Skip to comments.State science standards in election spotlight (ID/Creation Kansans need to vote!)
Posted on 08/18/2008 9:35:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
With five seats on the State Board of Education up for grabs this year, education advocates say how children learn about evolution hangs in the balance -- and who voters choose could affect Kansas' national reputation.
A frequent flip-flop between moderate and conservative majorities on the 10-member board has resulted in the state changing its science standards four times in the past eight years.
Conservatives have pushed for standards casting doubt on evolution, and moderates have said intelligent design does not belong in the science classroom.
In 2007, a new 6-4 moderate majority removed standards that called evolution into question.
This year, none of the three moderates whose seats are up for election are running again. Only one of the two conservative incumbents is running for re-election...
(Excerpt) Read more at kansas.com ...
Interesting...so if you don’t care to know, how is it then that you are so insecure as to DISallow people to discuss their viewpoints that DO want to know?
I know all I need to know about people that insist others “keep their views to themselves”, “behind closed doors”, “in church” where “it belongs”, “out of science class”, “because that’s not science”...ad nauseum.
in far too many cases, it’s the kind of insecure godless liberal marxist fascism that simply has no place in this country.
The quoted amendment he proposed seems to be precisely what the 1st is presently interpreted to mean.
I don't think George Mason supports your view of the 1st, but instead supported the view of Madison and Jefferson.
==I don’t think George Mason supports your view of the 1st, but instead supported the view of Madison and Jefferson.
It doesn’t matter who he agreed with. It has nothing to do with the Bill of Rights or the First Amendment.
Just out of curiosity, how would you have a biology teacher answer that question? How many other theological questions would you train teachers to handle? And then how would you handle the inevitable controversy when the answer conflicts with this or that theology?
What would a lesson plan look like that expresses exploration of origins that are structured, purposeful, ordered...?
Intelligent being supernatural in nature, as we’re capable of understanding such a concept...
Otherwise I suppose it depends on alot of things, the age group, their grade level, comprehension level, interest, exposure and so on.
So the opinion of the guy who wrote the First Amendment doesn’t matter to you. (James Madison)
The opinion of the guy who insisted a Bill of Rights be included doesn’t matter to you. (Thomas Jefferson)
And now the opinion of the guy wrote what Madison based his own writings on doesn’t matter to you. (George Mason)
Do you claim to respect the Conservative Constitutional principle of original intent?
Keep going. Louisiana has stripped away all you complaints and excuses and has authorized teaching scientific alternatives to evolution. My question to you, for the umptheenth time is, now that you have the law on your side, what is it you teach? What is your lesson plan?
That's precisely what I am claiming. And let me reiterate that neither the opinions of you, me, Mason, Madison, Jefferson, Washington, or any other person commenting on Virginia law matter one wit when it comes to the Bill of Rights/First Amendment.
Let me make this easy for you, Allmendream. According to the ORIGINAL INTENT of the founders, the Bill of Rights was never, ever supposed to apply to the states. They were supposed to ONLY APPLY TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Do you get it now? The federal courts have no business telling the states what they can and can’t do with respect to the teaching of creation, evolution, state support of churches, or anything else.
How can you claim to respect original intent and then ignore the obvious intent of the writer of the Amendment, the intent of the writer of the Virginia law the Amendment was based upon, and the intent of the founder who insisted that there BE a Bill of Rights?
And you still have not answered my questions about God and dice, after claiming I never asked it in the first place. I have now asked it of you twice. Why no answer?
You also cannot tell me how you propose that epigenetic mechanisms can derive genetic variation rather than phenotypic variation. It seems your source confirmed that genetic variation is due to mutation and that epigenetics changes phenotype. Can you address this discrepancy between what you claim and what your source said?
I guess it's "The First Amendment for me, but not for thee."
...that is, the federal government can’t do anything else other than what the delegated powers of the Constitution grant them.
Amendment 14: excerpt from Section 1. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
==How about their opinion on the 1st Amendment, which is BASED upon the Virginia law?
See previous reply.
==How is discounting their voluminous writings on the principle of Church and State respecting their original intent?
See previous reply. Etc, etc, etc.
==And you still have not answered my questions about God and dice, after claiming I never asked it in the first place. I have now asked it of you twice. Why no answer?
Dice can be both God’s will and random to our frame of reference in the same way God can know the beginning from the end and yet at the same time grant us free will.
==You also cannot tell me how you propose that epigenetic mechanisms can derive genetic variation rather than phenotypic variation. It seems your source confirmed that genetic variation is due to mutation and that epigenetics changes phenotype. Can you address this discrepancy between what you claim and what your source said?
==It seems your source confirmed that genetic variation is due to mutation and that epigenetics changes phenotype.
Do you concede that the Darwinists are now admitting that they were wrong about random mutation producing phenotype changes?
==You also cannot tell me how you propose that epigenetic mechanisms can derive genetic variation rather than phenotypic variation...Can you address this discrepancy between what you claim and what your source said?
How about the following:
“It is hypothesized that the generation of mutations in the error-prone replications of the epigenetically reprogrammed cells is not random. The mutations match epigenetic alterations in the cellular genome, namely gain of function mutations in the case of hypomethylation and loss of functions in the case of hypermethylation. In addition, continuing proliferation of the cells imposed by signaling in SSE speeds up the natural selection of the mutant cells favoring the survival of the cells with mutations that are beneficial in the environment. In this way, a stress-induced replication of the cells epigenetically reprograms their genome for quick adaptation to stressful environments providing an increased rate of mutations, epigenetic tags to beneficial mutations and quick selection process. In combination, these processes drive the origin of the transformed mammalian cells, cancer development and progression. Support from genomic, biochemical and medical studies for the proposed hypothesis, and its implementations are discussed.”
==Maybe that is why the 14th Amendment was ratified according to our founders vision of an amendable Constitution.
I thought we were talking about the original intent of the Bill of Rights? So now you want to talk about the 14th Amendment. Ok, but before we move on TO THE NEXT TOPIC, do you concede that the original intent of the founders was that the Bill of Rights was to apply solely to the federal government and not to the states?
I’m no big fan of political correctness.
And alot of little “problems” like these correct themselves.
When I was a kid, that was a funny question...the kids and most of the time even the teacher got a chuckle out of a question like that. Which in and of itself is important in breaking up the boredom and having some fun while learning.
At the same time, if mosquitos carry disease, and seem to offer absolutely no redeeming value to anything or anyone, to a child it’s a valid and wondrous question.
We of course understand how important mosquitos are in carrying disease, or even providing food to birds, frogs, fish...and so on and so on.
Back to when I was a kid...that was all there was to it.
That was that special time when people spoke freely of God, realizing he was in the background while we learned science and everything else. Our teachers, parents and all adults around us believed this and those few that didn’t, we were unaware of. But I’m sure they were there. And they weren’t threatened in any way.
Conversely, we were there to learn about science and that’s what we did. While we made little references from time to time in (every) class about God, we didn’t so much get into long discussions about what God does, why He did this or didn’t do that, I’m sure we did, but it was very infrequent as if some appreciable time in each class was spent on injecting religion, it just didn’t happen.
IF the teacher was aggravated, it was because the child was merely being disruptive and it MOST CERTAINLY had nothing whatsoever to do with religion being infused into science class, when someone made a reference to God!
Today...as the liberals have demanded we slowly lose our identity and this religious freedom, become one with the world and embrace multiculturalism and slowly destroy this country, we’re more likely to hear this question posed as a reference to Allah, or Buddha but that too wouldn’t bother me in the very least.
Teachers weren’t fixated on the PC NEA manifesto
back then, and shockingly enough, schools, while not without their problems, were not on the road to disaster, or broken beyond repair either.
In short, we weren’t socialized, we were taught.
It’s something we need desperately to get back to.
Here in Georgia it’s still somewhat like that, but in other areas, one sees the PC idiocy come to fruition. Ramming the homsexual agenda down throats, and myriads of horror stories to the point people home school or move.
Here we’re mostly conservative, mostly Christian, but it’s VASTLY different than when I was a kid. Now there’s an air of fear, a closeness between the adults and kids that broken by confusion, not just because of the God isn’t welcome issue but like I said because of the PC socialism.
I used to think we were more insulated from the madness fom a good part of the rest of the country. Georgia is trending red state more than ever, electing the first Republican governor since the civil war and so on.
And alot of people here simply would not tolerate someone DEMANDING the kids not sing Christmas carols or putting up a Christmas Tree like you see in NYC and other areas.
But a couple of things gave me a serious wake up call...the Georgia ACLU threatening the school board here with legal action if the word Christmas weren’t removed from the school calendar, a FEDERAL HOLIDAY. And they folded like a tent.
No parental involvement. No notifications. Just allow the Anti-Christian nazis to bully them around, illegally at that!
The other thing was my daughter had a shirt on that wasn’t quite the right shade of blue...navy or light blue but not royal blue polo shirts are allowed...so they made her change into a t shirt with the school logo which is the only other shirt allowed for a school function.
Seems they ran out of the logo t-shirts that day, so they made her wear a plain navy blue t-shirt. So I pointed out they forced her to change one out of reg. shirt for another out of reg. shirt.
To what end?
Come to find out, royal blue was authorized in the first place!
When I was a kid this incompetence not only wasn’t tolerated, but teachers weren’t protected by unions like this either!
But that’s how it is.
At any and all costs the vision is to ensure that God doesn’t infect science, meanwhile we’re all just to ignore the global warming cult of junk science.
I’m not buying.
You people angry with God better get a grip! Science is being eroded behind your back while you’re fixated on your God-hate!
You know who you are!
Kids can’t play dodgeball, or keep score cause like Al Franken everyone’s a winner!
There are several problems with schools and science class and God isn’t on the list.
But confusing kids and creating an inherent animosity between normal Christian children and the godless liberal NEA/ACLU agenda, there’s little wonder schools are broken.
As I pointed out, godless liberal socialism is failed policy!
One need only see how objective they are and these results by looking at:
Add reading comprehension to your looooong list of homework tonight.
But to be perfectly honest, until you get some assistance with your hate-God issues, it’ll be as useful to you as this waste of time on you has been for me.
C.S. Lewis was once asked if animals go to heaven—to include mosquitos. He said he didn’t know if animals have an afterlife, but he suggested a hell for humans could be very easily combined with a heaven for mosquitos :o)
One of the epigenetic responses to stress is to turn on genes that will increase mutations and turn off genes that repair mutations. It itself is not changing the genetics, only the way in which the genetic program is being expressed. In this case the epigenetic program is maximizing the chance of error prone replication to come across a solution to the stress, much the way error prone PCR is used in directed evolution to derive novel proteins with beneficial properties.
Once again Epigenetics can control phenotype (it is most certainly not the only determinant of phenotype)but it does not change the actual gene being expressed; that is accomplished by an increased mutation rate.
“a stress-induced replication of the cells epigenetically reprograms their genome for quick adaptation to stressful environments providing an increased rate of mutations, epigenetic tags to beneficial mutations and quick selection process.
Now if mutations were not essential to the ability of living systems to adapt to stress, why would the epigenetic program increase mutation rates and downregulate repair when the cell was under stress?
FUNNY....with my wife, it’s spiders.
There’s no explaining to her that they control alot of insects either, but ya can’t blame her being bitten by brown recluses TWICE.
Sorry, but I somehow missed you post where you provided a scientific alternative to evolution. It's a shame if you don't have one, because most of this thread has been taken up with bitching and moaning about not being able to teach alternatives. And here you have an entire state that has guaranteed the right of teachers and school boards to teach scientific alternatives to evolution.
“Dice can be both Gods will and random to our frame of reference in the same way God can know the beginning from the end and yet at the same time grant us free will.”GGG
So why do you seem to assume that “random” is synonymous with “God has no control over the process”?
Many things that affect our lives and our salvation may seem indistinguishable from randomness but I don’t for a second assume that means they are out of God’s power to control or predict.
Why should evolution be any different from the thousands of other factors that have a random component that affect our lives from the very moment of our creation as a random shuffle of our grandparents DNA to the effect of a random mutation to a gene in a brain cell that gives someone brain cancer and kills them? God is still in control, even if the process is demonstrably random.
Obviously there is no lesson plan.
Creationism ===> Creation "science" ===> Intelligent design ===> Critical thinking, teach the controversy, its only a theory, etc. ad nauseam...
Its all a dodge to get fundamentalist Christianity taught in the schools as first, an alternative to, and then a replacement for, the theory of evolution and most of the other sciences with which creationists disagree.
In other words, they really want creationism taught either as science or in place of science.
The lack of a lesson plan, or even a sketchy curriculum, is telling.
What do you want to bet if any teachers actually try to teach the "scientific alternatives to evolution" it will be the same anti-evolution and anti-science nonsense we see on Answers in Genesis and this website; nonsense which was been considered and discarded by science generations or centuries ago.
Creationism is specifically ruled out by the law (which was written by the Discovery Institute).
But it interesting after thousands and thousands of posts to this and similar threads, and after being given a chance by a state government, no one has come forward with a list of things to teach.
But it interesting after thousands and thousands of posts to this and similar threads, and after being given a chance by a state government, no one has come forward with a list of things to teach.
Well, they're certainly not passing these silly laws to teach better science!
For such a definitive answer, I take it that you must be adept in the sciences, perhaps a geologist.
That being the case, how is it that the Great Flood would have caused rocks and strata that are just 5700 years old, look as if they were hundreds of millions or many billions years old?
==One of the epigenetic responses to stress is to turn on genes that will increase mutations and turn off genes that repair mutations.
Is the turning on of the genes random, or by design? Are the increased mutations intiated by random, or by design? Is the turning off genes random, or by design?
==In this case the epigenetic program is maximizing the chance of error prone replication to come across a solution to the stress, much the way error prone PCR is used in directed evolution to derive novel proteins with beneficial properties.
Would you say that they are both directed, or just PCR?
==Now if mutations were not essential to the ability of living systems to adapt to stress, why would the epigenetic program increase mutation rates and downregulate repair when the cell was under stress?
Maybe it tries to adapt by matching its code to the feedback of the new environment. Maybe it knows what it’s looking for once it has found it, and thus must downregulate repair so this strategy does not defeat itself. Who knows. Epigenetics is still a new field. All I’m trying to point out to you is that the more they find out, the less random adaptation becomes.
PS...Just as Creation/ID predicts.
==God is still in control, even if the process is demonstrably random.
Granted. But if we extend your analogy, then it is random mutation that is the illusion, not intelligent design.
I’m just shocked...all this moaning and groaning about keeping God out of science class and you still somehow missed what it is EXACTLY that you’re endlessly fretting over and complaining about?
Sheesh, maybe you’re getting all riled up over nothing all this time!?
Maybe it’s nothing more than a few paragraphs in a book in chapter one, and you mean to tell me all this time you were worried to death there’d be music and crying and kids crawling on their knees...and finding God in science class ???
What a real kick in the head THAT would be, ‘eh?
BTW, as I’ve said all along, keep evolution, just allow students to understand that there is another theory that better explains to some folks our origins and it’s called “intelligent design” that explains some of the gaping holes in evolution theory.
I don’t know if I’d tweak it any per se, or rename it (yet again) which IMO was a mistake because even though it is the nature of Christians to bend over backwards to accomodate those that disagree with them, more people now understand that there simply IS no negotiating with fascists...
but a theory that supposes there indeed IS ‘intelligence’ as well as purposeful ‘design’ in ‘creation’, call it creationism, ID I don’t really care what it’s called, and you could have a big bang event just as the godless do I suppose...it’s all conjecture and therefore indeed theory after all.
and there IS order, and purpose, and design and not so much randomness, (although there could be some) and all we know was NOT NECESSARILY as evolution theory/Darwinism proposes.
If you’re searching for details, I don’t know how important that is in the lower grades, but can be introduced just like concepts are for any subject as you progress through the grades.
I’m not a teacher of theories of origin science to young children, I teach scientific principles to adults in nursing and use nursing care plans to teach, so if you seriously thought I was going to come up with some elaborate pages long ID theory, then you really SHOULD be sorry...
I’m sure competent Christian grade school science teachers will come up with something you can dwell on soon enough though!
You’d think that someone who puts all his eggs in the one basket of evolution would have SOME concept of patience!
but there IS that nagging aspect of godless socialism and petulant god-hate thing going on with you though, so...
We don’t need an alternative theory to put in place of Darwin’s fairytale. For instance, if Darwin were to come up with a theory claiming that all computer keystrokes are random, it would not be necessary to come up with an alternative theory to prove him wrong. All I would have to do is falsify that all keystrokes are random.
Phillip Johnson, founder of the Discovery Institure, says there is no theory of Intelligent Design. Nor any research. Nor any proposals for research.
Which is why I keep asking what you will teach.
In other words, you want your religious beliefs taught as if they were science?
You should be aware by now that "intelligent design" is neither science nor a theory, and as such has no business being introduced into science classes as if it were either.
Why don't you admit it; you don't really care about science in the least; you just want your religious beliefs to replace science in those areas where the two conflict. That's what this whole battle is about.
Essentially, what this is all about is the fact that the parents in KS might have the nerve to vote to allow the teaching of creation and/or ID in the classroom and the elitist, liberals are having a meltdown that the parents whose own money is going to educate their own children might actually have a say in what is being taught in the school, and that it doesn't fit in with the leftist, liberal agenda.
Seems to me that there was something about taxation without representation mentioned some years ago.....
So, no doubt, as soon as the parents speak and say the *wrong* thing, the ACLU will be all over this like white on rice cramming down the throats of the kids and their parents through the abuse of litigation and the power of the judiciary, something that most people don't want.
The ignorant knuckle-draggers don't know what's best for them even if the liberal elitists do.
Imagine... parents having a say in their child's life. We can't have any of that, now can we. The horror. They might actually make the *wrong* decision.
So if there’s no intelligent design, then how do you believe that everything came into existence?
Isn’t the only option left that it *just happened*?
A fluke of *nature*?
What’s the *scientific* explanation for how everything got here, where it came from, how it organized itself? What’s the evidence that it’s a self-directed system?
Is it science like the abiogenesis theories? Or string theory and cosmology?
It assembled itself?
No, the battle is about whether parents have any say in the education of their children. They keep trying to allow creation and ID be addressed in the schools that their own tax money is funding to educate their own children and certain leftist elements are not allowing it. The leftist elements sue into about bankruptcy any district who dares to violate their ideologies.
Evolution alone is not being taught in public schools because it's the will of the public, but because the school districts are being cowed by the threat of lawsuits they can't afford. It's easier to capitulate to the threats from the minority leftists than bear the financial burden of the lawsuits.
If the general public did not want creation and/or ID taught in schools along with evolution, they would not keep voting in school boards who would allow it.
Directed evolution is an experimental method whereby Scientists use error prone PCR to generate novel proteins and test them for the desired properties. This is analogous to the epigenetic stress response whereby genes that promote mutation are up regulated and genes that repair mutation are down regulated.
Indeed it is trying to adapt by CHANGING its code. Selection is what makes it “know” once it has arrived at solution.
Epigenetics is not a magic code word that makes the random go away.
As I said above,
In other words, you want your religious beliefs taught as if they were science?
You aren't even trying to pretend ID is science any more.
It might be more correct to state that if God is in control, then the process only appears to be random.
What appears to be random to us, who are inside the system or who do not have the level of knowledge to detect that pattern yet, may not really be so.
We've been studying so little of our physical world for so short a time, that it would be well nigh impossible to make that statement with any degree of certainty.
We can't say for sure that any process is truly random unless we know all about it and can take all the factors acting upon that system into account.
We don't have anywhere near that level of knowledge yet.
Nope. Wrong interpretation.
Then everything in life only appears to be random and random is a meaningless word. I am not willing to go quite that far, but I do know that random doesn’t mean “not under the control of God”.
Maybe. But since we don't have the level of knowledge yet to determine that, that can't be said for sure. Maybe some things are truly random; maybe nothing is. We can't know that yet.
... and random is a meaningless word.
No. *random* is a good description for much of what we see. It conveys meaning that others understand what is meant, even if it's not entirely accurate. Kind of like *sunrise* and *sunset*.
I think most people would be happy just to see evolution taught in total.
Bring the kids attention to the philosophical backgrounds of the men who have advanced the theory. Show them all of the forgery, fabrications, miss-constructions and misinterpretations that has went down and still happens in the field.
The *keeping only “science” in the science classroom and that teaching anything but evo is teaching religion* argument is merely a smoke and mirrors used to deflect people’s attention away from the real issue that their right to have a say in their child’s education that is being paid for with their money is being taken away from them.
The thought control police are glad to be able to have an argument that people will buy without realizing what the true agenda is; that is, indoctrinating other parent’s children into a belief system that those parents object to.
The hardcore, atheistic, leftist goal is really to keep any mention of God out of the schools and if they can accomplish that using the ToE then they gladly will. I don’t believe for a minute that the ACLU really gives a rats a$$ whether or not the ToE is true, or science, or anything, except inasmuch as it’s a useful tool for them to use in their attempts to remove any mention of God from any where in public or private life. And sadly, many evos, who are giving the ACLU its backing, are the useful idiots the ACLU needs to accomplish their goal.
This is shown by the argument first that anything but evo should not be allowed in the science classroom. Then when the non-evo agrees that it should be taught in a philosophy class, and when someone actually goes and tries to do that, the leftist then proceeds to state that the philosophy and religious instruction classes that evos say creation and ID belong in, have no place in public schools because that’s endorsing religion; separation of *church* and state and all.
And the evos stand behind that as they did on the FR threads that were posted when some school tried that in CA.
Discuss them all you want! Talk about them on the sidewalk to anyone passing by. Discuss them over dinner at a restaurant. Explore them in church. Encourage your kids to set up after-school clubs to discuss them. Publish them in the newspaper. Promote them on one of the six religious channels I get with my satellite package. Heck, ring my doorbell and try to give me literature--I'll treat you politely and read it later.
You just don't get to use governmental authority, as embodied in a teacher or anyone else, to promote them. That's really all there is to it. I'm sorry if that makes you feel persecuted.
I think I asked you this before: the population of Dearborn, Michigan, is now about a third Arab. If it reaches 51%, and they vote to implement a madrassa-style curriculum in the public schools, will that be okay with you? Will you tell the Christians in the community that the Arab parents have a right to determine what's in their child's education that they're paying for, so tough?
just another do as I say, not as I do post.
While your side hijacks the courts to ram godless liberalism on society, Christians can’t so much as even fight back.
Your position is more than crystal clear!
As has been proven here...liberals rant that science isn’t consensus or opinion, yet it’s been proven beyond their illogic it often is precisely that.
Pluto is no longer a planet because some, not all astronomers say so.
Medications: don’t get me started on what doctors use at their disposal as to which medication is “best” for hypertension and other illness. Often it has ZERO to do with science, for instance cost, availability, etc.
Oh and my favorite, we’re to look at what godless liberals have done to:
education in general
and just somehow trust them to be objective!?
Oh and just IGNORE they’ve hijacked courts and govt to force their godless agenda on society, you’re supposed to just ignore that just like they do!
But yes, this argument from day one had almost nothing to do with science and everything to do with the godless liberals scared out of their minds that Christians might just wake up from this incessant abuse and understand that Christians have every bit as much right to science, school, EVERYTHING as much as any other group...
Who decided the godless ideology and agenda would take the lead in science, govt, law and so forth TO THE EXCLUSION of believers?
The answer is the bully ACLU and all the godless liberals that are ALLOWED to get away with it. PERIOD!
Christians to the Michael Newdow’s of the world...seriously, consider Cuba, the place fits you like a GLOVE! The climate, the godless fascism, the hypocrisy...it clearly would be paradise for you!
You’re still here?
You haven’t shown a soul why we should trust godless liberals to be objective about science when they’ve destroyed everything they’vs touched from education to juornalism to...well EVERYTHING!
Ummm noooo...I look at it as the failed godless liberal agenda has failed ALL citizens by forcing the homosexual agenda on the rest of us as if it’s normal, to global warming nonsense:
godless liberalism has failed science just as it has failed the rest of society!
Decent conservative people remember that when Christianity wasn’t attacked by lunatic fearful liberals, and the ACLU types weren’t suing Christians into silence, schools weren’t utterly failed, socializing centers.
The writing is on the wall and you’ll see alot more people waking up to it.
You had your chance for several decades and it was an ABYSMAL UTTER failure!
If science is so ‘objective’, why are you scared? We had the best scientific breakthroughs before whackjob godless liberals hijacked the legal system and the ACLU to attack God and remove CHRISTMAS from the school calendar!
Care to explain how removing Christmas from the calendar helps kids learn anything other than confusion?
This reminds me of hypocrats saying they support the troops by undermining their mission.
Godless liberals get real antsy when they’re invited to live in Cuba, while undermining our culture and doing all they can do to destroy America from within.
If your idea of America is associated with godless liberals running science, both science and America are MUCH worse off!
anything from a few paragraphs to a few pages explaining that the gaping holes in the clearly failed godless agenda are better explained by:
do you not have a dictionary or something?
FURTHERMORE, godless liberals do not define science! I don’t even think that needs to be put into the text, but it very much IS something godless liberals need to fully grasp, although no sane person is holding their breath!
I know you guys are really against intelligence being anywhere near the science curricluom, but why take such a concept to such fantastical leaps, or in your case depths, and actually incorporate such nonsense into your very own lifestyle?