Posted on 02/26/2009 8:22:42 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Motive Mongering: Does It Belong in Science?
Feb 26, 2009 — Amanda Gefter, a book reviewer and science editor, felt the need to warn the world about the creationists. She wrote a blog entry at New Scientist called “How to spot a hidden religious agenda.”
In addition, Gefter listed concepts and emphases that she felt betray a hidden agenda: an emphasis on complex molecular machines, the reference to quantum physics in support of free will, and calls for “academic freedom” (which she says can be translated as “the acceptance of creationism”). Lastly, she disclaimed any connection between the truth of a scientific theory (like evolution) with its social consequences (like the Holocaust), as explored in the movie Expelled.
Bottom line: “It is crucial to the public’s intellectual health to know when science really is science. Those with a religious agenda will continue to disguise their true views in their effort to win supporters, so please read between the lines.”...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
That's like global warming where tree hugging socialist Luddite scum vermin hide their agenda with dubious theory.
She didn’t include a “How to Spot an Atheist Agenda” chapter.
I wonder why that is.
Wow. That is some kind of major leap. A child rapist/killer is not an atheist, he is a psychopath. Huge difference.
I shudder to think what horrible crimes you think agnostics such as myself have committed.
As long as you doubt for the sake of doubt, and not to deny the judge, which is really just a very primitive human emotion, then you’re A-OK with me.
Athiests who are atheists simply to deny the judge or claim no wrongdoing, those fools really need to evolve.
Where did I say anything about sex? Morality goes far beyond that. It is telling though that you think morality necessarily means sexual morality.
Heck, for an Athiest, making society “work better” could mean complete sexual carte blanche, as in San Francisco. Morality to Athiests is completely arbitrary so they can have anything their little hearts desire.
I can't access the article from here. Does it state that she is an atheist?
Just FYI for those who are interested.
Actually, Professor Leonide, you don't need to spend much time scrutinizing the professoriate at prestigious universities. They're not exactly notorious for child rape and murder. You're much more likely to find your culprits amongst protestant and catholic clergy.
I don't worry nearly as much about what you may have committed, but what you might not object to, under the guise of science.
You wish.
Where did I say anything about sex? Morality goes far beyond that. It is telling though that you think morality necessarily means sexual morality.
______
Where did I suggest that you did? It is telling that you seem unable to read for comprehension.
Right here.
Now you’re telling me that it’s not about sex, but about control (making society work better)
It doesn't, but I will bet dollars to doughnuts she is. However, mostly I brought in "Athiest" to get the moral discussion going.
As I said previously, you are quite comprehension challenged.
I guess this sentence “I’ve read on this forum, time and time again, that atheism, in denying absolute truth, made it OK for us to have as much sex as we wanted.”
Do you get the reference to others now?
About you, I said “Now you’re telling me that it’s not about sex, but about control”
So, as you can see, I mentioned specifically that you did NOT say it was about sex, but about control.
I find it amazing that I have to spell it out for you in such gruesome detail.
LOL! You answered my post specifically but somehow I became the "forum." I never mentioned sex in my post, you did, you raised the subject and attached it to morality. It is very telling that you are so defensive and so far off base on this one, stretching things far beyond what is reasonable to try and absolve your faux pas. However, you are entertaining.
I wish? It’s a sad fact, that’s all. And if you are going to contend that university biology professors as a class have any kind of comparable record, I’d like to see lists and analyses similar to those I linked.
I gotcha.
You were confused because you thought I was attributing comments to you, when in actuality I was comparing your comments to comments made by others.
You only became the forum in your own mind.
Not the stuff of honest debate, IMHO.
That would be trivially true, due to the fact that there are not very many children who attend prestigious universities. Criminals tend to gravitate to where their potential victims are. So I wonder what the per capita ratio would be of, say, government screwl teacher sex crimes to clergy sex crimes.
Cordially,
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.