Posted by J.H. on March 19, 1999 at 10:06:21 {MWKQmDRkic4cM}:
In Reply to: Evolutionism and Creationism posted by Jeffery M. Schwehm on March 19, 1999 at 08:38:15:
Jeff,
: I also am embarrassed and ashamed of the scholastic dishonesty, and ignorance of many in the Christian community on this topic. In fact, some seem to be prepared to do anything to "lie for God".
: Anyway, I have found a website that I think many on this board would find very interesting.
One more example of a xtian lying for God, you mean? The fundies are at least honest about their fanaticism. This guy obviously represents the "new creationism" of Johnson and Behe. Not a whim more honest, just more sophisticated dishonesty, and of course claiming to represent a "reasonable" alternative between what he calls materialism and fundie-YECism.
Problem is, science is about stuff you can observe and the logical theories you can form about these observations. To pollute science with the ideas of one particular religion is just as destructive when this is vague references to theism as the dogmatic claims of YECs.
Why are theists offended by biology doing their science without references to any god? Are they offended every time they read a math book without references to God's wisdom in making PI like 3.14...? Are they offended when a geology book explains plate tectonics without making statements about God?
If science should cater to the emotional needs of Christians, what should science do about hindus and buddhists? Should science also respect their claims that the material world is eternal and uncreated? That the material world is upheld by an evil demon?
Why should science give in to the pressure of one particular religion among the world's thousands, especially when they all make different statements about origins? Of course, this question is not hard to answer: Because this happens to be your religion, and you don't really bother about knowing much about other people's faiths.