melon said:We've already had a thread on this.
It's a pathetic title, since "intelligent design," by nature, is anti-intellectual and anti-science.
Maybe we should start demanding atheism in church? We need to teach "both sides of the story," after all.
coemgen said:Church isn't mandated. School is.
coemgen said:Simply saying God could possibly be behind everything or that it was all created, doesn't necessarily mean religion is in the classroom. It's simply part of someone else's theory.
coemgen said:Simply saying God could possibly be behind everything or that it was all created, doesn't necessarily mean religion is in the classroom. It's simply part of someone else's theory.
coemgen said:
Yeah, not Judeo-Christian, riiight.“My confession:”
I am a Jew, and every single one of my ancestors was Jewish. And it does not bother me even a little bit when people call those beautiful lit up, bejeweled trees Christmas trees. I don’t feel threatened. I don’t feel discriminated against. That’s what they are: Christmas trees.
It doesn’t bother me a bit when people say, ‘Merry Christmas’ to me. I don’t think they are slighting me or getting ready to put me in a ghetto In fact, I kind of like it. It shows that we are all brothers and sisters celebrating this happy time of year. It doesn’t bother me at all that there is a manger scene on display at a key intersection near my beach house in Malibu . If people want a creche, it’s just as fine with me as is the Menorah a few hundred yards away.
I don’t like getting pushed around for being a Jew, and I don’t think Christians like getting pushed around for being Christians. I think people who believe in God are sick and tired of getting pushed around, period. I have no idea where the concept came from that America is an explicitly atheist country. I can’t find it in the Constitution and I don’t like it being shoved down my throat.
A_Wanderer said:It isn't a theory, it is unsupported by the evidence. Natural selection explains the evidence better than other models, hence why it gets the distinction of being a scientific theory rather than a hypothesis, a difference that many don't seem to grasp. A theory isn't a simple guess, it is the best workable model to explain the known facts.
A_Wanderer said:Ben Stein Isn't Judeo-Christian?Yeah, not Judeo-Christian, riiight.
coemgen said:No it doesn't, DaveC. Religion is a set of beliefs. What if you said Creator, or intelligent being? It can still be used as a part of someone's line of thought on how things came to be in a general sense.
coemgen said:
He's not a Judeo-Christian. He's a Jew.
Read the first four words again.
Originally posted by coemgen But, as a theory that explains everything in terms of evolution--in terms of development of life, it explains very, very little. Darwinism doesn't explain where gravity comes from. It doesn't explain where thermodynamics comes from. It doesn't explain where the laws of physics come from. It doesn't explain where matter came from.
To tie everything together, God seems like the only logical explanation. [/B]
coemgen said:
If Hindus want to speak their mind on it, go for it!
DaveC said:
"Faith" does not equal "belief" to you? Can I see the dictionary you've been using, it's different than all the ones I've ever seen. :scratch.
I don't know whether to laugh, make fun of you, or feel sorry for you here.
I think I'll laugh, and hope (please, please, please) that you were being sarcastic.
coemgen said:
Dictionary.com has the following definition of Judeo-Christian:
"of or pertaining to the religious writings, beliefs, values, or traditions held in common by Judaism and Christianity."
So, we're talking someone who would believe both the Old and New Testaments. Stein is Jewish, and therefore doesn't accept the New Testament.
Are you still laughing?
anitram said:
Are you so naive to believe that the people pushing ID would welcome the Hindu myths of creation and destruction taught to their children?
DaveC said:
Yes. Except now I'm laughing AT you.
DaveC said:
When has anyone with half a brain ever said that "Darwinism" (which is a foolish term invented by religious-types who are trying to make it seem like it's blind faith on the level of religious belief to discredit the science behind it) has to explain gravity, or thermodynamics, or physics? They all have their own scientific laws to govern them, which have nothing to do at all with evolutionary theory/natural selection.
coemgen said:
Why?
coemgen said:
That said, Darwinism doesn't have to explain gravity, thermodynamics or physics. Stein didn't say that, and I'm not.
Originally posted by coemgen The point is, it doesn't explain everything.
coemgen said:Let's hear your definition.
Judeo-Christian (or Judaeo-Christian, sometimes written as Judæo-Christian) is a term used to describe the body of concepts and values which are thought to be held in common by Judaism and adapted by Christianity, and typically considered by some (sometimes along with classical Greco-Roman civilization) a fundamental basis for Western legal codes and moral values. In particular, the term refers to the common Old Testament/Tanakh (which is a basis of both moral traditions, including particularly the Ten Commandments); and implies a common set of values present in the modern Western World. The term has been criticized by some for suggesting more commonality than may actually exist. (Compare with Ebionites and Judaizers.)