The American Civil Liberties Union will file a suit today challenging a Pennsylvania school district that teaches alternatives to the theory of evolution alongside Darwinism.
The Pennsylvania ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State have scheduled a news conference for today to discuss the lawsuit against the Dover Area School District, the Associated Press reported. The suit was to be filed in U.S. District Court in Harrisburg, Pa.
On Oct. 18, the Dover school board voted 6-3 to add the teaching of "intelligent design" to its ninth-grade biology curricula. Without identifying who the "designer" might be, the theory of intelligent design says the complexity and order of the universe and mankind suggest the action of an intelligent cause rather than random chance.
According to AP, school board member William Buckingham said he proposed the change as a way of balancing...
Some fun historical reference: scientific insistence on "naturalistic" explanations to phenomena can roughly be traced at least as far back as Newton's Principia, in which he lists a number of logical presuppositions to his work.
One of them, roughly analogous to Ockham's Razor, tells the scientist that he ought to avoid introducing external factors into scientific analysis.
Ironic that the Puritan Newton did this, until one remembers that medieval work routinely inserted saints and angels into even the most mundane situations.
Unfortunately, modern scientists have run with this axiom to the point of excluding supernatural influence as a possibility even when the naturalistic solutions completely fail.
Just food for thought. And yes, the ACLU is trying to (ironically) establish secular humanism as a de facto state religion. No surprise there.
What is most troubling is that according to wnd.com:
"The ACLU... sees intelligent design as a more secular form of creationism..."
The problem here is that evolution is quite obviously a secular form of atheism (pardon the oxymoron, secularism is also an atheistic form of government).
What could be worse than PENN?
"As WorldNetDaily reported, last month the ACLU helped several disgruntled parents in suburban Atlanta sue their school district over a label on its textbooks that states: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." The suit claims the school board is "doing more than accommodating religion. They are promoting religious dogma to all students."
What is the ACLU afraid of???
Perhaps the same thing that philosophers are afraid of?
Now looky here, folks: I figure that the ACLU is rustlin' up a fuss about a little Intelligent Design being taught because it'll expose their monopoly on UNintelligent Design... Well, doggone it! They'll just have to put up or saddle up, and do it afore the Son comes down again, if ya know what I mean. ; )
The logic does baffle. If something is similar to something else, it could easily be an example of having a common source. When we look upon paintings of, say, Van Gogh, we do not conclude that one painting descended or was derived from another, but conclude that the paintings have the same artist. Could it not be that similarity in the Creation displays the handiwork of a Creator?
Darwinism is junk science. Wrong conclusions drawn from wrong interpretations based on desired outcomes.
A Darwinist perceives two animals to be alike, and conjectures a likewise totally unfounded historical explanation of why they are so. Why is it that the scientists, who are otherwise so proud of their scepticism about all that is not empirically verifiable, in this case give a free pass to something, which they mean to teach as fact, which is nothing more than an unsubstatiated historical explanation? If one rejects religion because it is a non-scientific explanation of history, one is bound to reject Darwinism on the same grounds! Furthermore, if I had ever argued in my philosophy papers in college that because a chair and a table look alike they must share the ancestry of an ancient undifferentiated four-legged piece of wood I would've been lagued at. Only among Darwinists is it ok to say that because this thing and this thing look alike, they must have come from the same thing. The thing that baffles me about Darwinism is how simply illogical it is - it doesn't make a lick of sense, aside from the material evidence against it. But the American Criminal Liberties Union must protest its religion. Hey, if they want to affirm descendance from a witless improvident simian that doesn't bother me, but as for me I'd rather believe I was created in the image of a Supreme God.
Just goes to show like probably many of us have noticed, that despite the Darwinist's rejection of God he still needs religion like any other person - thus people take on Darwinism, Tolerance, or other such systems of thought to be God. they're only responding the way any adherent to any other bunk, thin comprehensive religious system would when challenged - that is kicking and biting to hold onto his beliefs lest they be rent from him by the truth of the manifest falsity of them. It's an interesting thing about Darwinism - it gets for some reason a free pass among so-called scientists who will only otherwise accept as fact that which is empirically verifiable (which sentence itself is of course not empirically verifiable). Darwinism is in no way scientific, in no way verifiable, and in no way verified - it is merely an explanation of why things are the way they are, conducted, if you think about it, in the exact same way as an ancient culture develops mythology. The Greeks see that there is a large yellow globe in the day and a smaller white-blue one at night, so they conjecture that these two bodies must be being pulled by charioteers who follow one another perpetually around the earth for some reason - then the myth of why they do so is created - the same method as Darwinism.
That is quite true and creative, Ford. If one can't see intelligent design in this world, they arn't intelligent in this area. Sin, though, has been the sole cause of destruction to the normal function of this world.