God, Science [evolution], and the Kooky Kansans Who Love them Both

Lawrence.com ^ | 12/05/2005 | Sarah Smarsh

[curiosity]

There may be hope for Kansas yet!

[curiosity]

Faith and Science Ping.

[curiosity]

You may find this interesting.

[Coyoteman]

For tomorrow when I'm awake ===> Placemarker <===

[Firefigher NC]

“We can deal with contradictions,” Evans says. “We can go to church and then go to science class.”

Interesting article. But I don't think believing in God and studying science are contradictory from one another.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

There is absolutely no way to recocile Genesis- and by extension the Christian God- with the patently ridiculous theory of evolution, no matter anyone's wishful thinking.

[i.l.e.]

Let's see - John Brown started the civil war in Eastern Kansas and exported it to Harpers Ferry, Brown VS the Board of Education was started by a KC.KC attorney whose housekeeper's family was in Topeka public schools, and now we have academicians vs the public right to religion. Looks like Kansas is as big as you think (their crummy motto)

[i.l.e.]

Mirecki staged a country road fight between himself and two other thugs. He faked his own beating and was asked to leave his head of dept position by the other dept members. Mirecki is a media hound trouble maker, the advisor for the KU atheists and said that the best qualified teachers in the religion dept were secular humanists due to their objectivity.

Didn't the Nazis embrace paganism and Wagnerian romanticism and anti-Christian theology in their drive to creat the uber man? And weren't a bunch of top Nazis butch gays who even persecuted their more effeminate brethren?

Universities are breeding grounds for radial secular humanism - an anti christian theology protected by the state and therefore is our new state religion. Mirecki is a symptom of the greater problem.

[OkieDoke]

"absolutely no way" "patently ridiculous theory of evolution"?

Richard Rubenstein, professor of conflict resolution and public affairs at George Mason University, and author of `When Jesus Became God' (a Publishers Weekly Best Religion book) Harvard graduate, Oxford University, Rhodes scholar and Harvard law school--and thousands of other learned people--might question your imperative, categorical statement on an ontological, teleological or cosmological basis, as you wish.
From his latest book, "Aristotle's Children, Harcourt Inc., 2003, page 298:
"Reason could transform the earth, if only science and technology were inspired and guided by a new global morality. Faith would expand and mature, if only the world's religions addressed themselves to the long-term trends in society and nature, and helped create that global majority. And--since the split between faith and reason divides each of us against himself--we could become more loving and useful to each other and more satisfied with ourselves, if only we could integrate these fundamental aspects of our being."
I suppose as sentient beings with an understanding of right and wrong, we will still probably continue trading shots like: 'Intelligent Design' is a pseudo-science for crackpots, or that evolution--as far as it goes, hard science--is "wishful thinking", instead of attempting to advance cogently to our Maker our claim to return to the garden and eat from that other tree, the Tree of Life.
FRaternally, OK

[perfect stranger]

Could it be, then, that Mirecki was right?

One is that Mirecki has a personalized license plate that reads "MIRECKI" or the "EVILDRP," his online nom de guerre

Searching google for EVILDRP does not help his case at all.

[curiosity]

Interesting article. But I don't think believing in God and studying science are contradictory from one another.

I agree with you. The sentence you quoted I found objectionable. But the rest was pretty good, I think.

[Mercat]

ping to read later

[Mamzelle]

Finding #4--the left has found a possible way to chip away at the successful alliance between the GOP and religious conservatives.

Build on the resentment that libertarians (cultural liberals) feel when they realize they have to share a table with unfamiliars like conservative Christians--throw around the "theocrat" libel and "know nothing" ( appeal to intellectual snobbery/vanity). There's nothing that scares an "educated" libertarian more than being thought stupid or unsophisticated.

Try to make Republican pols disavow, shun or otherwise betray religious conservatives (make Santorum a target?) so that a few religious conservatives stay home instead of vote.

All it takes is a few, after all.

There you go--Democratic majority in the Senate. And all they had to do was call a few Christians a few bad names.

I'd be willing to bet that George Soros might even front a little money for such a project.

[Baraonda]

Merry Christmas

[Right Wing Professor]

Thanks for the ping. It's a remarkably intelligent article.

I have a feeling that after this week, Kansas will draw back from the abyss. They're a little loonier than Nebraskans down there, but violence, or even just allegations of violence, over a college course is something that will make them think seriously. I haven't posted this here, but some Kansas Republicans just formed a group to take the party back from the fundamentalist fringe. About time.

[metmom]

Mirecki is a media hound trouble maker, the advisor for the KU atheists and said that the best qualified teachers in the religion dept were secular humanists due to their objectivity.

But they're not really objective because they have their own belief system and it colors their attitudes. I sure hope they are not *objective* in the same way that Mirecki is, or perhaps I should say that I hope he's not an example of *objectivity* among academia.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[curiosity]

Build on the resentment that libertarians (cultural liberals) feel when they realize they have to share a table with unfamiliars like conservative Christians

Not all conservative Christians are creationists. Worldwide, most are smart enough to realize that there is no necessary conflict between Darwinian evolution and the Fatih. It's only in America where they've been hoodwinked into believing that their faith compels them to reject reason.

And you don't have to be a libertarian to value sound science. I'd venture to say many, if not most pro-evolution freepers would reject the libertarian label.

[JSDude1]

I saw this with the greatest respect, and a little trepedation because most Christians that believe in evolution are ~SINCERE~ Christians, but they are ~wrong~ where they're theology is concerned (and therefore wrong on the truth of what is 6-day-literal-creation-by-miracle-by-God!

Evolution (macro-evolution) Naturalistic, can not be Compatable with The Bible becuase if YOU as a 'Christian' believe in the Bible (and in Genesis) wherein God claims that He ~created~ the world in 6-Literal days (YES THAT WOULD BE A MIRACLE/ or Demonstration of God's POWER), then HOW CAN YOU THEN CLAIM THAT YOU DO NOT BELIEVE WHAT GOD SAYS IN GENESIS (And deny his power to do miracles in Genesis-Origins), and then claim that Later Miracles by God happened (Did God change, did His POWER?...). How can you claim that YOU know that Christ miraculously ROSE from the Grave, but not that GOD WAS TELLING THE TRUTH IN GENESIS (..and by Hebrew Language, the cleares/plainest reading of GENESIS says that God Created-The-World In 6 Literal Days..)?

ANSWER me? Will YOU be consistent? DID HE DO IT OR NOT!?

[dr_lew]

Genesis says that God commanded the earth to bring forth grass, "And the earth brought forth grass." How can this be reconciled with Intelligent Design? This seems to be a clear statement of abiogenesis.