Oklahoma GOP Pushing Bill That Would Require Teaching “Creation Science”

Sigh:

With a Democrat no longer in the governor’s office to keep them in check, Republican legislators have filed numerous bills that could violate federal and state prohibitions against mixing religious doctrine with government, a group of concerned residents said Saturday.

“This year we really have a challenge,” said Victor Hutchison, president of Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education and professor emeritus of the University of Oklahoma’s zoology department.

Measures include requiring teaching creationism in public schools, paving the way for vouchers for private schools, and establishing when life begins, which could interfere with medical research and a woman’s choice to have an abortion, said members of the Oklahoma City chapter of the Americans for Separation of Church and State.

“We’ve got tons of legitimate problems in this state — economic problems and we’ve got big deficits,” said Mike Fuller, president of the local group. “These legislators want to focus on these ideological cases that really will not advance our state at all. They’ll send it going backward in my opinion.”

(…)

John Krizan, director of the religious liberty department at the Tenth Street Seventh-day Adventist Church, 1407 NE 10, said he is concerned proposed bills are drawing the church into government affairs.

“The closer you get church and state together the weaker they both become,” he said.

Hutchison criticized Senate Bill 554, which would allow creationism to be taught in public school science classes. He called it a “slick bill” because it states it requires the teaching of evolution but would also consider creationism a science. It would allow religious answers to count on science tests and science assignments.

“We are not anti-religion,” Hutchison said. “We are simply saying religion is supernatural. It cannot be addressed by science.”

Most of the rest of the developed world seems to have put this issue behind them, I cannot for the life of understand why nonsense like this keeps happening in the United States.

H/T: FrumForum

FILED UNDER: Quick Takes, Religion, Science & Technology, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Ernieyeball says:

    I have always said that I will approve of prayer in schools as long as I get to write the prayer. I will not submit my prayer to anyone for approval. I am going to write the prayer and those kids are going to say it!
    Creation Myths taught as science in public schools is OK with me as long as States mandate the teaching of Natural Selection and Evolution in all Sunday Schools every Sunday.
    Fair is fair.

  2. sam says:

    Who gives a shit what they do in Oklahoma?

  3. Gulliver says:

    Who gives a shit what they do in Oklahoma?

    Everybody that counts….

  4. Alex Knapp says:

    He called it a “slick bill” because it states it requires the teaching of evolution but would also consider creationism a science. It would allow religious answers to count on science tests and science assignments.

    Cool! I’m going to teach kids in Oklahoma that the Earth was formed when the gods got together and killed Ymir and used his flesh, bone and blood to create the seven worlds. Then all-father Odin created Askur and Embla out of tree trunks, while Vili and Ve gave them the power of speech. After man’s creation, the gods then took Ymir’s eyelashes and separated Middle-Earth from the rest of the worlds.

    I’m sure that will be an acceptable answer to how humans came to be in Oklahoma, right?

  5. Gulliver says:

    Q. How did life begin?

    Scientific answer: We don’t know

    Q. How can life be created from nothing?

    Scientific answer: We don’t know

    Q. Where did the first life come from?

    Scientific answer: We don’t know

    Q. How did the primordial ooze develop into the first cell?

    Scientific answer: We don’t know

    Q. Can you created life from nothing in a lab using all of the technology and knowledge at your disposal?

    Scientific answer: No.

    Q. Is there anything that science cannot explain?

    Scientific answer (without even having the good grace to blush): No. The answer to everything is found in science, even if we are just faking it.

    Sounds like myth to me.

  6. sam says:

    Gulibler writes:

    “Everybody that counts” by taking their shoes off to get to 20.

  7. Rob Prather says:

    I amazes me that this is even an issue in this day and age.

  8. Gulliver says:

    “Everybody that counts” by taking their shoes off to get to 20.

    How’s the weather up there? Must be getting a nose bleed by now. Your arrogance defines the liberal mind-set that got your ass kicked in the last election. Keep it up. Please.

  9. Gulliver says:

    I amazes me that this is even an issue in this day and age.

    Yeah, science has come so far in defining, describing, and alleviating the human condition and our collective propensity to be selfish, hurtful, and self-destructive. Amazing why people are still asking those pesky questions like, “What is my purpose and place in the universe, and why am I here?”

    If everyone would just stop trying to find a personal answer to that question and realize that they are purely a function of accident and biology – then they would feel so much better about the addictions, accidents, and injustices that come their way.

  10. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***Cool! I’m going to teach kids in Oklahoma that the Earth was formed when the gods got together and killed Ymir and used his flesh, bone and blood to create the seven worlds. Then all-father Odin created Askur and Embla out of tree trunks, while Vili and Ve gave them the power of speech. After man’s creation, the gods then took Ymir’s eyelashes and separated Middle-Earth from the rest of the worlds.***

    Come on ALex, I know for a fact that you have the training and intelligence to create your own mythos.

  11. sam says:

    Tsk. tsk. Well, I’ll take my arrogance to your invincible ignorance. And just so there’s no mistake, if states like Oklahoma want to codify their peckerwoodry, hey, I’m all for it. And if your folks in Congress are successful in preventing the transfer of wealth from the rich states, where the educated folks are, to places like Oklahoma, where they are not, then I’m on your side.

  12. G.A.Phillips says:

    Gulliver, simple truths and facts pi$$ these guys off to no end, keep up the good work:)

  13. sam says:

    “Yeah, science has come so far in defining, describing, and alleviating the human condition and our collective propensity to be selfish, hurtful, and self-destructive.”

    And religion has a better track record?

  14. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***I amazes me that this is even an issue in this day and age.***The satanic masterpiece has yet to be completed, sorry…….

  15. Alex Knapp says:

    I really, really, really should know better, but….

    Q. How did life begin?

    Scientific answer: We don’t know

    There are, in fact, several competing hypotheses at the present time, some of which are stronger than others. So while “we don’t know” is narrowly correct, the truth is that there’s a lot of different evidence, several explanations for which have been proposed, and scientists are currently researching to determine which hypothesis is the strongest.

    Q. How can life be created from nothing?

    Scientific answer: We don’t know

    Actually, this is a false question. Nobody thinks that life was created from nothing. That said, there is lots of evidence to support the idea that the building blocks of life, such as amino acids and nucleotides, can sponteously form in chemical conditions that existed at the time that life is thought to have began on Earth. The exact mechanism through which it did happen is still under investigation, but that it could happen in a number of ways is pretty much beyond dispute.

    Q. Where did the first life come from?

    Scientific answer: We don’t know

    That’s a really imprecise question. Do you mean where, exactly, on Earth did the first life form as we understand it actually spontaneously generate? I doubt we’ll ever know that answer. Have we been able to pinpoint an approximate timeframe? Yes. We also know that it almost certainly happened in the ocean.

    Q. How did the primordial ooze develop into the first cell?

    Scientific answer: We don’t know

    Well, again, this is narrowly correct but not really right. As noted above, there are several mechanisms through which we know that the building blocks of life can spontaneously develop. But again, there are several competing hypotheses as to the specific mechanism.

    Q. Can you created life from nothing in a lab using all of the technology and knowledge at your disposal?

    Scientific answer: No.

    From nothing? No. Can it be demonstrated in the lab to RNA, protein strands, and micelles can spontaneously form under chemical conditions similar to that in the early Earth? Yes.

    Q. Is there anything that science cannot explain?

    Scientific answer (without even having the good grace to blush): No. The answer to everything is found in science, even if we are just faking it.

    Nobody says this.

  16. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***And religion has a better track record?*** In the first place ,pick one.

    In the second place come to grips with the fact that evolution/atheism is a religion.

    In the third place admit that you have no answers to Gulliver’s questions and earn some credibility, so that we might continue.

    We is all about plausible credibility here, it’s a science thing.

  17. sam says:

    And I should know better, too, but:

    @ GA

    ***And religion has a better track record?*** In the first place ,pick one.

    Alright, how about “alleviating the human condition” . Like, uh, medical science? Biochemistry and such? Tell you what GA, when your health finally brings you in sight of the dirt nap, why don’t you call the minister of your church and not place a burden on the medical resources of your community? That way you wouldn’t be a hypocrite, right?

  18. Gulliver says:

    … transfer of wealth from the rich states, where the educated folks are, to places like Oklahoma, where they are not, then I’m on your side.

    When you say rich states you mean as in like the state of Texas, which has been relatively recession proof? Glad to see you affirming that Texas’ governing philosophy and conservative stance on social and fiscal issues is because the population is made up of educated folks. They’re just not educated in the way you’d like.

    Look in the mirror when you speak of ignorance, because you’ve just made an unsupportable generalization. And please don’t respond by saying that I did the same – mine was to illustrate your woefully deficient argument. Par for the course from one who sneers at the “uneducated.”

  19. Alex Knapp says:

    evolution/atheism is a religion

    Evolution is a scientific theory. Atheism is a philosophic stance towards a particular branch of theology. Some atheists accept evolution, some don’t. Some theists accept evolution, some don’t. To equate the two is meaningless. To combine the two and claim its “religion” is doubly so. Religion is far more encompassing and complicated than either claim to be.

  20. sam says:

    “When you say rich states you mean as in like the state of Texas, which has been relatively recession proof?”

    Yeah, with the help of federal bailout funds. Google, ‘texas deficit federal bailout’.

    Try and keep up, ok?

  21. Gulliver says:

    …there’s a lot of different evidence, several explanations for which have been proposed, and scientists are currently researching to determine which hypothesis is the strongest.

    Read, “We can’t decide which one of our guesses might stand up to scrutiny better than the others.”

    Beware of the man who tells you emphatically that you’re stupid for not believing that he “might, possibly, given enough time, be able to prove you are incorrect.”

  22. Alex Knapp says:

    Gulliver,

    When you say rich states you mean as in like the state of Texas, which has been relatively recession proof? Glad to see you affirming that Texas’ governing philosophy and conservative stance on social and fiscal issues is because the population is made up of educated folks. They’re just not educated in the way you’d like.

    Texas made up its budget gap with Federal stimulus funds.

    http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/23/news/economy/texas_perry_budget_stimulus/index.htm

  23. James says:

    I wouldn’t worry. Oklahoma isn’t very good at teaching kids anything.

  24. Alex Knapp says:

    …there’s a lot of different evidence, several explanations for which have been proposed, and scientists are currently researching to determine which hypothesis is the strongest.

    Read, “We can’t decide which one of our guesses might stand up to scrutiny better than the others.”

    Sure, that’s one way of putting it. That’s how science works. Investigate facts. Make hypotheses. Test hypotheses. Adjust hypotheses based on tests. Repeat.

    As you learn more facts, you change your opinions.

    What is your preferred alternative?

  25. Gulliver says:

    Nobody thinks that life was created from nothing.

    Sorry, but you haven’t got a clue as to what you’re talking about. Read. Something relevant to the origins of the universe and life according to science. The best someone can come up with is that it was “seeded” here from some other planet or comet or what have you. That’s not an answer, it’s just transferring the same problem to “someplace” else.

  26. Gulliver says:

    Yeah, with the help of federal bailout funds. Google, ‘texas deficit federal bailout’.

    Try and keep up, ok?

    No… YOU try and keep up moron. The word “help” doesn’t translate to “necessary.” Unless you’re an educated liberal I guess. Does your education enable you to come up with a response that actually has merit? Or did you miss that part of the lecture?

  27. Alex Knapp says:

    Nobody thinks that life was created from nothing.

    Sorry, but you haven’t got a clue as to what you’re talking about. Read. Something relevant to the origins of the universe and life according to science.

    Um, I have read. I didn’t earn a degree in biochemistry without being familiar with hypotheses about abiogenesis. But nobody thinks that life was created out of “nothing.” Unless you define “nothing” as the spontaneous chemical generation of amino acids, nucleotides, and other necessary chemical “building blocks.” But personally, I describe that as “something.”

  28. Alex Knapp says:

    No… YOU try and keep up moron. The word “help” doesn’t translate to “necessary.”

    97% of Texas’ budget shortfall was filled with Federal stimulus funds.

  29. sam says:

    While, I on the other hand, prefer to transfer the problem to that Someplace Than Which No Greater Can Be Imagined. Yeah, that’s some explanation, alright.

  30. sam says:

    “When you say rich states you mean as in like the state of Texas, which has been relatively recession proof?”

    Texas comptroller’s office lays out budget crisis:

    AUSTIN, Texas — A state budget expert identified $10 billion in lost revenue created by poor planning in making past tax cuts.

    The state’s chief revenue estimator, John Heleman, said the legislature’s decision to cut property taxes in 2005 and replace that revenue with a new business tax created a perpetual budget shortfall. He said the property tax cuts cost more than lawmakers expected, and the new business margins’ tax does not bring in as much money as expected. He said that created a $10 billion hole in the budget.

    Heleman said the recent recession was the worst to hit Texas since World War II. He said recovery in jobs and business revenues would be slow.

    Senators must figure out how to solve a $27 billion budget shortfall in drafting a new budget.

  31. Gulliver says:

    Texas made up its budget gap with Federal stimulus funds.

    And so did the so-called “educated” and “rich” states which Sam used to support his fallacy. That fact negates Sam’s original premise because it means that the “rich” states “needed” bailouts to be sucessful. Once again, you folks use tortuous logic with a twist of lime to support your ill-advised comments.

    Face it, the core of Sam’s point has to do with bigotry and snobbery. There is no factual foundation… there is just his liberal arrogance.

  32. sam says:

    You’re only waving your arms, now.

  33. Alex Knapp says:

    And so did the so-called “educated” and “rich” states which Sam used to support his fallacy.

    True, but out of all 50 states, it was Texas that used the greatest proportion of federal funds to make up its budget shortfall. By a great deal, in fact. This undermines your claim to Texas’ superior governance.

    Also, I’m curious, what’s your alternative to the scientific approach to obtaining knowledge?

  34. Gulliver says:

    http://www.texasahead.org/economy/outlook.html

    Jan 28, 2011

    Jobs
    Texas’ December 2010 unemployment rate was 8.3 percent, up from 8.2 percent in November.
    The Texas unemployment rate has been at or below the national rate for 47 consecutive months.

    Housing
    Thus far, Texas has weathered the national real estate crunch without significant damage to property values. Sales and construction activity dropped to pre-2007 levels but began to shows signs of recovery in 2010.

    Another indicator that the state’s economy has been comparatively healthy was the U.S. Bureau of the Census report that Texas added more people (nearly 4.3 million) than any other state between the census counts of 2000 and 2010.

    Entering 2011, more than half the jobs shed by employers during Texas’ shorter recession have already been recovered as our economy recovers more quickly than the U.S. as a whole. Nationally, only 13.4 percent of recession-hit jobs had been recovered ending 2010.

    Yes. Relatively recession-proof. But you’ll never accept facts, they don’t fit your narrative.

  35. Alex Knapp says:

    Gulliver,

    As far as unemployment rates by states go, Texas is 23rd out of 51 (if you count DC as a state) –

    http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

    Texas also appears to be in the middle when it comes to homeownership rates:

    http://www.danter.com/statistics/homeown.htm

    So I guess I’m not seeing what’s so special about Texas.

  36. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***Alright, how about “alleviating the human condition” . Like, uh, medical science? Biochemistry and such? Tell you what GA, when your health finally brings you in sight of the dirt nap, why don’t you call the minister of your church and not place a burden on the medical resources of your community? That way you wouldn’t be a hypocrite, right?*** stereotypical nonsense.

    ***Evolution is a scientific theory. Atheism is a philosophic stance towards a particular branch of theology. Some atheists accept evolution, some don’t. Some theists accept evolution, some don’t. To equate the two is meaningless. To combine the two and claim its “religion” is doubly so. Religion is far more encompassing and complicated than either claim to be.***lol ok, shall I call it a faith, shall I say that atheism is a faith spawned of Evolution?

    You most assuredly get my point, so stop with the sociological purification.

    Evolution is an indoctrinated mythos system that is like a gateway drug to atheism. Clear it up for you any? lol……

    And that you show a zealot like faith in it with your answers to Gulliver is pretty much beyond dispute……:)

  37. G.A.Phillips says:

    Breaking:Doug finds the key to a viral post without mentioning Palin. FTJ>FTJ>>>>>>>>

  38. Alex Knapp says:

    @GA –

    lol ok, shall I call it a faith, shall I say that atheism is a faith spawned of Evolution?

    I don’t think that would be very accurate. Atheism predates the discovery of evolution by a good long while. Formal atheism developed independently and simultaneously in Classical Greece and Vedic era India circa the 6th-5th centures BCE.

    Evolution is an indoctrinated mythos system that is like a gateway drug to atheism. Clear it up for you any? lol……

    I’ll have to impart that to my friends at the monastery to which I make retreats. They teach evolutionary biology.

    And that you show a zealot like faith in it with your answers to Gulliver is pretty much beyond dispute

    You will note that all I have done is correct his errors in his understanding of evolutionary theory. At no point did I insist that he accept it.

  39. sam says:

    GA, you asked for an example of the superiority of science over religion. I offered medical science as one such instance, and then invited you to show you weren’t a hypocrite by declining medical service in the case of deathly illness, in favor of prayer. Why is that “stereotypical nonsense”? Don’t you believe that religion is superior to science?

  40. Rob Prather says:

    GA,

    Your ignorance is stunning. Evolution is independent of atheism and it doesn’t necessarily lead to atheism. Catholics accept evolution, for example.

  41. sam says:

    To understand GA, you have to appreciate where he’s coming from:

    GA Phillips prays to his god:

    Dear lord lol I beseech thee lol to guide my steps lol as I walk through the valley of the shadow of lol Obama. Please lol lolrd, hasten the day when my tadpole does not shrivel lol when the lol annointed one comes on the tv. lol. Speaking of my lol tadpole, oh lord, lol, since that blue-lol-lipped devil as come on the scene lol, my tadpole has been more tad than pole lol…could you help it to regain its lol manly uprightness lol before the next tea party lol? There will be some lol pretty hot tea partyettes there lol and a limp tadpole will not put me in good standing, if you catch my drift lol. Amen lol.

  42. john personna says:

    You guys who can’t blockquote might worry that it correlates with dumber positions.

    I’m just saying.

  43. Ernieyeball says:

    Holy Books are full of holes.
    The Bible was written by human beings. Human beings make mistakes.
    Some humans use the Scientific Method of Finding Thing Out to correct their mistakes.
    Other humans use their Holy Books to worship their mistakes.

  44. Alex Knapp says:

    @Ernieyeball,

    I think that’s an overly narrow way of looking at things. Traditional sacred texts may not be the best means of determining scientific knowledge. But that doesn’t mean they’re meaningless, either. Quite the contrary, they are enormous repositories of human thinking and wisdom. They’re ignored at our peril.

  45. Ernieyeball says:

    …Finding Things Out…
    (Sure wish there was another way to correct OTB comment mistakes.)

  46. Ernieyeball says:

    Some humans +other humans does not = all humans.

  47. mantis says:

    Unconstitutional.

    See Edwards v. Aguillard, which decided in 1987 that a Louisiana law mandating the teaching of “Creation Science” alongside evolution was a violation of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.

    Louisiana’s “Creationism Act” forbids the teaching of the theory of evolution in public elementary and secondary schools unless accompanied by instruction in the theory of “creation science.” The Act does not require the teaching of either theory unless the other is taught. It defines the theories as “the scientific evidences for [creation or evolution] and inferences from those scientific evidences.” Appellees, who include Louisiana parents, teachers, and religious leaders, challenged the Act’s constitutionality in Federal District Court, seeking an injunction and declaratory relief. The District Court granted summary judgment to appellees, holding that the Act violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Court of Appeals affirmed.

    Lawmakers really ought to be familiar with the law, even those from Oklahoma (and Georgia).

  48. mantis says:

    “What is my purpose and place in the universe, and why am I here?”

    Not questions a biology curriculum can or should answer.

  49. Brett #2 says:

    See Edwards v. Aguillard, which decided in 1987 that a Louisiana law mandating the teaching of “Creation Science” alongside evolution was a violation of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.

    There’s also the Dover v. Kitzmiller decision.

    I have no idea why so much of America still clings to the silly fairy tale aspect of their religion, but I think it’s probably a combination of ignorance and fear. Ignorance of the science and its evidence, and fear that if the Bible isn’t literally true down to the most ridiculous fable, then it’s all false, Jesus doesn’t love us, life is meaningless, etc.

  50. Alex Knapp says:

    @Brett,

    and fear that if the Bible isn’t literally true down to the most ridiculous fable, then it’s all false, Jesus doesn’t love us, life is meaningless, etc.

    Evolution does make the doctrine of Original Sin somewhat problematic, especially the Calvinist variant, which is pretty popular in the United States.

  51. mantis says:

    There’s also the Dover v. Kitzmiller decision.

    Yeah, but that was “Intelligent Design,” which is what the creationists came up with when “Creation Science” was slapped down by the SCOTUS in Edwards. It’s basically the same thing, as the court found, but the Edwards case deals with a law so similar to the proposed Oklahoma law that it, if passed, will get knocked down by lower courts almost immediately.

  52. G.A.Phillips says:

    ***I don’t think that would be very accurate. Atheism predates the discovery of evolution by a good long while. Formal atheism developed independently and simultaneously in Classical Greece and Vedic era India circa the 6th-5th century BCE.***

    First off evolution was not discovered, as to the atheism you speak of, merely thought up.

    And I would think that what happened in the Garden of Eden would qualify as the original lie and consequences of the belief in evolution.

    ***I’ll have to impart that to my friends at the monastery to which I make retreats. They teach evolutionary biology.***

    Alex you can find so called Christians that don’t believe in the divinity of Christ, and you don’t even have to look hard.

    ***You will note that all I have done is correct his errors in his understanding of evolutionary theory. At no point did I insist that he accept it.***

    I have read what you have wrote and I will be the judge of why I think you wrote it….lol….and also it’s intent…lol…

    ***GA,

    Your ignorance is stunning. Evolution is independent of atheism and it doesn’t necessarily lead to atheism. Catholics accept evolution, for example.***

    lol how else do people get these crazy ideas, And why must you people always point to Catholics and the Catholic Religion as if it is in anyway some kind of Christian standard, talk about a stunning ignorance, damn…

    Why don’t you go get a Bible and then compare it to that churches dogma and practices, and then get back to me…..

    ****GA, you asked for an example of the superiority of science over religion. I offered medical science as one such instance, and then invited you to show you weren’t a hypocrite by declining medical service in the case of deathly illness, in favor of prayer. Why is that “stereotypical nonsense”? Don’t you believe that religion is superior to science?***

    I believe that that Christianity is superior to science and also is the source of it, to tell you the truth.

    Also your prayer and most statements that you have ever propagandised on the subject have led me to my conclusions.

    you seek to take one abstract cult and make it the rationalization for your example about all, something I can easily do with atheists and these so called other believers of evolution as a whole. who gets closer to the truth is in the eye of the beholder.

    lol, I believe in prayer and in medicine…grrrr

    Mostly in this case I believe in the fact that what ever you what to call them have not the slightest Idea about evolution or creation science or atheism or Christianity. Many of You just don’t get none of it.

  53. sam says:

    “I have no idea why so much of America still clings to the silly fairy tale aspect of their religion, but I think it’s probably a combination of ignorance and fear.”

    I don’t know about that.

    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day

    I find that haunting and moving. As I said elsewhere, that’s about as good a description of the Big Bang as poetry can produce. My problem with creationists is that they know the words, but seem not to know the music. Besides, if what they claim is true, then, in effect, God is liar. They seem to think that God is somehow diminished if the poetry is not taken for fact. I read Genesis as reflecting the awe of men who let themselves be struck by the fact of the world. As the attempt of finite men to put into words what must have seemed to them as infinite. It’s an experience open to all of us, you know. Let yourself be struck by the existence of the world, and for a fleeting moment you can experience what the writers of Genesis must have experienced. I respect that deeply. What I don’t respect very much is cheapening of all that for political purposes.

  54. Bleev K says:

    Thou shall keep your religion for yourself.

  55. mantis says:

    And why must you people always point to Catholics and the Catholic Religion as if it is in anyway some kind of Christian standard, talk about a stunning ignorance, damn…

    There are more Catholics in the world than people of any other Christian church. And they’ve been around pretty much since the beginning (I leave it to the RCC and the Eastern Orthodoxy to argue about the first few hundred years). So it’s not at all unreasonable to consider Catholics a large part of the Christian faith, and thus quite appropriate to consider their acceptance of evolution as a sign that the theory is not anti-theist or synonymous with atheism at all.

    So, you were saying something about stunning ignorance and how Catholics shouldn’t be considered Christians?

  56. Tsar Nicholas says:

    Religion is the opiate of the masses and leftism is the opiate of the anti-religious.

  57. sam says:

    You get that out of a libertarian fortune cookie?

  58. G.A.Phillips says:

    ****So, you were saying something about stunning ignorance and how Catholics shouldn’t be considered Christians?****

    lol, Why don’t you go get a Bible and then compare it to that churches dogma and practices, and then get back to me…..

  59. sam says:

    GA the Know-Nothing who truly knows nothing.

  60. anjin-san says:

    > you mean as in like the state of Texas, which has been relatively recession proof?

    Guess you have not heard about Texas’ budget situation. Pretty much as bad as California. Meanwhile Perry slams stimulus money in front of the camera and begs for it behind the scenes.

  61. anjin-san says:

    > My problem with creationists is that they know the words, but seem not to know the music.

    Afraid those cats just have no rhythm…

  62. anjin-san says:

    So Gulliver do you know WHY Texas avoided the worst of the housing meltdown? Apparently not.

    Government regulations (Texas has an 80% maximum loan-to-value limit for home mortgage refinancing and home equity lines of credit.) and high property taxes that make it unattractive to out of state investors.

    They don’t cover this stuff on Fox I guess.

    Somewhere there is an AOL chat room wondering where Gulliver has gone…

  63. Axel Edgren says:

    Non-life is just non-complicated molecules.

    Life is sufficiently complicated molecules. There is a SPECTRUM between in-animate matter and animate matter. There is no “toggle”. Creationists are proof of this – they are far closer to a rock than they are to me.

    Second, atheism or total theological apathy is a neurological order, while any kind of speculation about things that are INTRINSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE is a neurological disorder.

    Also, when are the owners of the website going to become men and ban the ID people? Their opinions are a class below those of the others, so they should be banned to promote quality on OTB.

  64. Axel Edgren says:

    “I believe that that Christianity is superior to science and also is the source of it, to tell you the truth.”

    Sigh. Christianity is a *substitute* for science. Religious ideas about the origin of things and concepts were meant to explain what was then could not be explained.