Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary From: dgary@ecsvax.UUCP (D Gary Grady) Newsgroups: sci.research Subject: Re: FAITH VS FACT Message-ID: <3542@ecsvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 13-Jul-87 09:46:07 EDT Article-I.D.: ecsvax.3542 Posted: Mon Jul 13 09:46:07 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 14-Jul-87 03:16:10 EDT References: <1787@pbhye.UUCP> <1746@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> Reply-To: dgary@ecsvax.UUCP (D Gary Grady) Followup-To: talk.religion.misc Distribution: na Organization: Datalytics, Inc. Lines: 56 In article <1746@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> dam@uvacs.UUCP (Dave Montuori) writes: >This is the first time I've ever heard the Great Flood used as support >for creationism. Furthermore, the Flood isn't too far from being >a fact proven by honest scientific means. ... I don't think there is any evidence for a universal flood that is taken at all seriously by geologists. The "Noachian Deluge" (as they tend to call it) is part of the dogma of most Creationist organizations, and members are often required to affirm their belief in it as a condition of joining. Hence the Flood is a part of Creationism rather than merely support for it. >... I am against the >involuntary lack of prayer in public schools ... There is plenty of prayer in public schools - go by any time during exams! The courts and the Constitution have prohibited only government-run prayer in schools - that is, prayer at a time or in a manner established by the school or the teacher (which are arms of the government). No matter what one's religion, having the government mucking about in it should be cause for alarm. >... I think the Supreme Court defined >secular humanism to be a religion in 1961. In one decision the Court noted that a religion need not necessarily include a belief in a deity, and in a footnote listed a series of examples, including some Eastern religions and "secular humanism." According to the attorney who actually wrote the decision, this "secular humanism" was a reference to a tiny church in California, not the American Humanist Association or any similar group. Further, since no evidence was heard either way, it was not a formal finding of the Court but just a passing reference - an "obiter dictum" to lawyers. Although secular humanists believe in science, it is a wild leap to suggest that teaching science implies teaching humanism. Plenty of non-humanists favor science teaching. But anything beyond a surface look at the Creationism movement reveals it to be made up of Christian fundamentalists who start with a dogmatic belief in Creation and then go hunting for anything that supports their a priori belief and dismiss anything that does not out of hand. It has no place in a science class. >Now let's get this out of sci.research and back in talk.* where it >belongs.... Right you are! -- D Gary Grady (919) 286-4296 USENET: {seismo,decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary BITNET: dgary@ecsvax.bitnet -- D Gary Grady (919) 286-4296 USENET: {seismo,decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary BITNET: dgary@ecsvax.bitnet