Re: [asa] Brownback on evolution

>
>
>
> Your argument is evolving from 'government agencies have no right to
> ban religious ideas' to 'they have no right to ban one religious idea
> but not the others'. I hope that the readers can appreciate the big
> difference between the two statements.

Nope. Didn't argue that.

I did parrot what the 7th Circuit said further down in the case. Thats all
I did.
In addition to showing that my original opinion derives (to a reasonable
person)
from the actual text of the case. As does the parroting itself (although I
explicitly didn't show that). So what?

Having to be "right" about showing that my opinion was "wrong" strikes me as
a bit obsessed.

I think its a waste to have to re-state what I actually did just because
someone totally mis-understands it or makes a mountain out of a mole-hill,
or is worried about what I might argue tomorrow, or for some reason doesn't
like me or doesn't like some group of people.

Here's an opinion: An opinion is not an argument. Treating it as such is
making too much of it. Isn't insisting that I must change an opinion
expressed in an email sort of like insisting that someone not refer to
David Hefland as "she"? Is that worth doing? ;) I don't know.
I did get a good laugh out of it though.

 I apologize to the ASA for answering these posts. I very much want to chat
with ASA members (and I mean signing members) on a variety of subjects
where I can learn something from them.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Jun 17 16:24:49 2007