Creationism argument ended in death

The Australian ^ | 12 14 07 | not available

[Sherman Logan]

A FRUIT picking trip to NSW ended in the death of a Scottish backpacker over a row about creationism and evolution. English backpacker Alexander Christian York, 33, was today sentenced to a maximum of five years jail for the manslaughter of Scotsman Rudi Boa in January last year. Mr Boa, 28, died on January 27 after being stabbed by York at the Blowering Holiday Park, near Tumut. ... The Scottish couple and York, neighbours at the caravan park, were becoming friends and spent the night of January 27 drinking at the Star Hotel in Tumut. However, towards the end of the night, an argument between York and the pair about creationism versus evolution escalated into a shouting match at the pub. The couple, both biomedical scientists, had been arguing the case of evolution, while York had taken a more biblical view of history. ...Although the altercation had been defused by the time the Scottish tourists left the hotel, it became inflamed again at the caravan park when all three were quite drunk. According to Ms Brown, York was making dinner when he attacked the couple outside his tent, stabbing Mr Boa with a kitchen knife as the argument escalated. ...Justice Adams said he had given York a sentence at the lower end of the scale, partly because of the accidental nature of the stabbing. “I do not believe that he took aim but rather thrust out,” Justice Adams said. “I think he knew that the knife was in his hand ... but he did not actually turn his mind to the potentially serious consequences of doing this. “The offender is a person of good character and the offence is a complete aberration.” York, unshaven and dressed in prison greens, sat impassively as Justice Adams read out the sentence....

[Mad Dawg]

Okay, I'm just trying to understnad here ...

If a Darwinian wants to propagate his genes he shouldn't argue with drunk creationists? Drunk creationists are better adapted than drunk Darwinians? Wow, Is biology complicated or what?

[ReignOfError]

I think the one-sentence paragraphs occur when articles are put online.

It depends on the copy-paste method. FR's HTML auto-detect is very handy for a quick note. But if you introduce single tag, the system treats the whole post as HTML. So if you tap return twice to separate paragraphs, that will be ignored.

For example, I have a paragraph tag at the beginning of each paragraph in this post. I have to, because I italicized the quote above. If the post had any kind of stray <X> in it, that could muck up the whole deal.

[ReignOfError]

Complain, complain, complain ... at least they put spaces in between the words. They even have periods at the end of sentences.

But their periods spin counter-clockwise.

[TexGuy]

But I’ll settle for the cohesive version if that’s all that’s available.

Good! *snicker*

[Tax-chick]

Since Noah was the first recorded drunk, I think drunk Creationists probably have an edge in the gene-propagation contest ...

[Tax-chick]

If the post had any kind of stray in it, that could muck up the whole deal.

Yes, that happens to me, too! However, the article at the source link is formatted with each sentence as a new paragraph. This seems pretty common, and I assume it has to do with the way that website is set up.

[PAR35]

I simply implied that he was missing the teachings of Jesus.

Like this one?

Luke 22:36 He said to them, "But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.

[Luke Skyfreeper]

Somebody keep the knives away from the Freeper creationists!

I'm not at all a "creationist," but to be fair that statement should be amended to say:

Somebody keep the knives away from any Freeper creationists who happen to be roaring drunk.

[brytlea]

I guess I missed th rest of that one, it must say, “and stab those who disagree with your interpretation of scripture...”
;)

susie

[Sherman Logan]

Fair enough.

[drjimmy]

That is the Judge speaking. Since he has no ax to grind in this case and saw all of the evidence I would tend to go along with his decision.

So any decision made by a judge is, by your definition, a good one?

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

Not very good action by a Creationist--neither murder nor drunkeness are laudable Christian behavior.

Suspect that the Macroevolutionists were more than a trifle insulting, however they shouldn't have been murdered.

Maybe it was a little Anglo-Scottish bad blood in the rough-and-tumble land of Oz?

[Michael.SF.]

That is a huge leap and one not supported by my comments. Get real.

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

The murderer was a drunk Englishman. The murderer and victims were Britons (the victims being Scottish).

When started reading, sort of had a similar idea to yours: wow. Australians are tough. Turns out they were Europeans.

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

More than accounts given by the defendant or the mainstream media.

Relativity.

[P8riot]

Sorry. I read too much into it. Please accept my apologies.

[Verginius Rufus]

I wonder how much time the judge would have given someone who killed someone in a vehicular accident while driving drunk? The English backpacker’s offense seems to be roughly equivalent. The main difference is that drunk drivers don’t know what their victims’ views on evolution might be.

[P8riot]

Jesus was just putting “doormat theology” to bed with that one.

[PAR35]

They weren’t planning to use the swords to trim their beards.

[drjimmy]

That is a huge leap and one not supported by my comments.

Well, then, let's look at your comments in their entirety.

"That is the Judge speaking." So because a judge says it, it must be valid.

"Since he has no ax to grind in this case and saw all of the evidence I would tend to go along with his decision." Since it is unlikely that you know this judge personally or were in the courtroom during the case, you have decided solely because he is a judge that he has no ax to grind, that he saw all the evidence in the case, and that his decision is valid.

Res ipsa loquitur.