From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Wed Nov 10 2004 - 15:37:40 GMT
Arlo:
> "Intelligent Design" is the newspeak label conservatives are using to push
> creationism (first "creationism", then "creation science", now "intelligent
> design"). This is one example of how the conservatives distort the news by
> manipulating language. As it stands, I have no qualms with "intelligent
> design"... in a comparative mythology course, where it belongs. You may
> think this is dismissive, but I believe mythology to be very important.
Your opinion about "intelligent design" is not shared by all biologists.
You might want to read "Icons of Evolution" by biologist Jonathan Wells
for an alternate view. What I find amusing is your insistence on teaching
history from all points of view, no matter how controversial (including
equating the morality of Communist Russia with the U.S.), but slamming the
door on teaching controversies about evolutionary theory.
Since you don't want to mention the MOQ in a biology class, I take it you
believe, like MSH, that the MOQ theory of evolution is imaginative poetry,
and that Pirsig's answer to the question, "Why survive?" should not be
taken literally.
> When you explain to them why Uncle Sam killed 10 million native American
> Indians. Or why Uncle Sam enslaved, tortured and considered "blacks" (and
> Indians) as sub-humans in their "All Men Are Created Equal" nation?
Where on earth did you get 10 million Indians from much less killing that
many? And have you explained to the kiddies that the horrible Christian
white man abolished slavery many generations ago while black Muslims in
Africa are currently slaughtering Christian blacks by the thousands?
> Of course, I could always dismiss the genocide of Stalin by claiming it was
> "conservative propaganda with the agenda of discrediting Marxism". Maybe
> those 13 million people just killed each other in local disputes. Uncle Joe
> simply inherited the land bereft of these murderous savages.
Sounds like something a liberal would dream up.
> Nor am I. One of the strengths of his (Pirsig's) explanatory framework, and
> why I
> believe it will overcome static social patterns of thought.
Is Pirsig's evolutionary theory explanatory or poetry in your view?
> > If you can point to where I blasphemed liberals with those words I'll
> > gladly apologize.
> Aahhhh... you are a politician on the side? Your use of "liberal" as a
> pejorative speaks for itself.
Hmm. If it's such a pejorative, how come you apply to yourself, like when
you wrote the following:
> But don't think I do not like America, Platt, I have much hope given that
> 49% of the country, half of the population (of voters) not only voted
> democratic, but voted for the ***most liberal member of congress***. All we
> need is 1% to see through the veil of right-wing propaganda, and we'll not
> only have a "liberal" president, but a very liberal president! Something
> worth staying for!!!
Obviously you are proud to be called a liberal. As for Hillary becoming
president, lotsa luck. :-)
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 10 2004 - 15:37:27 GMT