Who are "they"? If it is the press-created "they", then keep in mind that the press always looks for the polar advocates - young earthers vs. in-your-face athiests. Let's turn it around for a minute. I look at disease, war, violence, inequity, inequality, stupidity of some design features (knees, elbows, eyes), and I infer that there cannot be a god. Why should this not be taught if ID should be? I make my inferences about the existence of a creator from these facts. Why isn't this just as legitimate as science as ID's opposite inference? It is. Just as legitimate. And that is, not at all. As a matter for debate in another class, it would be fun for some people, I'm sure. But it is not science. It is a belief formed from observation. I can decide either way: there is a creator, there is not a creator -- and there is no difference in observable results in physics, chemistry, or biology. There may be observable results in sociology or history or philosophy, however. Steve On Dec 21, 2005, at 1:35 PM, Brad M Pardee wrote:
-- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 2900 Van Ness Street NW mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC 20008 http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/ "Love the pitcher less and the water more." Sufi Saying |
_______________________________________________ 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.