Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt
From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Education of creationists' child
Message-ID: <1268@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 11-Dec-84 18:01:47 EST
Article-I.D.: dciem.1268
Posted: Tue Dec 11 18:01:47 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Dec-84 20:15:55 EST
References: <1236@dciem.UUCP> 
Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 51
Summary: 

> 
> Martin Taylor writes:
> >(a) I NEVER suggested that creationists didn't want their children
> >to learn about evolution, so I suggest that Miller is perhaps using
> >the same standards of truth in argument that he uses in his newsletters
> >in net.origin
> 
> Zat right?  Well, golly, I just happened to have saved the following from
> net.origins, posted by one Martin Taylor:
> 
> >I originally suggested that the right to determine their children's
> >education might be taken from creationists
> > ...
> >The crimes that are committed in the name of religion are many, but
> >among the worst must be included refusing a child the nutrition it
> >requires for mental growth.  Would you leave a child with parents
> >who starve it for food?  No?  Why then would you leave it with parents
> >who starve it for mental food?  Malnutrition of the brain has the same
> >general effects in both cases.
> 
> Gee, Martin, I don't know how else to take what you wrote than to falsely
> claim creationists don't want their children to learn about evolution.
> So, yes, I do use the same standard of truth, one which is correct.  Now I
> suppose I could have misunderstood you.  If so, perhaps you will be so kind
> as to interpret said nonsense on "refusing a child the nutrition" and
> "malnutrition of the brain"?

I have replied to Miller by mail as follows:

(1) Re-read your own quote.

(2) I retracted "creationists" and substituted "fundamentalists" in
response to your first flame.  In fact, I think "fundamentalists" is
more correct, although there is some overlap between the two groups.

(3) My original posting, from which you extracted the selection, dealt
with the teaching of basic science, and as far as I remember did not
even mention evolution (though I may be wrong on that; it certainly
wasn't in connection with the mental deprivation part of the posting.)

(4) What has this argument got to do with whether creation or evolution
better fits the facts of the world?  That's what belongs in net.origins,
not the political questions of who gets what kind of education.
======

The net deserves better.
-- 

Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt
{uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsrgv!dciem!mmt