Although my sig quote does indeed quote CS Lewis ("When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle), I am not an all or nothing kind of guy when it comes to politics. I think the way to peace in the culture wars is agreeing to disagree.
For example, school choice is the solution to the curriculum wars in the public schools. A robust Free Exercise Clause and Free Speech Clause also allows each of us to dance to his or her own religious Piper. A live and let live approach to the EC--one that opens the public square to all kinds of celebrations (including religious ones like Christmas)--is also a necessary part of the peace treaty. If A can avert her eye from a gay pride banner in the public square, then B can avert his eye from a nativity display in a park.
ID in the science curriculum is only a!
problem
because of the government school monopoly. The same for commencement prayer and sex ed. A secular establishment won't bring peace, but allowing dissenters to exit without penalty will.
Cheers, Rick Duncan
Steven Jamar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Steven Jamar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think Doug has stated this well. But perhaps it understates the challenge presented by evolution -- if science can explain so much, then what is left? It also understates the challenge to the Biblical literalists -- if evolution is correct, then the Biblical story is wrong. If the Biblical story is wrong in any detail, it is all suspect. If it is suspect, then what? This is the line I've heard not only from young-earther creationists, but also from those who accept the geological and astronomical data and information and see in the Biblical creation stories another sort of truth or perhaps allegorical truth. To them, evolution challenges even that remaining confidence.I understand the all or nothing viewpoint -- though I reject it. Just read Prof. Rick Duncan's recent sig for this attitude.Steve_______________________________________________
On Nov 23, 2005, at 4:34 PM, Douglas Laycock wrote:
I agree with Ed Brayton's posts on the limits of science. My take on the line between science and religion in the Intelligent Design debate is this: the defined task of science is to produce the best naturalistic explanation possible. That explanation is random variation and natural selection (ful! ly elaborated, with multiple mechanisms of selection). That explanation is sufficient to explain the origin of species, and that explanation does not assume purpose or guidance or design. That is as much as science can say.
[snip]
This clarification, even when understood, comforts some believers but not all. Just as some believers want the support of the state for their faith, some also want the support of science. Even a model that says evolution could have happened without divine guidance is too threatening.
--Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017Howard Univer! sity School of Law fax: 202-806-85672900 Van Ness Street NW mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"If a man empties his purse into his head, no man can take it away from him. An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest."Benjamin Franklin
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
! Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
Rick Duncan
Welpton Professor of Law
University of Nebraska College of Law
Lincoln, NE 68583-0902
"When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered." --The Prisoner
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
