Christian education?

Christian vulgarity!

<dogmatic bullshit snipped>

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/02/12/INGU9H55MD1.DTL&t
ype=printable

Great minds needn't think alike to be right
Advocates of science, religion can co-exist
- Cynthia Bass
Sunday, February 12, 2006

On this day in 1809, two of the most famous men of the 19th century were
born under very different circumstances -- one in a Kentucky log cabin,
the other in an English country house complete with stable and servants'
quarters.

The first is, of course, Abraham Lincoln.

And the second? None other than Charles Darwin.

That two such influential men should be born on the same day of the same
year surely is one of history's most amazing coincidences. In fact, had
the second man been anyone else in the world except Charles Darwin, the
father of the theory of evolution, it might even be cited as an example
of ... intelligent design! Needless to say, Darwin's birthday is not a
day of great celebration in intelligent design circles.

On the contrary: Darwin's theory of evolution has been increasingly
under attack by intelligent- design proponents -- an attack both shrill
and nationwide.

It's important to keep in mind that an overwhelming majority of
scientists, both here and abroad, consider evolution one of the most
established theories in all science. Indeed, modern biology, physiology,
biochemistry -- and even medicine and immunology -- accept and build
upon Darwin's naturalistic explanation of both the diversity of species
and the complexities of biological systems. Intelligent design adherents
agree with Darwin that species are indeed diverse and biological systems
unquestionably complex.

It's that naturalistic element they so heartily oppose.

According to intelligent design -- both its nonscientific supporters and
the few fully credentialed scientists who also support it -- there are
times when diversity is just too diverse, complexity just too complex,
for the explanation solely to be natural selection. The examples most
often cited include unexpected biological novelty in the fossil record
and the existence of so-called "junk" DNA. If life were really informed
by natural selection alone, says intelligent design, these examples
should never exist. And yet they do. Therefore, there must have been
something (or someone) that (or who) stepped in and, for whatever
reason, "designed" them.

Regarding the exact nature of this designing force, intelligent design
advocates declare complete neutrality: it can be God, Brahma, Gaia, even
the Enlightenment's "Great Clockmaker." They claim they are interested
only in making sure students are not misled into thinking that Darwin
explains everything.

This is disingenuous in the extreme. There would be no interest in
including an intelligent "disclaimer" in a biology class (as was
proposed in the recent Dover, Pa., court case), were it not specifically
to undermine Darwin. After all, while it's true that modern Darwinian
thought doesn't explain everything in biology, there are plenty of
unexplained mysteries in physics, too. Astronomy and cosmology also have
lots of gaps.

But nobody's rushing to insist on "disclaimers" prior to teaching say,
the Big Bang. Darwin comes in for this special treatment precisely
because some zealous conservative religious believers see evolution as a
direct threat to all religious belief in America. There's a sad irony in
this for those of us who are ourselves religious, for the surest way to
undermine religion is to insist on playing in Darwin's "ballpark."

That's because once you accept the standards of science and the
scientific method -- which intelligent design vehemently claims to --
you run the risk that science will ultimately provide naturalistic
explanations to its current mysteries. And if the day comes when a
future scientist explains "junk" DNA as concisely as James Watson and
Francis Crick explained what at the time seemed equally unsolvable --
the mystery of DNA itself -- where will this leave religious belief?

A more effective way to bolster religious belief than attacking Darwin
is to remember that religion addresses questions that are completely
beyond the range of science. The meaning of life, the nature of good
conduct, the nature of the human soul: Science is not set up to deal
with any of these.

This is why religion remains so potent -- and, I think, so positive -- a
force in modern America. It alone provides answers to the hardest
questions we all face. In a health crisis, we want help from a doctor
who practices medicine in a completely rational and scientific manner.
But our prayers that this medicine helps go to a supernatural being, not
to the doctor.

Which returns us to today's other birthday boy.

Lincoln could never have accomplished the great tasks before him, nor
inspired others to stay the course through so many defeats,
disappointment and death, without recourse to ideas imbued with the
deepest spirituality. Whether he declared that "this nation, under God,
shall have a new birth of freedom" or called on his fellow Northerners
to press on to victory "with malice toward none, with charity for all,
with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right," he clearly
saw the unique wisdom and power embodied in the great truths of religion
-- wisdom certainly different from scientific wisdom, but equally
certainly, just as valuable.

This, most of us would agree, is religion at its best: providing
spiritual comfort, psychological strength, moral direction and righteous
inspiration.

In this realm, evolution -- wonderful job that it does in explaining the
natural world -- cannot compete with religion. In its own "ballpark,"
religion, as Lincoln knew, wins every time. It's only when it strays
into the other guy's stadium that it sets itself up for inevitable loss
and disappointment.

Cynthia Bass is an East Bay author who writes about history and culture.
Contact us at insight@sfchronicle.com.

Page E - 1
URL:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/02/12/INGU9H55MD1.DTL

[snipppppp]

Gee, how unexpected.....Ed can't spell Vaseline.

One time a thing occured to me
What's real, and what's for sale?
Blew a kiss and tried to take it home

It isn't you, isn't me
Search for things that you can't see
Going blind, out of reach
Somewhere in the vaseline

Two times and it has rendered me
Punch drunk and without bail
Think I'd be safer all alone
Flys in the vaseline we are
Sometimes it blows my mind
Keep getting stuck here all the time

You'll see the look and you'll see the lies
You'll eat the lies, and you will.

It isn't you, isn't me
Search for things that you can't see
Going blind, out of reach
Somewhere in the vaseline.