not just in Kansas,

Ron at Ron at
Sat Jul 28 15:38:45 CDT 2001


Richard:  I further maintain that Natural Selection is the leading
 "Theory" to explain how the fact of biological evolution has led to a
broad diversity of organisms that appear to be adapted to the environments
in which they live.

John:  Leading theory - read most popular.

Ron:   It is only the leading theory (yes, most popular) among
evolutionists. The  majority of people in the world reject the idea that
they came from monkeys. When it comes to "evolution" _that_ is the primary
thing they see. The next thing is their prejudice that all evolutionists
are atheists and out to destroy _their_ religion and children.  Evolution,
natural selection, all of it is very unpopular - a stupid idea - to most
people.

When we only or mostly associate with those within our own little world we
loose touch and perspective. Which means we are now not able to
_communicate_ with certain individuals or groups. The school board has all
the power because it is holding all the cards. The  last thing someone
needs to do is go in like Dr. I Am It, talk over their heads, talk down to
them, talk at them, make speeches etc.

Creationism is going to be taught. People want it taught and the
politicians loovvveee to please the people. (School boards are still
elected aren't they?). Here is some real good advice.

1) The first thing is to acknowledge that "you" have no problem with other
_scientific_ theories and data being presented. In fact you support it.
2) "Your" only concern as a spokesperson for science is to _ask_ what
standard or criteria is the school board using _ what plan do they have_ to
establish that the evolutional alternatives that will be taught are science
based and not religion based. Make them answer that. This ties to three.
3) None of us want people who hold religious persuasions contrary to our
own forcing them upon our children under the cover of teaching about
creation as an origin. The danger here is that one can not talk about a
creation without also requiring a creator. Thus, just because an advanced
being or beings or singular "god" or force, whoever/whatever, "created" it
does not automatically follow that it is the god of the Jews, Buddhist,
Christians etc.

When the apostle Paul was on trial he noted that two religious factions
were present one faction believed in a resurrection and one did not. When
it came time for him to speak he did not shove Jesus down their throat. He
divided and conquered (got himself off the hook) because he said that this
was really all about the doctrine of a resurrection.   They got so busy
fighting among themselves he walked. I as a  Pentecostal Christian do not
what my kids any where near any Baptist teaching or teachers. Likewise, the
Baptists don't want Pentecostals and Catholics teaching their kids. There
are many feuds just within Christianity.  I'd question the school board as
follows.

"So you are saying you want to have a bunch of Baptists or Christians come
in here to our public schools and tell our Buddhist, Hindu, Moslem, etc.
etc. kids that Jesus is the creator and thus the God they should believe in
and go home and tell their parents (the voters) they need to change
religions? Or that you are going to have those of Moslem, Jewish, or
Buddhist persuasion teaching our Christian kids that Jesus is not the
creator and thus not god and we need to leave Christianity? My question is,
how are you going to insure that creation as a life origin is all that is
taught and not the teachers god as the agent of that creation?"

If people just want "creation" taught - say as the Behe molecular
design/designer type of thing fine. The student will also be informed of
traditional evolutionary selection. They can make up their own mind -
embrace either or parts of each. But if a specific god - of what ever
religion - will be taught (and it is enevitable that it/she/it will be),
that is an entirely different matter. People who want their kids taught
that can send them to their own religions private schools. Public school is
for all the public not a platform for the introduction of personal
religions agendas.

I am just saying that the people considering this simplistic la de dah
let's teach creationism in public schools thing have their head in the sand
relative to the religious hornets nest they are inviting in. We are talking
about thousands of schools across the US and thousands of teachers. Every
zealot nut case there is is going to what to - and some will - get into the
public schools to not really teach about evidence of intelligence reflected
in the intricate design at the molecular and higher levels but to push
their CULT.  By strict definition, all religions are cults. I'd push mine
if they would let me - which is how I "know" the others will do the same
thing.

I can teach my kids about our Creator and my views of creation/evolution
etc here at home just fine. I am not willing to put them at risk to have
some _________ teach who knows what religious crap under the cover of
"creationism."

Ron




More information about the Taxacom mailing list