MikeBGene:
>. . . If it turns out the Kansas decision
>was inconsequential, all that talk about the crucial importance of
>macroevolution
>in a state-wide standardized test is going to be exposed as empty
>rhetoric. It will be interesting to see if any scientists ever get around
to
>scientifically establishing the importance of macroevolution on
standardized
>tests. Of course, why take the risk when the rhetoric "sounds" so good?
Susan:
>the reason the Kansas decision was not inconsequential, is because it is a
>step toward a state religion--the Christian religion, specifically
>fundamentalist protestantism.
It merely looks this way to you, probably as a function of your extreme
bias (even hostility) against Christianity. My point had nothing to do with
subjective opinions about what events might possibly lead to that dreaded
Christian theocracy that's just always on the horizon. Atheists have been
whining about the Coming Theocracy since the early 80s. Reagan was
supposed to bring down Armageddon. The Moral Majority would take away
our freedom. Pat Robertson would become president and set up concentration
camps. The Christian Coalition would outlaw abortion and force women to
remain at home. Blah, blah, blah. Now, I'm supposed to think Kansas is
the spark that will light the theocracy?
It's often ironic how many in the atheist community so perfectly mirror the
fundamentalists they oppose. Among the fundamentalists, there has always
been a core that keep waiting for the End Times - always on the look out for
the spark that will bring in the anti-christ. Many atheists seem to share in
this mentality, except for them, the End Times are when the Christians take
over. They too are always looking for the slightest nudge to indicate the sky
is about to fall.
Tell you what. I'll save your posting and if we're posting here 10 years
from now,
we can see how signficant that step was in terms of making a state religion,
okay? My money says we won't be any more closer to a Christian state
religion.
In the meantime, my original point you responded to stands, as you failed
to address it.
Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 03 2000 - 22:49:07 EST