Re: [asa] Discovery Institute against harmonizing?

It seems to me Mr. Luskin is playing games here. He seems to be saying that any claim for compatability between religion and science is a religious claim, not a testable science clailm. This is indeed true. But he is also claiming that this is unconstitutional. That is false. One can hold a religous view and teach science. [I've forgotten the logic term for this, drat!] This is not the issue at hand, unless, of course, the teacher is requiring their religion to be taught to students in a science class. The real problem is centered on whether or not ID is science, which it is not. If ID is religion, no requirement for it to be taught as such is
  allowable in a science room on the basis that it is a legitiamate scientific alternative. This is the result from Dover.
   
  George A
   
   
   
  

David Campbell <pleuronaia@gmail.com> wrote:
  Anyone know more details on the situation? As reported, the Discovery
Institute seems to be claiming that it's unconstitutional to say in a
public classroom that evolution and religion are compatible. So far,
no one has objected or arrested me for saying that in my classes,
though standards for university and grade school are a bit different.
Specifically, teaching materials designed to accompany the "Judgment
Day: Intelligent design on trial" program includes "Q: Can you
accept evolution and still believe in religion? A: Yes. The common
view that evolution is inherently anti-religious is simply false.'

"According to Casey Luskin, an attorney with the Discovery Institute,
this answer favours one religious viewpoint, arguably violating the US
constitution. 'We're afraid that teachers might get sued, ' he says."

As they supported the proposed Kansas standards that claimed that
evolution was inherently atheistic, there's some inconsistency here.
As the Judgement Day program does not reflect favorably on ID, the DI
may be trying too hard to cast aspersions on it.

No doubt the Discovery Institute has their own take on the story which
should be consulted for a more balanced picture than what I have at
hand.

Objectively it is perfectly possible to have a religious view in
harmony with evolution, so both Dawkins and Johnson are wrong. One
can legitimately debate how well evolution meshes with a particular
religious tradition, but that's not the same question.

-- 
Dr. David Campbell
425 Scientific Collections
University of Alabama
"I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.