Written by Pia Savage
Blogging has been great for me. It's allowed me to meet people from parts of the country I didn't know well enough before, and realize that people throughout this incredible country are caring, compassionate, and intelligent with beliefs that are very similar but they don't exactly mirror them.
That's the problem. We, who are called liberal, don't think exactly alike. Earlier this summer I wrote about subway searches. I was scared, angry, tired of answering comments from people who do usually think alike, and can't understand how people on Bring it on! can think differently from one another.
I won't explain how The First Amendment really means that America is a Christian country; because as many times as it's been explained to me I still don't understand how this: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. — The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution can possibly mean that as a non-Christian I have been living in a legally Christian country all these years. Yes the majority of the population is Christian.
The variety of religious beliefs in the United States surpasses the nation’s multitude of ethnicities, nationalities, and races, making religion another source of diversity rather than a unifying force. This is true even though the vast majority of Americans—83 percent—identify themselves as Christian. One-third of these self-identified Christians are unaffiliated with any church. Moreover, practicing Christians belong to a wide variety of churches that differ on theology, organization, programs, and policies. The largest number of Christians in the United States belong to one of the many Protestant denominations—groups that vary widely in their beliefs and practices. Roman Catholics constitute the next largest group of American Christians, followed by the Eastern Orthodox.
That in no way means that Thomas Jefferson and the other founding fathers meant for this to be a Christian nation.
The roots of the First Amendment can be traced to a bill written by Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) in 1777 and proposed to the Virginia Legislature in 1779. It guaranteed freedom of (and from) religion. After an impassioned speech by James Madison, and after some amendments, it became law on 1786-JAN-16.
Why when we at Bring it on! have been saying this since we began am I bringing this up now? Because many radical Christian Rightists still don't get it. It's simple; it's the Amendment that guarantees the most basic of rights, the right to practice or not practice a religion, and never have to worry that a state religion will be formed, and also and equal, guarantees freedom of speech.
Because so many people feel validated and vindicated by the people occupying The White House, Intelligent Design, and The Discovery Institute have been getting much play recently. Here are a few quotes by William Safire who isn't exactly known as a liberal, but yikes, he's Jewish, so the Radical Christian right always knew that they couldn't trust him, really.
Then along came the phrase intelligent design, and evolution had fresh linguistic competition. Though the phrase can be found in an 1847 issue of Scientific American, it was probably coined in its present sense in "Humanism," a 1903 book by Ferdinand Canning Scott Schiller: "It will not be possible to rule out the supposition that the process of evolution may be guided by an intelligent design."
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - ABE
"We Jews... tend to get a bit crazed when The First Amendment is under attack; and Intelligent Design is just another attack on it."
Intelligent Jews don't attack intelligent design.
Only crazed Jews do that.
And Intelligent Design has nothing to do with the First Amendment.
Intelligent Jews want to learn more about any theory.
2 - billy
here we go again. i have no problem learning about intelligent design, except it isnt a theory.
it is a rather simplistic philosophy that explains evrything to an invisible and undetectable "designer"
the cause of everything cant be tested so there is no theory and certainly no basis to discuss it in science class.
3 - ABE
Why don't elephants spew venom and why don't cobras have trunks?
Answer that billy, and I'll ask several hundred million more questions.
I'm sure you can answer each one of them.
"evolution" doesn't begin to answer these questions.
4 - The Bastard
Evolution doesn't begin to answer these questions?
If that's that case neither does intelligent design. Why? Because there is absolutely not one single ounce of credibal research to back up intelligent design. Just the bible.
And I'm confused, in the Bible there are actually two stories on how this world came about, which one is true? Answer me that and I'll let you teach intelligent design in public schools!
5 - ABE
Evolution doesn't begin to answer these questions?
"If that's that case neither does intelligent design"
Good. We are making progress.
But Intelligent Design doesn't rely on the Bible.
Why do opponents of ID have to rely on kicking the Bible around to avoid addressing intelligent questions?
6 - The Bastard
Intelligent questions? What exactly is an intelligent question? Is it "no question is a dumb question" or is it "how many quarters make up a dollar?"
And in case anyone is wondering why an elephant has a trunk and why shakes have venom really should pick up a science book instead of copping out and saying I don't have to learn this stuff because it was all made by God.
One last question, if you believe in intelligent design than you would have to believe in martians, right?
Stop making excuses and learn something!
Because Intelligent Design states that something "out there" made us with a purpose. So God is a martian, right?
But that would contradict what you believe and that is that human life is the only life in the universe.
7 - billy
Answer that billy, and I'll ask several hundred million more questions.
how would you asking me absurd questions detached from reality, raise id to the level of a theory?
8 - pia savage
let me simply state that if Intelligent Design could be quantified and studied as evolution has been, I might think it acceptable to teach in public schools.
But it hasn't been, and so I can't accept it.
Thought about the crazed Jew remark and I have to thank Abe. I come from a long line of crazed Jews.
Yes intelligent Jews want to learn any theory that has substance; any intelligent person does of any race, ethnic and and/or religious group.
I was stating that William Safire and I tend not to agree on most issues, but usually do on First Amendment issues, and Intelligent Design is a First Amendment issue. I wouldn't want any kid I know to be taught it as equal to Evolution, or even less than.
Let me repeat this because I have learned to: William Safire (once Nixon's numero uno speech writer) and I tend not to agree on issues other than First Amendment ones.
Intelligent Design is most certainly a First Amendment issue
9 - ABE
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Intelligent Design is most certainly a First Amendment issue.
How so?
10 - ABE
Comment 8 posted by pia savage
"let me simply state that if Intelligent Design could be quantified and studied as evolution has been, I might think it acceptable to teach in public schools."
Evoluton is being questioned by Intelligent Design.
And with sufficient cause.
Why is it being turned into something else?
11 - Victor Plenty
"Intelligent design" is theology, not science.
12 - ABE
Intelligent Design is questioning the "theory" of evolution.
If you have no questions -- you are being satisfied by a "theory" full of holes.
You can't see the holes -- but many can.
13 - Victor Plenty
Gaps in science require more science to fill them. Not theology dishonestly masquerading as science.
14 - ABE
What theology?
15 - ABE
Why don't elephants spew venom and why don't cobras have trunks?
This is not theology.
"evolution" doesn't begin to answer these questions.
16 - Victor Plenty
Every question you pose has one answer: "God made it that way." Clearly, ABE, this is the only reason you believe "intelligent design" has something more to say on the matter than evolutionary biology does.
This makes all of your questions theological questions, not scientific questions.
Intelligent design is a perfectly adequate subject for theology students to learn. It has no place in any biology class.
17 - ABE
Intelligent design is a way to allow students to question the current "theory" in a biology class.
What you appear to fear is students understanding the holes in what is presently being taught.
No one is suggesting that we that teach "God made it that way."
18 - Victor Plenty
You fear students learning to think for themselves, without turning to the self-appointed authority of a religious leader to learn the answers to every perplexing question.
If you put "intelligent design" into biology classes, "God made it that way" is exactly what you are teaching the students. The phrase has no other meaningful interpretation.
Science is a method for investigating the universe without the theological disputes which have always muddied the inquiry into reality in the past.
19 - ABE
You are connecting points that have not been made here,
I can see why you are content with the current “theory.”
20 - Victor Plenty
Hmm. What have I overlooked? Perhaps you really believe the "intelligent designer" behind the current state of affairs in the universe wasn't God after all, but was actually Cooter from the old television series The Dukes of Hazzard.
Actually that might explain a lot. Who else but Crazy Cooter could come up with the platypus and call it an intelligent design?
No, your claim that "intelligent design" has nothing to do with theology is far more of a strain to any credibility you might have had than any of the so-called holes you imagine you have found in the science of evolutionary biology.
21 - ABE
the·ol·o·gy
“the study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions. A course of specialized religious study usually at a college or seminary
A system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions”
___
No one is proposing that biology include “the study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions” or any of the rest of “theology“.
Intelligent Design is “the study of the nature of evolution and scientific findings; rational inquiry into questions dealing with the holes and gaps in the “theory” of evolution.
22 - Victor Plenty
Oooh, argument by dictionary definition. Sign of the amateur debater every time.
Tell us, ABE, what are your answers to these questions you have posed about cobra trunks and elephant venom?
Surely your scientific analysis must have come up with something really good by now, being so intelligent and everything.
23 - ABE
I resort to the dictionary only when it is necessary to educate someone.
24 - Victor Plenty
Oh! I am slain by your rapier wit! You want to educate me, why don't you answer my question about who the Intelligent Designer really is, if you want us to believe it's not God you're talking about here?
Or answer your own questions about why cobras and elephants are the way they are. Share your vast scientific knowledge with us.
Go ahead. Educate us.
25 - ABE
That is what I have been trying to do without success.