Re: "The Goal of ID is to establish a theocratic state"

Yes, I'm sure it's "enlightening" indeed. This is the sort of
polemic that leads ordinary Christians who are trying their best to figure
things out, raise their kids, and maintain some semblance of a traditional
morality think "evolution = relativism = fetus farms for stem cells."
There's a reason many people on the right tie evolution to atheism,
faith-bashing and relativism: because many on the left use it that
way. It's naive to buy into the argument that one political party or
another is "anti-science" because of it takes religiously informed positions
about bioethics seriously.

On 1/19/06, Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Read
> The republican war on science
> by Chris Mooney
>
> That will enlighten you!
>
> Michael
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "George Murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>
> To: <jcannon@washjeff.edu>; <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 1:30 PM
> Subject: Re: "The Goal of ID is to establish a theocratic state"
>
>
> > This may be _Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent
> Design_
> > by Barbara Forrest and Paul Gross. You can find info at
> > http://www.creationismstrojanhorse.com/ . I haven't read the book but
> > from what I know of the authors & have heard about the book, it sounds
> > right.
> >
> > There are certainly legitimate & realistic concerns about the influence
> of
> > the religious right in the political arena today. But the words
> > "theocracy" & "theocratic" are vastly overused & overextended. A
> > theocracy - literally rule by God - is government by religious
> > authorities - priests &c. It is misused by people who apply it to any
> > religious influence on political leaders. E.g., I heard one speaker say
> > that Bush's 2001 decision on embryonic stem cells meant that we now had
> a
> > theocracy. This is nonsense, whatever you may think of that decision.
> >
> > The use of "theocracy" in that way is kind of a mirror image of the way
> > Johnson et al use "naturalism." The 1st uses an evil sounding word for
> > any mention of God & the 2d uses one for anything that doesn't mention
> > God.
> >
> > Shalom
> > George
> > http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Joel Cannon" <jcannon@jcannon.washjeff.edu>
> > To: <asa@calvin.edu>
> > Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 8:12 AM
> > Subject: "The Goal of ID is to establish a theocratic state"
> >
> >
> >>I found myself in the odd situation of defending ID defenders last
> >> night when the speaker said with a straight face that the goal of ID
> >> was to establish a theocratic state.
> >>
> >> When asked she cited a book that had "the wedge" in the title (two
> >> authors) which have a vague feeling that I have seen before. Can
> >> someone give me a short summary of what the book says. I suspect the
> >> assertion may involve the Discovery Institute's involvement in
> >> conservative political causes. She had read Reason in the Balance so
> >> it would appear that an extrapolation of what Johnson says there was
> >> part of the claim.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Joel W. Cannon | (724)223-6146
> >> Physics Department | jcannon@washjeff.edu
> >> Washington and Jefferson College |
> >> Washington, PA 15301 |
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Thu Jan 19 10:47:27 2006