were stated in their earliest form just 140 years ago. Relativity came along 90 years ago. Quantum mechanics came along 80 years ago. These have all been sustained a shorter time than has evolution.

The real issue though is how adopting ID will undermine the scientific and technological progress of America.

46 posted on 11/13/2005 4:37:22 PM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
I wonder if this habit of supposedly Christian-subscribing politicians reading out of existence these clear expressions of God's righteousness...and previous practice of "abandonment" of sinning people (those who consciously abandon God)...is a good indication of a similar inclination by these politicians to disregard the U.S. Constitution?

God does not abandon people. Santorum is correct.

If he did, there would be no opportunity for repentance, no chance to turn back.

Instead of poring over the Old Testament, read Christ's words about the Good Shepherd, who will abandon the 99 in search of the 1.

Oh, and read the different situations in which Jesus went to sinners to bring them to Him.

The Old Testament is not a reflection of Christian attitudes, and should not be presented as such. Jesus brought a new way of living.

47 posted on 11/13/2005 4:37:36 PM PST by sinkspur (Trust, but vilify.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Okay ace, please tell us how the original single celled organism came into being. Second, please point us to an uninterrupted lineage of that single cell to man.

I'm going to go grab a bite, so don't hurt yourself scurrying for that data.


48 posted on 11/13/2005 4:37:58 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
There is no proof evidence whatsoever that man evolved from a single celled organism.

Oh please. Sure there is! Where on earth did you get the idea that just because you say something means you have to be taken seriously?

49 posted on 11/13/2005 4:39:08 PM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: dbb
See how easy that is?

If I pour coffee in a cup, why is there coffee in the cup?
A) Because of my actions
B) Because of a combination of physical laws which caused it to happen, such as coffee being in the pot, the pot being tipped over the cup, gravity etc.
C) Both. (And countless other details, including the fact that some farmer grew the coffee beans, who used some tools and supplies from other folks etc.)

I prefer answer A). It is simple and pragmatic. Am I wrong to do so? Is the simplest explination (all other things being equal) usually the best?

50 posted on 11/13/2005 4:39:27 PM PST by AndyTheBear (Disastrous social experimentation is the opiate of elitist snobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 651-686 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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