« Schmidt-Hackett post-mortem | Main | Monstrous »

August 04, 2005



I agree 100% with your next-to-last paragraph. For so many people, this is just a game to be won or lost, not a policy discussion that will affect our nation for at least a generation. People hear "political" and they just tune out. Others, like certain people who like to annoy me on my blog, call liberals and Democrats "sour grapes" and "sore losers". They will be contrary no matter what, just so their team wins. Beyond that? Maybe they go celebrate at the bar with the other fans of the winning team.

Ed Drone

I think the neotheocrats take advantage of the media's need for conflict and the liberal American psyche (we tend to 'live and let live' if there's no harm in it) to push their "we're so mistreated because you won't teach your kids to be like us" BS. If the newspapers and TV didn't mention these kooks, if the school boards didn't knuckle under for fear of this wacky minority's supposed 'electoral power,' we could relegate them to the dusty shelf they deserve.

"Intelligent Design" is not a science course, it's a 10-minute mention on the first day of the class. It's obvious that if there is a designer, He uses evolution as his clockworks, and all we can study is the clock, since by definition the designer is the Great Unknowable. Science cannot take a position on the nature of the designer; religion should not take a position on the nature of the design.

Or as my 8th-grade science teacher put it, "Religion answers the 'why' question, and science answers the 'how' question." I think it could be expanded thusly:

Religion = Who? Why?
Science = How? When?

Some elements of What? get answered by both, and some are not answered by either.


The comments to this entry are closed.