Posted on 10/13/2009 8:10:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
O’Reilly told Dawkins”
you insist you can’t even mention it, that is fascism, sir.
Was he right? Is it constitutional/scientific to insist that only materialistic evolution can be taught?
See: O’Reilly vs. Atheist Author Richard Dawkins...
(Excerpt) Read more at uncommondescent.com ...
Ping!
I see it as a Constitutional violation. To willfully and thoroughly exclude God is to promote atheism. Atheism is a religion and it has become the official national religion of the government.
That is exactly the way I see it. That’s why I call the evolution-only establishment the “Temple of Darwin.” Thanks for your thoughtful reply—GGG
Based on how this is worded, of course he has the Constitutional right to insist X be taught just as someone on the opposite side has the Constitutional right to insist that Y be taught. Everyone has a right to petition redresses to the government. His insistence, however, doesn't mean he gets his way, just like someone on the opposite side insisting something doesn't mean they get their way. He is just one voice and just like everyone else, he can request his view through the representative process, in this case school boards and other representative bodies that determine textbooks and curriculum.
What a laugh. If the school board approves the teaching of ID or Creation alongside evolution, in marches the communist ACLU, the NCSE, the MSM, and the rest of the evo-fascist attack machine.
The freedom of said petitioning goes both ways. If the school board says only evolution be taught, in marches the Discovery Institute etc. To have the freedom to petition or to organize petitions means freedom for the other side to do such. If your side isn’t winning, you may want to work on better arguments and/or better organizing.
Again, the freedom to petition doesn’t mean you get your way.
Dork-fight. I was rooting for BOR, but he blew it. Dawkins on points.
Evolution is NOT Fascist... but most Evolutionists, especially Richard Dawkins are!
I have a feeling the only reason why you are so nonchalant is because your fellow enemies of freedom are firmly ensconced in the educational establishment, the MSM, and educational establishment.
Enemies of Freedom, how rich, coming from someone who wants to restrict the right of petition. Of course, this follows the old model, if you can’t debate, attack.
Try to keep up...we aren’t allowed to have a debate over origins in the classroom because of jackbooted evos like you. That’s because you and your fellow jackbooted Temple of Darwin fanatics know that if the debate is allowed to happen, we win every time.
Funny, it seems to happen quite often, it is jut when it is presented to boards, often, one side looses the debate and they claim they were 'jackbooted'. If you are 'winning every time' then why are you complaining? If your argument is so strong, it should be pretty obvious what is 'right' and you shouldn't be having the issues you do. Of course, it is always someone else's fault. It isn't fault with your debate, evidence, etc.
Then what’s the problem with the creation and ID points of view being represented?
Why just one?
Why does it have to be an either/or scenario.
I’ll give creationists this over evos any day, as a whole, creationists are fine with creation AND ID AND evolution being taught in public schools, as opposed to the evos who as a whole adamantly reject that option. As a matter of fact, I don’t recall reading any creationist on this forum who insists that evolution not be taught in public schools. And yet the overwhelming majority of evos insist on it being kept out under the guise of either it not being *science* or because it’s *religious*.
I agree with GGG. You appear to be nonchalant about evolution only being taught in the schools because it’s the position you hold, as comes across so clearly from the vast majority of the evos.
Giving Dawkins credit for anything is making your credibility circle the bowl.
That's interesting, I've seen many calls here teaching of evolution should 'be banned from science as it isn't science'.
Well now....what is he so afraid of?
I will pay for his ticket to the Creation Museum...
Fascists, jackbooted evos.
No data to back up your points once again, so out comes the name calling in the first 10 posts.
Why is there so much hate in your and your groupies’ hearts against people who disagree with you?
Would any of you object to Lamarkian evolution, Hindu creation, Hopi creation or UFO seed theories being taught alongside Creation, ID and Evolution?
I already know your answers, so I will try and give you something to think about. Often what we are trying to obtain comes back to haunt us. Is there a standard that you want the schools to uphold when it comes to teaching our children. If so, what is that standard and how should it be determined?
Specifically since it is obvious that schools can’t teach everything, what should be the basis for determining whether Lamarkian evolution, creationism, evolution or UFO seed theory should be taught?
Before this time began, there was no heaven, no earth and no space between. A vast dark ocean washed upon the shores of nothingness and licked the edges of the night.
A giant cobra floated on the waters. Asleep within its endless coils lay the Lord Vishnu. He was watched over by the mighty serpent. Everything was so peaceful and silent that Vishnu slept undisturbed by dreams motion. From the depths a humming sound began to tremble, Ohm. It grew and spread, filling the emptiness and throbbing with energy.
The night had ended, Vishnu awoke. As the dawn began to break, from Vishnu’s navel grew a magnificent lotus flower. In the middle of the blossom sat Vishnu’s servant, Brahma. He awaited the Lord’s command.
Vishnu spoke to his servant: ‘It is time to begin.’ Brahma bowed. Vishnu commanded: ‘Create the World.’ A wind swept up the waters. Vishnu and the serpent vanished.
Brahma remained in the lotus flower, floating and tossing on the sea. He lifted up his arms and calmed the wind and the ocean.
Then Brahma split the lotus flower into three. He stretched one part into the heavens. He made another part into the earth. With the third part of the flower he created the skies.
The earth was bare. Brahma set to work. He created grass, flowers, trees and plants of all kinds. To these he gave feeling. Next he created the animals and the insects to live on the land. He made birds and many fish. To all these creatures, he gave the senses of touch and smell. He gave them power to see, hear and move. The world was soon bristling with life and the air was filled with the sounds of Brahma’s creation.
Is this the story of creation that you want to be taught in our schools? I think it is a much better story than the Bible version.
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.