Comments on: Criminalizing Creationism http://blog.darwincentral.org/2007/08/03/criminalizing-creationism/ Coniuratio compatiens Thu, 15 Jul 2010 04:02:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Darwin Central » Europe Bitch-Slaps the Discovery Institute http://blog.darwincentral.org/2007/08/03/criminalizing-creationism/comment-page-1/#comment-17725 Darwin Central » Europe Bitch-Slaps the Discovery Institute Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:30:30 +0000 http://www.darwincentral.org/blog/2007/08/03/criminalizing-creationism/#comment-17725 [...] yet more persecution by the Darwinian Thought-Police, as reported in our own Darwin Central blog at Criminalizing Creationism (13 Aug 2007). By truncating key phrases in his quotations from that draft, Attorney Luskin grossly [...] [...] yet more persecution by the Darwinian Thought-Police, as reported in our own Darwin Central blog at Criminalizing Creationism (13 Aug 2007). By truncating key phrases in his quotations from that draft, Attorney Luskin grossly [...]

]]> By: Possum http://blog.darwincentral.org/2007/08/03/criminalizing-creationism/comment-page-1/#comment-16452 Possum Thu, 16 Aug 2007 07:13:00 +0000 http://www.darwincentral.org/blog/2007/08/03/criminalizing-creationism/#comment-16452 Attempts to teach creationism in public schools should be treated as high crimes: Typically the state law establishing school boards mandates that science be taught. Since creationism (and its lab-coated twin ID) are not science, any school board that attempted to teach ID would be in violation of the law that established it. This is practically the definition of a high crime. Such actions should be corrected by legislative impeachment and trial. A side benefit of treating ID like this is that it also applies to other abominations like Ebonics or Afrocentric history. Attempts to teach creationism in public schools should be treated as high crimes: Typically the state law establishing school boards mandates that science be taught. Since creationism (and its lab-coated twin ID) are not science, any school board that attempted to teach ID would be in violation of the law that established it. This is practically the definition of a high crime.

Such actions should be corrected by legislative impeachment and trial.

A side benefit of treating ID like this is that it also applies to other abominations like Ebonics or Afrocentric history.

]]> By: Jemmy Button http://blog.darwincentral.org/2007/08/03/criminalizing-creationism/comment-page-1/#comment-16283 Jemmy Button Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:36:58 +0000 http://www.darwincentral.org/blog/2007/08/03/criminalizing-creationism/#comment-16283 I have edited the final sentence of my article here, for it was brought to my attention that my meaning rather misfired, and read as a personal attack on Mr. Luskin. My intended meaning -- that Mr. Luskin's article did not seem to use the same understanding of the word 'criminalise' as is common in the UK, will, I trust, be clearer from the final sentence, now corrected. I have edited the final sentence of my article here, for it was brought to my attention that my meaning rather misfired, and read as a personal attack on Mr. Luskin. My intended meaning — that Mr. Luskin’s article did not seem to use the same understanding of the word ‘criminalise’ as is common in the UK, will, I trust, be clearer from the final sentence, now corrected.

]]> By: Alfred Wallace http://blog.darwincentral.org/2007/08/03/criminalizing-creationism/comment-page-1/#comment-16262 Alfred Wallace Mon, 13 Aug 2007 09:58:31 +0000 http://www.darwincentral.org/blog/2007/08/03/criminalizing-creationism/#comment-16262 The Discovery Institute insists that ID is NOT Creationism, yet I know of no instance where they have publically distanced themselves from any of the wildly unscientific claims of Young Earth Creationists, like a 6,000 year old earth, or Noah's flood, and the like. Behe's testimony at Dover did so, but has the Discovery Institute? Can anyone point me to such a declaration on their part? The Discovery Institute insists that ID is NOT Creationism, yet I know of no instance where they have publically distanced themselves from any of the wildly unscientific claims of Young Earth Creationists, like a 6,000 year old earth, or Noah’s flood, and the like. Behe’s testimony at Dover did so, but has the Discovery Institute? Can anyone point me to such a declaration on their part?

]]>