| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
29 Nov 2005 05:53:38 AM |
| Object: |
Darwin on Trial |
Darwin on Trial
http://www.newyorker.com/online/content/articles/051205on_onlineonly01
New Yorker - United States
What, briefly, is the history of the teaching of evolution? Most Americans
know about the Scopes trial, in 1925. What are the other milestones?
Scopes was a young schoolteacher who volunteered to participate in an
A.C.L.U. challenge to a law in Tennessee; the law forbade teaching that
“man has descended from a lower order of animal.” Scopes lost the case, and
never appealed it beyond the Tennessee Supreme Court, which upheld the
constitutionality of the law but overturned Scopes’s conviction on a
technicality. But since then the courts, including the Supreme Court, have
consistently held that laws forbidding the teaching of evolution or
mandating the teaching of creationism side by side with evolution are
unconstitutional—that they violate the establishment clause of the First
Amendment, because they breach the separation of church and state. The key
Supreme Court decision in this area was Edwards v. Aguillard, in 1987, in
which the Court overturned a Louisiana statute that mandated the teaching
of creationism alongside evolution. Scalia wrote a sharp dissent, which is
an indicator of how he might vote if an intelligent-design case ever made
it to the Court.
And recently—as in a Cobb County, Georgia, case involving what you might
call “warning labels” on high-school biology textbooks, which say that
evolution is a theory, not a fact—courts have gone further, seeing such
invitations to look askance at evolutionary theory as violations of the
establishment clause. In that case, the U.S. District Court judge said that
the stickers were tacit endorsements of a fundamentalist-Christian
viewpoint, even though they did not mention anything explicitly religious.
.... evolution are unconstitutional--that they violate the establishment
clause of the First Amendment, because they breach the separation of church
and state. ...
**************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the U.S. and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
30 Nov 2005 09:57:23 AM |
|
|
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
I do not want my child's mind to be corrupted by religion of any sort
especially Christianity.
Never trust christians, as their faith goes above any agreement they make.
Chris.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
30 Nov 2005 01:42:56 PM |
|
|
"Chris" <nimbo@(no-spam)ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
I do not want my child's mind to be corrupted by religion of any sort
especially Christianity.
Never trust christians, as their faith goes above any agreement they
make.
This is bigotry given greater importance than human well-being. If a
Christian is a capable doctor then it is a disservice to the community to
prevent him or her from practising based purely on the religion s/he holds
to.
If a Christian has an understanding of physics, or history, or maths, or
what-have-you, then again, it is doing a disservice to potential students
to prohibit that person from teaching.
You are confusing 'Christian' with 'mindless fundamentalist' - and I assure
you, there IS a difference. Refusing to recognise it is a mark of your own
prejudice, and makes you as guilty as those you criticise.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paulo Joe Jingy" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
30 Nov 2005 03:07:12 PM |
|
|
Chris (no-spam) wrote:
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
Ah -- tolerance. (Unlike *those* intolerant Christians.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nog" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
30 Nov 2005 03:18:46 PM |
|
|
Paulo Joe Jingy wrote:
Chris (no-spam) wrote:
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
Ah -- tolerance. (Unlike *those* intolerant Christians.)
Christianism is not unlike Nazisism.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Paulo Joe Jingy" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
30 Nov 2005 03:48:33 PM |
|
|
Nog wrote:
Paulo Joe Jingy wrote:
Chris (no-spam) wrote:
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
Ah -- tolerance. (Unlike *those* intolerant Christians.)
Christianism is not unlike Nazisism.
Atheistic communism is not unlike Nazisism.
(I didn't start this thread. An intolerant anti-Christian did.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Midjis" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
01 Dec 2005 01:54:29 AM |
|
|
"Paulo Joe Jingy" <dblizz@gmail.com> wrote:
Chris (no-spam) wrote:
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
Ah -- tolerance. (Unlike *those* intolerant Christians.)
Christianism is not unlike Nazisism.
Atheistic communism is not unlike Nazisism.
(I didn't start this thread. An intolerant anti-Christian did.)
All dogmatic fascism loses us the moral high ground, whether it be anti-
religious or anti-atheist.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
30 Nov 2005 10:53:04 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 15:57:23 GMT, in alt.atheism , "Chris"
<nimbo@(no-spam)ukonline.co.uk> in
<DZjjf.105821$375.22888@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
I do not want my child's mind to be corrupted by religion of any sort
especially Christianity.
Never trust christians, as their faith goes above any agreement they make.
How about Christian Bernard?
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
30 Nov 2005 12:27:43 PM |
|
|
alt.education removed
Chris (no-spam) wrote:
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
I do not want my child's mind to be corrupted by religion of any sort
especially Christianity.
Never trust christians, as their faith goes above any agreement they make.
Chris.
How do you know for sure if someone is a Christian?
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
30 Nov 2005 02:18:17 PM |
|
|
On 30 Nov 2005 10:27:43 -0800, in alt.atheism
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in
<1133375263.542996.229000@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
alt.education removed
Chris (no-spam) wrote:
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
I do not want my child's mind to be corrupted by religion of any sort
especially Christianity.
Never trust christians, as their faith goes above any agreement they make.
Chris.
How do you know for sure if someone is a Christian?
Which ones?
The ones who follow the teachings of Jesus let you know by the way they
act. They understand the Sermon on the Mount, and, if they are
imperfect, they don't worry about it. They mind their own business.
The ones who worship themselves and claim to be Christians tell you that
they're saved and that you're going to hell and that their car will have
no one in it come the rapture. They pray loudly in the square and make a
big deal of how generous they are to the poor. They try to run everyone
else's lives. In short, they are everything that Jesus condemned.
.
|
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: Darwin on Trial |
30 Nov 2005 02:30:59 PM |
|
|
David Jensen wrote:
On 30 Nov 2005 10:27:43 -0800, in alt.atheism
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in
<1133375263.542996.229000@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
alt.education removed
Chris (no-spam) wrote:
Christians should not be allowed to teach or hold positions of power
including medicine.
I do not want my child's mind to be corrupted by religion of any sort
especially Christianity.
Never trust christians, as their faith goes above any agreement they make.
Chris.
How do you know for sure if someone is a Christian?
Which ones?
The ones who follow the teachings of Jesus let you know by the way they
act. They understand the Sermon on the Mount, and, if they are
imperfect, they don't worry about it. They mind their own business.
How can Christian's "mind their own business" given Jesus told them to
make disciples of all nations?
The ones who worship themselves and claim to be Christians tell you that
they're saved and that you're going to hell and that their car will have
no one in it come the rapture. They pray loudly in the square and make a
big deal of how generous they are to the poor. They try to run everyone
else's lives. In short, they are everything that Jesus condemned.
Thank you for answering for Chris. I don't think he understands
anything outside his anti-religious expression tunnel-vision and so
probably wouldn't know how to answer the question anyway.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
