This piece pretty much is a representative portrayal of what is going on in the evolution/creationism debate all over the country:
Intelligent design emerged in the late 1970s and suggests there are certain aspects of the universe and nature that are best explained by an intelligent designer. But it avoids discussion of the designer, instead focusing on the complexity of life and the universe.
Proponents say that it is an alternative theory to evolution and has a place in public school classrooms because it fosters critical thinking.
“The theory of evolution has a lot of holes in it, and science students in our public schools should be given as much information to make intelligent decisions on their own to decide on the origin of the universe,” said Rep. Jack Hoogendyk, R-Texas Township, a gubernatorial candidate who has considered introducing legislation to allow it to be taught in Michigan classrooms.
But critics of intelligent design counter that it is simply repackaged creationism without scientific basis that stays away from discussion of God or religion to avoid being outlawed as unconstitutional.
“They haven’t done anything scientifically to warrant being in the classroom,” said Ed Brayton of Michigan Citizens for Science. “Evolution is beyond a doubt one of the most well-supported theories as a result of a century and a half of painstaking research by literally thousands and thousands of scientists. Yet they are demanding equal time.”
Read the whole thing, and then swing on onver to the Panda’s Thumb and check out Parts three and four of their report from inside the 2005 Creationism Mega Conference. If you haven’t already read them, here are parts one and two.
Also be sure to check out Ron Bailey’s dispatches over at Reason:
Thanks to Dave Straub for the Reason links.
Dave Straub
Ron Bailey at Reason also was at the “Mega Conference,” and filed three dispatches:
Creation Summer Camp
The Myth of Millions of Years
God Said It, That Settles It
The auto-preview feature is very cool, John.
Scott M
Ed Brayton has a great blog.
ppGaz
“The Myth of Millions of Years” is a priceless construct.
It goes with my favorite creationist blurb:
“How do you know what happened millions of years ago. Were you there?”
We wring our hands over the craziness of radicals in other lands. Hell, we have them right here in Kansas.
SeesThroughIt
Yup, few things encapsulate the smug stupidity of the radical Christain right quite like their attempts to put their little myths on the same footing as a century and a half of nonstop scientific inquiry.
Slartibartfast
Likening “radical Christian right” to radical Islam, on the other hand, takes pure genius.
bruce
The “radical Christian right” does indeed share many similarities to radical Islam. Mostly the radicalism. See David Neiwert for more over at Ornicus.
Slartibartfast
Or Orcinus. Whatever.
I’ve red Neiwert’s thoughts on the matter and…well, I think it would play well to the Velikovsky set. Other than that, it doesn’t have much value.
ppGaz
Exactly. Why do you think they’re referred to as the “American Taliban?”
albedo
“Exactly. Why do you think they’re referred to as the “American Taliban?”
Well, someone being referred to as something doesn’t necessarily equal them being that thing. The Christian Right doesn’t, with the exception of the Eric Rudolphs of the world, share the same commitment to change through violence. They’ve actually been pretty brilliant at enacting change through elected representation and lobbying.
I’d agree, though, that the CR and radical Islam certainly share many goals. Among them: making women second-class citizens, outlawing homosexuality, governmental institution of religion, and general butting into peoples’ private lives…
ppGaz
Yes, especially that last part. It’s all about power and control, whether you are talking radical Islam, or Dobson. The only “values” they care about are the ones over which they think they can, and should, have control.
I have a standard two-word response to that sort of thing, wherever it comes from; the second word is “you.”
Anderson
Is it just me, or is the comment signin greatly diminishing the # of comments?
Creationism & suicide attacks should be generating godawful 50+ strings.
We’ll have to wait for the next break in the Plame case to get a fair test ….
7
I think American Taliban is an apt phrase for the American Christian Right. After all, their actions certainly are not American or Christian. And while they are not like the Taliban in that they don’t use violence to advance their cause, their objective is the same; to silence, intimidate and otherwise eliminate those that are opposed to their goal of a theocracy. And as far as violence is concerned, sure they may not come out and advocate it, but I hardly ever see them condemning it. I don’t recall any of these groups speaking out against Eric Rudolf or Paul Hill. I seldom here Falwell or his ilk saying anything about the hateful and often violent language of Fred Phelps. Not one made a peep when it became reported that the Judge hearing the Terri Schivo motions had to be put under police protection due to the numerous death threats he received. We should also not forget that it is the Christian Right/American Taliban, that are frequently presenting their issues as a conflict. It’ a culture WAR. It’s the FIGHT to take back America. It’s a BATTLE to save the soul of the nation. Maybe I am over reacting, I hope that’s all it is. But from some of the rhetoric we have heard, it doesn’t sound like these folks don’t want us to react.
But the Taliban comparison is apt mainly because like the Taliban, the Christian Right is evoking a higher authority, presenting their brand or oppression as being god’s work. In fact it has nothing to do with god, it has everything to do with power and control. Getting evolution out and bible tales in is one way they can get control the public schools.
Slartibartfast
If that’s the best you can come up with, I suggest more practice. There are in fact a few nontrivial distinctions that set one apart from the other; the violence part is just one of them. Not excusing any of our domestic problems, mind you, just saying they’re not really all that much alike.