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 previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 681-686 next last
To: LogicWings

There are huge gaping holes in the lineage of single celled organisms to man. You guys have no answer for that that cannot be shot down. Therefore, it is a falsehood to claim that the theory of man's assencion from single celled organism is anything more than a faith based belief system.

Deal with it.


61 posted on 11/13/2005 4:48:20 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Out of 55 items on your mock troll list, I was disappointed to not see my "no repeatable experiment" argument that you dismissed several months ago as simply being tripe you had heard before.

Does this mean I don't qualify as a troll in your estimation? How sad.

62 posted on 11/13/2005 4:48:25 PM PST by AndyTheBear (Disastrous social experimentation is the opiate of elitist snobs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Belief in intelligent design destroys only one belief system, that of those who have accepted on faith the origin of man from a single celled organism.

That is false on several levels. First, belief in intelligent design as a scientific concept destroys the very foundation of scientific reasoning. Second, universal common descent is hardly a faith-based precept. It is supported by: the universality of the genetic code and other cellular features as well as the phylogenetic tree based on fossil evidence.

63 posted on 11/13/2005 4:48:58 PM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
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.

First things first: Do you accept that man evolved from an ape that was similar to today's chimpanzee?
64 posted on 11/13/2005 4:50:33 PM PST by jennyp (WHAT I'M READING NOW: Art of Unix Programming by Raymond)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
You do have my sympathy though.

I don't need it, and could care less. Reality is inexorably on my side.

I realize what a crushing blow it is to be confronted with the reality of your faith based belief system.

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

65 posted on 11/13/2005 4:50:59 PM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
And changing my words to suit your unsustainable arguement won't sell.

And you should be thankful that I'm willing to take your rhetoric and turn it into a properly scientific statement..

66 posted on 11/13/2005 4:52:41 PM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
And changing my words to suit your unsustainable arguement won't sell.

And you should be thankful that I'm willing to take your rhetoric and turn it into a properly scientific statement..

67 posted on 11/13/2005 4:52:46 PM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Santorum in panic mode and abandoning his principles Barf Alert!


68 posted on 11/13/2005 4:52:49 PM PST by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

I'll send you the bill for the new keyboard.


69 posted on 11/13/2005 4:53:29 PM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

I hate it when I stutter!


70 posted on 11/13/2005 4:53:41 PM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: marsh_of_mists
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".

There was a time when Santorum was a House member and during his first term in the senate when he either was as conservative as I am or he was an excellent actor (take your pick) but I happen to believe he was conservative because he lives his life that way. When reporters or anyone thought they were nailing him, he answered them with truly conservative answers that they used because they believed they could hurt him with his own words, but most normal people thought what he said was appropriate which made him popular because he not only had the right answer, but he wasn't afraid to give it in an "in your face" manner. Sometime after his 2nd term began, he started to be just a little less conservative and since '04 when he campaigned for Specter, he has become truly embarrassing IMO. All I can figure is some fool has sold him on the idea he can be reelected appealing to the same people Specter does (HA!) or he just has the most dreadful instincts of anyone I've ever seen who is in a panic.

71 posted on 11/13/2005 4:55:25 PM PST by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I do draw the line at teaching things that have not been proven, to be irrefutable fact."Proven" is a tough thing to do in science, for all of us scientists recognize the possibility than there can always be an exception to the "rule."

I accept Christ based upon spiritual faith. Has it been proven that Christ was the son of God? No.

I accept God as an article of spiritual faith. Has it been proven that God exists? No.

Science is not about faith, it is about empricial observations. You're having trouble with that concept.

72 posted on 11/13/2005 4:55:33 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: ICE-FLYER
Faith required in the astronomical possibility of evolution is far greater than a faith required to believe in God

Stop trashing language and the meaning of words. Thinking that the Theory of Evolution is an accurate portrayal of the reality of how species differentiated is not "faith."

"Faith" is a belief in the supernatural. Evolution rejects the notion of a supernatural.

73 posted on 11/13/2005 4:55:47 PM PST by LogicWings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: AndyTheBear

You can always try for inclusion as a subspecies.


74 posted on 11/13/2005 4:56:58 PM PST by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

Name calling stopped bothering me in about the third grade. That's about when I began to question things that were told to me, that couldn't be sustained by fact. I am willing to admit my faith in Intelligent Design is just that. Sadly, you can't come to grips with your faith based belief system. I can live with that.

The theory of man evolving from a single celled organism doesn't bother me. Teaching it in our schools with exclusivity is like denying the famale children in the Middle East not to be able to attend school. It's just an arbitrary demand by people who can't even be honest enough to admit to themselves that their beliefs are based on faith, not reality.


75 posted on 11/13/2005 4:57:55 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Santorum is moving so far left he will be to the left of Specter.


76 posted on 11/13/2005 4:57:59 PM PST by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ICE-FLYER

You are inadvertently correct that the possibility of evolution is astronomical, but I'm pretty sure you meant to say infinitesimal.


77 posted on 11/13/2005 4:59:31 PM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

"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. "


There is no proof whatsoever that man was created by God. There are plenty of myths written by men in books but when push comes to shove, there's absolutely nothing tangible to prove either the existence of a God, nor its hand in the creation of matter.


78 posted on 11/13/2005 4:59:58 PM PST by Blzbba (For a man who does not know to which port he is sailing, no wind is favorable - Seneca)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Paul Ross
Darwinian origin is in fact pure religion, and the case for Intelligent Design is based in science.

One wet iota of evidence that ID is "based in science." One single, tiny little bit of evidence that it is anything but fantasy. Any. . . Single . . . Bit . . .

79 posted on 11/13/2005 5:01:01 PM PST by LogicWings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

Belief in something that can't be proven can only be sustained based on what?

You're loathe to admit that 'evidence' is not conclusive. Therefore your theory cannot be proven. You don't like it that I use that word. I don't blame you.


80 posted on 11/13/2005 5:01:05 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 681-686 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