>Brownback is was and always will be a nutter.
>
With each day my respect for the Dali Lama grows, his comments on science and
religion is so appropriate:
When the sacred texts and science conflict, the sacred texts are wrong.
Now contrast that to Brownback's comments.
~~~
You are exactly right Will. The minute you propose that Science and Faith
compliment each other, or that they inhabit the same space if you will, you
need to subject Faith to the same analysis that you would Science.
When that happens, it quickly becomes a case of a faulty premise leading to
absur
Brownback is was and always will be a nutter.
>From another analysis:
"The truths of science and faith are complementary: they deal with
very different questions, but they do not contradict each other
because the spiritual order and the material order were created by the
same God." -Brownback
It
He thinks perfectly good scientific facts should be thrown out when it
disproves one of his faith based opinions. No surprise there.
At least we know he is incabable of having an open mind and
entertaining new ideas - states so clearly in his op-ed. Good stuff
to know come election time.
-Camer
Sam Brownback, Senator from Kansas seeking the republican nomination, is the
op-ed contributor to the NY Times today. He presents his views on evolution.
He does a fair job of asserting his position of faith, how it reconciles (to
a certain extent) with evolution. He even makes a few good points.
