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

[whypikonme]

I just don't get it

Me neither, do you talk the way you write? No wonder you picked that name.

[Busyman]

anyway.......on topic..........

the ACLU can go straight to hell as far as I'm concerned
I really wonder if they'd defend a Christian in court if they tried to remove the teachings of evolution because they found it offensive?
I seriously doubt it, because they don't give a shit about civil liberties
they're anti-Christians with too much time and money, period.

am I saying that ID belongs in school? no
am I saying it should be thrown out? no
look at other ways to institute it maybe
braniac made a good point, throw it in with philosophy or somethin, make it an elective, etc

but no, according to the ACLU it has to go
even if it was somehow proven that it has valid educational value,
if it has to do with Christianity in any respect it doesn't belong

and the fucking courts keep letting them get away with this shit
I just don't get it

The problem is that the folks pushing for ID in classroom are

1. Pushing for their own brand of ID, the Christian brand.

2. Pushing for it to be in science class.

In those cases it should be thrown out.

If they were smart they'd push for it in philosophy class or something similar.

ID in itself is independent of religion.

[clocker]

ID in itself is independent of religion.

How do you figure that?

re·li·gion ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-ljn)
n.

Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.

Intelligent Design (or ID) is the controversial assertion that certain features of the universe and of living things exhibit the characteristics of a product resulting from an intelligent cause or agent, not an unguided process such as natural selection. Though publicly most ID advocates state that their focus is on detecting evidence of design in nature, without regard to who or what the designer might be, in statements to their constituents and supporters nearly all state explicitly that they believe the designer to be the Christian God.

How many athiests subscribe to the theory of intelligent design?

[JPaul]

From the Urban Dictionary

The Intelligent Design Theory suggests that intelligent causes are necessary to explain the complex, information-rich structures of biology, and that these causes are empirically detectable.

Contrary to popular belief, this theory is based on modern science, not religious beliefs.

The latest theory to explain the complexity of the biological world is intellegent design.

Source: George, Feb 26, 2005

[lynx]

From the Urban Dictionary

The Intelligent Design Theory suggests that intelligent causes are necessary to explain the complex, information-rich structures of biology, and that these causes are empirically detectable.

Contrary to popular belief, this theory is based on modern science, not religious beliefs.

The latest theory to explain the complexity of the biological world is intellegent design.

Source: George, Feb 26, 2005

That's fine, until you take the obvious viewpoint that Intelligent Design must have an Intelligent Designer.

Choose what definition you like, it must be the product of faith based ideology, ie religion.

[JPaul]

I keep asking this, why does the inteligent designer of our Universe have to be God.

God (certainly from a Christian viewpoint) is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. All knowing, all powerful and all present. The being who created our Universe could just as easily have come from another one, set our's in motion and have subsequently died.

Given that ID, as I understand it, concerns itself with how things work in our Universe, then the "non-God" designer must surely be acceptable to it. It doesn't matter where the designer came from, just what she did.

That being the case, ID is not religious. What is religious / philosophical is seeking the nature of the designer, as opposed to understanding the design itself.

[GepperRankins]

there's still no science to support it

[3RA1N1AC]

What is religious / philosophical is seeking the nature of the designer

apparently they've already found the nature of the designer, since it's in the name of the hypothesis: "intelligent."

[JPaul]

What is religious / philosophical is seeking the nature of the designer

apparently they've already found the nature of the designer, since it's in the name of the hypothesis: "intelligent."

Indeed, however being intelligent does not make her God.

[3RA1N1AC]

i still wonder how one determines whether or not a naturally occuring structure qualifies as a design. what test could possibly be used, to distinguish such a thing?

if one must first assume that there's a distant intelligence without testing the existence of the distant intelligence, assume that there's a design without testing the existence of the design, and then assume that there's a connection between the distant intelligence and the design without testing the connection... that's quite a lot of assumption from which to begin one's scientific study of this design-created-by-a-distant-intelligence.

i reckon it falls into the domain of philosophy because it's (seemingly) all deduction and no test.