They will offer a boatload of excuses, the editorital pages of the state will defend them, and ultimately KU will do whatever they want as taxpayers are forced to fund it. It is fine if they offend and bash religion, just as long as they never say anything positive. That's KU for you. Never send your kid there unless you want him/her to get an education in pornography along with the anti-Christian everything else.
Typical response of the Left. Dont address the real issue; instead get mad that someone called you on it.
I don't thibk we have all the facts here.
Aren't we missing a rather large point here?
The guy who sent the email mocking religion wasn't just any old liberal prof. He is . . . the chairman of the religious studies department!
This is the equivalent of appointing David Duke chairman of the African-American Studies department!
Ah, I see. So Christianity is to be above criticism.
Somebody email Senator Brownlee a copy of the First Amendment.
>"This man is a hateful man," said state Sen. Kay O'Connor, R-Olathe. "Are we supposed to be using tax dollars to promote hatred?"
"He says he's trying to offend us," Altevogt said. "The entire tenor of this thing just reeks of religious bigotry."
Huh. I thought I was reading DU there for a second, what with these being the sort of whines you get from the Left. Sad to see them coming from those supposedly on the Right.
Hey, where are all those guys who are always saying on the evolution threads that nobody in academia thinks or acts like this?
CONSERVATIVE AND PROLIFE PROFESSOR AWARDED PROFESSOR OF THE YEAR AWARD
Posted on 11/25/2005 8:42:57 AM CST by Lawrence Roberge
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: November 17, 2005 Jill Minette, CASE, 202-478-5666 Professor Lawrence Roberge, 413-547-8448
NATIONAL HONORS FOR TOP PROFESSOR IN CONNECTICUT
(Washington, DC)-The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and the Council for Advancement and Support of Education have named Lawrence F. Roberge at Goodwin College the 2005 Connecticut Professor of the Year. Professor Roberge was selected from among nearly 400 top professors in the United States.
He asks us to support and encourage the teachers and professors who are conservative..
Christian bashing? Creationism and ID are primarily Muslim, Moonie and Scientologist positions; most Christians are evolutionists.
Another cockroach complaining that someone turned on the light.
This guy has a great sense of humor.
As many of us on these threads who are 1) conservative, 2) Christian, and 3) educated have pointed out, this creationism / ID nonsense is the semantic equivalent of handing your enemy the ammunition to shoot you with. So great, now everyone can denigrate conservatives because we are associated with either ID or creationism.
Thank you so much. /sarc
Yes, evolution is the preferred dogma of lefties everywhere.
Their low level of tolerance ranks right down there with Islamofacists, with whom they share a hostility to both God and America.
Devotees of scientism have always sought to rule out challenges to their faith in strictly materialist metaphysics.
Sometimes their monopolistic claims are not vindicated, and they throw a hissy fit, like this KU professor. They insist on the right to use Other People's Money to promote their faith, masquerading as science, and to filter out all competing views, or evidence that fails to butress their claims.
A useful example of how to combat such pretensions is provided by the following rhetoric-laden retreat from a statement that was too blatantly scientistic, as opposed to scientific, to stand up to serious scrutiny:
NABT Statement on Evolution Evolves
by Eugenie C. Scott
In 1995 the National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT) issued a "Statement on the Teaching of Evolution" which was reprinted in Reports of NCSE (17(1):31-32). In a list of "tenets of science, evolution and biology education," the first item read:
The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments.
After the statement was published, anti-evolutionists criticized the use of the terms "unsupervised" and "impersonal." UC Berkeley lawyer Phillip Johnson (author of Darwin on Trial) and other anti-evolutionists have claimed that the NABT statement is "proof" that evolution is inherently an ideological system, rather than simply a well-supported scientific explanation. Criticisms of the statement have appeared in newspaper letters to the editor, in newsletters and other publications. It appears that when most Americans other than scientists hear evolution described in blanket fashion as "unsupervised", they hear, "God had nothing to do with it" -- a statement which is outside of what science can tell us.
In September of 1997, two distinguished scholars, Alvin Plantinga, John A. O'Brien Professor of Philosophy at Notre Dame University, and Huston Smith, Thomas J. Watson Professor of Religion at Syracuse University, wrote to NABT Executive Director Wayne W. Carley, suggesting that the words "impersonal" and "unsupervised" were inappropriate because, "Science presumably doesn't address such theological questions, and isn't equipped to deal with them. How could an empirical inquiry possibly show that God was not guiding and directing evolution?"
The inclusion of those two words, Smith and Plantinga said, "...gives aid and comfort to extremists in the religious right for whom it provides a legitimate target. And, because of its logical vulnerability, it lowers Americans' respect for scientists and their place in our culture. If the words 'impersonal' and 'unsupervised' were dropped from your opening sentence [sic] it would help defuse tensions which, as things stand, are causing unnecessary problems in our collective life."
The NABT annual meeting was held in Minneapolis October 8-11, and the letter and its request were considered by the Board of Directors on Wednesday, October 8. The Board initially voted to retain the extant wording, focusing on Plantinga's and Smith's comment that the statement "contradicts the beliefs of the majority of the American people, 90% of whom (according to opinion polls) believe that a personal agent -- God -- supervised in some way our arrival on this planet." Board members considered the comment irrelevant because scientific definitions are independent of the percentages of individuals holding opinions on religion. Carley's October 8 statement to the press underscored this view.
Reflecting upon that decision, Executive Director Carley commented, "We were at the end of a 9 hour meeting, we were tired, and we didn't give the subject enough time." During the next few days of the meeting, however, Board members consulted with other NABT members, and reconsidered the underlying message of the Plantinga-Smith letter. The letter exemplified how describing evolution as "impersonal" and "unsupervised" was being interpreted by individuals outside of science as anti-religious and unscientific.
NABT Board members realized that they had a communication problem on their hands: they had not intended the statement on evolution to include theological positions! President-elect Dr. Richard Storey, one of the drafters of the statement, and other members of the Board called for a reconsideration of the decision, and the Board met on Saturday, October 11, the last day of the conference. After a more extensive discussion than had been possible on Wednesday, the Board considered that:
1) The extant wording which included "unsupervised" and "impersonal" apparently was miscommunicating both the nature of science and NABT's intent;
2) The deletion of those two words would not affect the statement's accurate characterization of evolution, and affirmation of evolution's importance in science education.
Evolution is still described as a "natural process" (the only phenomena science can study), and a later bullet states that natural selection "has no specific direction or goal, including survival of a species." The strong position of evolution in biology and other sciences was not compromised by removing two adjectives that miscommunicated NABT's meaning.
As the leading association of biology teachers in the United States, the NABT speaks with authority on issues affecting science teachers. Joseph McInerney, a former NABT president and a drafter of the Statement has said, "...teachers are at the front, dealing with direct challenges to their teaching from real students and real parents who have immediate questions and immediate demands." One such question is, "Are you a Christian, or do you believe in evolution?" (Reports of NCSE, 17(1):30.) Plantinga's and Smith's letter underscored a very real problem: many people perceive that they have to make a choice between their religious beliefs and evolution. As a science education organization, the NABT needs to avoid giving the impression that they are taking sides in theological issues -- an impression given by the original text of their statement.
As McInerney pointed out, one of the goals of the NABT's statement on evolution was to "provide support for biology teachers when they are confronted with challenges to the teaching of evolution." By eliminating two nonessential words, the NABT Board of Directors made a statesmanlike decision that better fulfilled this goal by reducing a potential source of conflict in the classroom.
May 21, 1998
Typical Leftist bullcrap. As seen here, the idiot in question (Mirecki) doesn't deny his wrongdoing. Instead, he just makes up a bogus "bigger wrong" done to him so he (the aggressor) can claim to be the victim in all this!
It is confirmed. Leftists have no shame because they have no soul.
"Tim Miller, a fellow professor in the department of religious studies, said intelligent design proponents are showing that they don't like having their beliefs scrutinized."
I think the proper word would be "ridiculed", not "scrutinized".
It's a good thing he isn't the English professor.
Another article on the same subject here as well:
BTW- A few thoughts about Creationsim being unsound. Is there any evidence for evolution? There aren't any evidences of inter-species change. All we have are tiny speciations and mutations that may or may not change a species. There should be tons of fossil evidence. There isn't.
BTW2- Myth actually is evidence for Intelligent Design and a flood. Every racial and religious group has had a creation myth and flood one. Usually myths are based in fact and since it occured so much throughout the Earth it probably is based in fact.
BTW3( the last)- def. of science. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena. According to this Creationism/intelligent design is science.