What are you afraid of

This case in Dover, Pa deserves some discussion. I believe that the Court got it partially right. Let me start by saying that I am a Christian and I do believe in the evolution.

What they did do right is that they allow Intelligent Design as an elective and not taught as a Science.

What they did wrong is allow evolution to continue to be taught as a scientific fact.

If you think about it why wouldn't God create creatures that could adapt to their environment and let the strongest and most able further the species. Also, I don't believe that evolution should be taught as fact, because it isn't thats why they call it a "THEORY". HELLLOOOOO!!!!

the·o·ry (th-r, thr)n.

  1. A systematically organized body of knowledge applicable in a relatively wide variety of circumstances, especially a system of assumptions, accepted principles, and rules of procedure devised to analyze, predict, or otherwise explain the nature or behavior of a specified set of phenomena.
  2. Abstract reasoning; speculation.
Here's a couple of questions about evolution:

If we evolved from apes, why aren't gorillas and chimps becoming more humanoid. Science tells us that Chimps, Gorillas and Humans have been the same for hundreds of thousands of years.

I don't think that ID or Creationism should be taught as a science because it is not, it is a belief system.

This case in Dover wasn't asking that Creationism of ID be taught, they simply wanted students to hear a statement about ID before ninth-grade lessons on evolution. The statement said Darwin's theory is "not a fact" and has inexplicable "gaps." It referred students to an intelligent-design textbook, "Of Pandas and People."

That isn't unreasonable is it, allow the students to know that evolution isn't a fact and maybe see a different side of the story. There is a case is in Kansas where people want the gaps in the theory of evolution taught and another in Georgia that wants stickers put on books stating that evolution is a theory and not a fact. Why is the left so opposed to any critism of evolution and giving yet another viewpoint. If creationism or ID is as rediculus as the left says lets let the students determine that. Any belief that cannot withstand critism is a belief not worth having.

Another funny liberal Hypocrasy:

If liberals are so fond of the theory of evolution, why do they get pissed off when humans clear cut land and destroy the habitat of owls, isn't that just a case of "Surivival of the Fittest".


The secular war on Christianity will continue, see revelations.


globalfriendshipnetwork said...

i was browsing the web and found your blog , before i leave your blog i would like to you /your team members /your blog visitors " Merry Christmas "

Jeff said...

Its fine to question evolution, and emphasize that it is a theory rather than fact. But, I am left to wonder about Creationism which leaves promotes incest. If there were just Adam and Eve, and their sons Caine and Able, and Caine killed Able, that leaves only Adam, Eve and Caine, so either Adam and Eve had a girl thats not mentioned or Caine impregnates his mother. Or if there was a sister to Caine, then he impregnates his sister or perhaps Adam fathers his own grandchildren. I dunno, but no matter how you look at it, the Christian theory involves immediate family members having sex and fathering children without the benefit of marriage, unless of course you support marriage between siblings. Or polygamy with a father and daughter and mother.
The Christian bible story seems a bit creepy to me.

The Whipping Boy said...

To each his own, Jeff. I respect your opinion. I will look into this subject, but I very seriously doubt that the Bible promotes incest. To say that is ridiculus, much in the say way it was ridiculus when Conservatives said that Kerry voted against body armor for the troops when it was actually a small part of a bloated defense bill. Sometimes the impression that a sentence leaves is far more effective than the syntax of it.