Posted on 12/20/2005 8:16:05 AM PST by GSlob
Sadly, you are wrong. The judge's description of ID is wrong, and his bias against any threat to Darwinism is mis-guided. I am not going to revisit the long debates about whether ID is religion or science. It is pointless. Suffice to say, this is not the last that you will hear of ID.
We'll see. Now Judge Jones has created a [nonbinding] precedent, which other, more lazy, judges would be only too happy to use as a point of reference. I hope not to hear of ID for a blissfully long time.
"Interestingly, our founding fathers (who I presume were way smarter than I) did not seem to have a problem with God in the public square."
They did actually. Madison (the guy who basically wrote the constitution), while a devout Christian, was so against God in the public square that he tried to block Congress from getting a chaplain. I don't know about you, but I certainly don't want the government to get involved in instilling faith in my children. I couldn't control what type of religion they were teaching, and, being the government, they would probably screw it up anyway!
Unlike you I don't think that the mere mention of religion instills faith into children. I hope your kids faith is not that fragile. If it is, lock them up because there are far greater dangers than the government (or government schools) mentioning religion or saying a prayer.
susie
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.