Re: Creationists take their challenge to evolu tion theory into theclassroom

["n" <dave () farber net>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John S. Quarterman" <jsq () quarterman org>
To: <dave () farber net>
Cc: "John S. Quarterman" <jsq () quarterman org>; <ip () v2 listbox com>
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Creationists take their challenge to evolu tion theory 
into theclassroom


> > _______________ Forward Header _______________
> > Subject: Re: Creationists take their challenge to evolution theory into
> > theclassroom
> > Author: David Byrden <iplist () byrden com>
> > Date: 12th February 2005 1:26:23 pm
>
> > ...
>
> > I think my approach should be used to deflate the Creationists such as
> > Mr. Harris, who said:
> >
> >  >> "There are creation myths on both sides. Which one do you teach?"
> >
> > Mr. Harris is wrong; there are more than two sides. Every religion has a
> > different creation myth.
>
> And Christianity has at least two: Adam and Eve created simultaneously vs.
> Eve created out of Adam's side; they're both in Genesis 1.  This is
> well known to every serious student of religion, or, for that matter,
> to anyone who simply reads that book.
>
> > If the Creationists force Creation to be taught in
> > schools, the schools should teach every single creation myth from
> > cultures all around the world. This would leave no time for any science
> > in science class - thus making a point - and would undermine the 
> > students'
> > unthinking acceptance of Christianity.
>
> Or at least undermine their unthinking acceptance of some particular
> sect's interpretation of Genesis as representing Christianity.  After all,
> when did Bishop Ussher's dating of Creation to 4004 BC
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ussher
>
> become more important than the Sermon on the Mount or the parable
> of the Good Samaritan?
>
> David has said what I haven't seen many people say: the response that
> will succeed to a creationist attack on evolution is not to circle the
> wagons around evolution or even around science.  It is to counterattack
> against the creationists' version of religion and Christianity.
>
> This isn't something that many of us particularly want to do;
> science isn't about attacking religion; it is about science.
> However, this isn't science; it is politics.  What creationists
> believe and teach in their own homes and churches is their affair.
> But when they interject their dogma into public school systems as fact,
> they expose it for critical examination, not to mention ridicule.
>
> > David
>
> -jsq 

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/