|
Title: I.D. vs. C.D. Post by: JudgeNot on August 05, 2005, 11:26:00 AM Unless you've been hiding in a cave the last few years, you know that teaching of I.D. (Intelligent Design) along side Charlie Darwin's 'evolution' is a very hot political potato that the C.D.ers are loosing to the I.D.ers on scientific merit alone. I've linked to an interesting (but lengthy) op-ed by Dan Peterson on American Spectator.
An excerpt: Among certain sectors of the media, for example, it's an article of faith that those who believe in God, or advocate principles supporting that belief, are just a mob of Bible-thumping, knuckle-dragging, Scripture-spouting, hellfire and brimstone-preaching, rightwing, gun-toting, bigoted, homophobic, moralistic, paternalistic, polyester-wearing, mascara-smeared, false-eyelashed, SUV-driving, Wal-Mart shopping, big hair, big gut, fat butt, holy-rolling, snake-handling, Limbaugh-listening, Bambi-shooting, trailer-park-dwelling, uneducated, ignorant, backwater, hayseed, hick, inbred, pinhead rubes -- mostly from the South, or places no better than the South -- who voted for Bush. I take some of this excerpt personally: I, for one, DO NOT wear mascara, nor am I inbred. I wish I had big hair, but I've never sported false-eyelashes. As for the rest of the description... yea? So? Read the entire article here: http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8543 (http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=8543) Title: Re:I.D. vs. C.D. Post by: Soldier4Christ on August 05, 2005, 11:54:08 AM He's calling people bigoted when he makes statements such as that?
I really enjoy people that do not understand the meaning of the very words that they use! ::) ::) ::) ::) |