Ed Darrell writes:
No, urethra design is not beside the point at all. Is there an
intelligent design explanation for that design? There is an
evolutionary explanation (though not wholly satisfactory to
many). How could such a thing have happened, according to
"intelligent design theory?"
The absence of any possible answer to that question points to the
lack of science behind ID. That is the whole issue.
I agree that ID is not a scientific theory. I also believe
that the Dover decision was correct.
That said, though, one needs to be fair here. The claim of
intelligent design theory is not that NO features of the biological
world can be explained by evolution through natural selection. Nor
is it, as I said before, that the biological world is, according to
one or another criterion, well-designed. It is, rather, that there
are certain features of the biological world (irreducible complexity
and all that) that point to at least those features having been
designed by an intelligence.
It is therefore consistent with at least the bare bones of
ID theory that the designer was evil, or a practical joker, or a
child-god who designed us as part of the heavenly equivalent of a
kindergarten art project.
Perry
*******************************************************
Perry Dane
Professor of Law
Rutgers University
School of Law -- Camden
217 North Fifth Street
Camden, NJ 08102
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.camlaw.rutgers.edu/bio/925/
Work: (856) 225-6004
Fax: (856) 969-7924
Home: (610) 896-5702
*******************************************************
_______________________________________________
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.
