Today's Talking Point

[lollardfish]

To compete with China in the 21st century, we need to teach our students the best possible science. Teaching creationism - by any name, and intelligent design is only the latest in a long list - is unpatriotic.

Notes: Fear of the Soviets was critical in the defeat of creationism in the courts during the 50s and 60s. Biology and biological development (i.e. evolution) are going to become only more important branches of science in the next century - for economic reasons, medical reasons, but also military reasons.

Comments

[groomporter.livejournal.com]

I've always thought a lot of people would be able to accept evolution easier if they just view it as a theory of change, not as a theory of creation. I've never gone to track down Darwin's exact words, but when I was in public high school we were actually taught that Darwin said life was "created" and then evolved to its current state.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

Ah, see, this is precisely the problem. Many 'intelligent design' folks actually have no problem with the concept of evolution being the mechanism by which God allows species to develop. Their real problem is that the earth needs to be about 10,000 years old, or the Bible is wrong. Most attacks on Darwin are really defenses of the book of Genesis, even though I'm not always sure that the creationist folks are aware that's what they are doing.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, I suppose it's the Bible literalists that are the problem.
I did see an interesting comment recently asking why so many creationists are social Darwinsists when it comes to other issues.