New Evolution spat in U.S. schools goes to court

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

You fail to acknowledge the demonization of Christians and Conservatives is an on-going and pervasive process, Rat.

They could have been described as something innocuous, like...an "advocacy group", you see?

It is much like saying "A Fundamentalist Christian Group Bombed a Family-Planning Clinic", rather than, "A Religious Group Bombed an Abortion Clinic".

Maybe you don't see any difference, given the high ground you watch from. :P

---

In the same way as say...

"A Fundamentalist Islamic Group bombed an Israeli Military Checkpoint" as opposed to "A Religious Group bombed Armed Israeli Soldiers"..

Seems you only wish this way of communicating when it suits you :P

---

Is this the tactic you use to avoid accepting that your argument has been summarily dispatched? :D

Crap.

As ive said before, we are badly designed.

A design this bad can only come from starting from an orginal and then adding on other things for which the orginal design was not suited in the 1st place..

ie: Either evolved this way, or God was a totally lazy bastard that you wouldnt give a job to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

In the same way as say...

"A Fundamentalist Islamic Group bombed an Israeli Military Checkpoint" as opposed to "A Religious Group bombed Armed Israeli Soldiers"..

Seems you only wish this way of communicating when it suits you :P

---

Is this the tactic you use to avoid accepting that your argument has been summarily dispatched? :D

---

Sorry, didnt realise that "summarily dispatched" meant the same as "Havent really got an answer to that"..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

Sorry, didnt realise that "summarily dispatched" meant the same as "Havent really got an answer to that"..

---

Answers require questions before them.

Have you a plain question, or just more rhetorical ones? :huh:

I have no questions... just pointing out that you have put "Good" and "Bad" in the article, not Reuters.

They have merely reported exactly the same way as they do for everything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

I have no questions... just pointing out that you have put "Good" and "Bad" in the article, not Reuters.

They have merely reported exactly the same way as they do for everything else.

---

In this case, "the same way as they do for everything else..." is predjudicial, Rat, and that was my point.

If you, as a consumer of Reuters' output, have been conditioned to believe "Christian" and/or "Conservative" to have a negative connotation, then, hey...double-trouble.

I'm not aware of any media outlet characterizing teachers or scientists as inherently negative, are you?

http://www.badscienceprojects.com/html/modules/news/

Worthy News and just about every other Right Christian Agency? :P

However, im gobsmacked by your admission that the News is biased Re: Islamic Terrorism in the Middle East and elswhere. ;)

@ J2.

Who is it then that is pushing for I.D. in schools?. Who was it pushing for creationism in schools (seeing as they are obviously two completely different things :rolleyes: )




@ topic
By all means put it in an elective religious studies class but keep it out of science classes. It's not science and doesn't belong there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

@ topic
By all means put it in an elective religious studies class but keep it out of science classes. It's not science and doesn't belong there.

---

A common misconception nowadays. Truth is scholarly intelligent design supporters can quite effectively debate using pure scientific evidence.

You don't have to look hard to see such, but it is now common practice for evolutionists to turn a blind eye to this arguement.

Maybe this lawsuit will come to an actual debate about the validity of such things.