The city of Dover, PA, recently ousted 8 school board members who insisted upon interjecting Intelligent Design into their High School curriculum.  This is a rural school, probably in a safe “Republican” area, and no doubt with lots of churches and God-fearing citizens.  But apparently they tired of having a religious agenda forced into their schools.

----------------

Here is what Pat Robertson had to say about the city of Dover, PA:

 

“I’d like to say to the good citizens of Dover. If there is a disaster in your area, don’t turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city. And don’t wonder why He hasn’t helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I’m not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that’s the case, don’t ask for His help because he might not be there."

 

I like the response of Larry Gurreri, a newly elected school board member:

"This is a man of the cloth judging people and judging the whole town?" Gurreri said. "I would expect a whole lot better from someone in his position."

Robertson owes the Dover community an apology, he said.

"One person is going to judge me, and that's God," Gurreri said.

---------------------

Incoming board members say Intelligent Design will be taught in their school, just not in the Science classes, but in an elective Comparative Religions class.

---------------------

 

I just do not see that the theory of evolution necessarily excludes God, nor refutes the Bible.  Many are theistic evolutionists, who believe that God is the Prime Mover of Creation.  And some sincere Christians believe the Bible is a rich mixture of literary forms, never meant to be taken literally in all matters.

 

I also wonder why some consider it so essential to protect a High School student from a point of view which may challenge currently held convictions.  High School is a time to grow and expand as a person.  These young people have the right, and I think necessity, to consider evolution and see if it rightly fits into their view of the world.  I have three teenagers, and I pray daily they will develop into the healthy and productive persons that I strive for them to be.  Outside of my direct presence, they meet all kinds of people and confront all kinds of points of view.  My daughter told me, tonight, that her Jewish friend will be celebrating Christmas with us and she will be observing Hanukah with his family.  I’ve never done that, but I am excited for her.  She told me her College roommate will be moving out to live with her boyfriend.  It would break my heart if my daughter did likewise, and I guess I could send her to Falwell’s school to try to keep such from happening, but I choose to trust her within the arena of life.  We have trained her well, pray for her, and trust her. 

 

I do not believe God is overly concerned with whether Biology class begins with a mandatory disclaimer about evolution.  I say let ‘em teach it.  I’ll expose my children to the Biblical worldview at home and at church.  And I’ll keep an eye on the school to make sure it is playing fair.  Recently I went to parent’s/teacher’s conference at school.  First I was amazed that so many parents were not present.  But, I walked into the Social Studies classroom to meet the 10^th Grade teacher.  It was Black History month, and I looked around the room.  Portraits of all kinds of dignitaries were on the walls, including Bill Clinton, but absent were Conservatives.  I asked the teacher where were noted Black conservatives, like Clarence Thomas, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, and Thomas Sowell?  I’m not sure she knew who these were, but she promised to look into it.  My kids know who these people are.  And, that’s the key.

 

Do I believe that evolution has the absolute answers to man’s origin?  No.  Do I believe Intelligent Design should be taught in public school?  Let me teach my understanding of God and creation in my church and home.  I believe a good teacher will be wise enough not to force any theory upon a student.  Simply present the ideas, and let the learners decide.  And I guarantee you I can teach the Bible better than my public school system. 

 

---

posted by: Marijane24 (reply)
post date: 11.13.05 (2:24 pm)

That sounds wierd to teach about god in an actual classroom at school. It is a public school right? If it was a private Catholic school then I could understand.

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 11.13.05 (4:22 pm)

It is a public school. "Intelligent Design" is the theory that the universe and nature are so complex they point toward a personal creator. I think it is worthy of consideration, but I wonder if it should be taught in science classes in public schools. I do not trust the schools with the religious education of my children.

---

posted by: userfriendly (reply)
post date: 11.13.05 (6:09 pm)

I wouldn't mind seeing it taught in schools. Maybe not any more in depth than the big bang theory goes or anything .. I don't remember too well but I'm pretty sure we didn't spend a whole lot of time on that unit in science. I say if they want to touch on that subject, they ought to be allowed to throw out all the theories and possibilities, since nothing has been proven yet.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.17.05 (7:47 am)

Love the first half of your post... lol. I'm not too worried about Condileeza Rice being included as a role model for Black History month, as she's pretty much an Uncle (or should that be Aunt?) Tom.

Ole' Pat sure does step in it though doesn't he? Seems like once a month he's out there - fanning the fires of hate.

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 11.17.05 (9:13 am)

So, here is an intelligent, thoughtful, compelling black who happens not to tow the democratic line of thought, and of course she is labeled with a derogatory epithet? It sounds to me like such a person must be a real threat to someone.

I do not think a public school teacher should exclusively promote liberal democrats as roll models for his/her students. An educator should set aside personal political agenda in the classroom, and do what he is paid to do- educate. Wheter or not you like such as Colin Powell, etc. - they are worthy of emulation by our young people.

---

posted by: 14u2nv2 (reply)
post date: 11.17.05 (4:39 pm)

I agree with this..however..stiffling a childs religion/belief is not correct either. Therefore I say (for instance), if children wish to pray in school..they should be allowed. As long as it done in a way that dosen't disrupt classes. I also do believe that science has a real play in creation (unlike most christians) so therefore it is important. I however believe that the "big bang" was an act of God...all part of his plan..his works...and his creation :)

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.24.05 (6:35 am)

You make THE point in this debate, PD -- the YOU should teach YOUR children about YOUR religion and should not want the schools teaching religion in any shape or form! I really just don't understand why conservative Christians insist on damaging their own cause by supporting benign religions overtures in the public sphere. The fact is that EVERYONE knows that so-called "Intelligent Design" is not so intelligently designed as a way to interject an element of creationism into the public school curriculum. Intelligent Design isn't just bad science -- actually is not science at all -- it is PHILOSOPHY/RELIGION -- it is also bad RELIGION. What interest does a fundamentalist Christian have in teaching that some amorphous intelligent force created the universe. This is a spiritual door flung very wide-open for all sorts of deistic suggestions and is probably less friendly to legalistic Christianity than it is to the more new age elements of religion which are growing much faster than Christianity in America. Exclusivists, particularly Muslims and Christians, should be the first in line to oppose ANY attempt for the public schools to teach anything that loosely smells of religion for fear about how the questions will be framed inside of a secular institution by teachers of whom no one knows that teachers individual beliefs and how the teacher will handle framing the concept of an "Intelligent Designer". Just think if that teacher is a Scientologist or a Wiccan, like our good friend Fairmoon -- would even a moderate Christian want someone who believes something very different about an Intelligent Designer teaching that module in science class?

This is one of the absolute best examples I know of to demonstrate the true nature of conservative Christian political ambition. As with all religious fundamentalism, the temptation to understand themselves as having a responsibility and right to FORCE religious ideas on EVERYONE is an inherent element of fundamentalist psychology.

And all this in the name of a teacher who adamantly avoided political power so that He could reach the hearts and minds of each individual with the LOVE of the FATHER. Now THAT'S a pretty Intelligent Design, if you ask this heretic!

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.24.05 (6:43 am)

Reply to: surrogate

I never been so disappointed in anything I've ever seen you write as I am with your vicious and mean-spirited name-calling of Ms. Rice. Are you aware of what a pernicious accusation it is to call a black person an "Uncle Tom"? Are you aware of how completely out of bounds it is for a white man to even consider going there about a BLACK WOMAN? You simply have no rightful context with which to even use that terminology! If the Rev. Al Sharpton calls Ms. Rice an "Uncle Tom", I would disagree, but, I would have no basis to take exception to his use of the term.

I really wish you would reconsider those remarks, as they seem very out-of-character for you and I'm holding out the distinct possibility that it wasn't a very well thought out accusation on your part -- as I am very guilty of myself from time-to-time.

Ask Jesus what Father has to say about this one for me as Ms. Rice is also a devout believer in Christ and in Father's loving grace.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.24.05 (7:35 am)

Reply to: kurtmaddox

Well, I don't think much of her... how's that? Excuse my name calling. Any government official that high on the totem pole who would be out shoe shopping during Katrina strikes me as callous and mean. I'm sure you know of, but probably have either ignored or rationalized, many of the things this lady has done to make it obvious to caring people that she will do whatever it takes to justify this war and the infallibility of this administration's decision making processes. To me, and I admit, it's just my flawed opinion, this is presumably because "she's got hers." (I can't see any other plausible reason for her refusing to be straight with the people she serves.) Colin Powell has the same take on her. I listened to him a few weeks ago carefully avoid using a similar term, but his meaning was clear.

She's an extremely well educated and well spoken woman, but toady nonetheless. Is that better?

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.24.05 (12:29 pm)

Reply to: surrogate

Yes, that is much better :-)

Hmmm... I guess the rules of how to maintain yourself when you occupy seats of power don't apply to Democrat Presidents who get sexual favors from interns inside the Oval Office right next to the phone from which nuclear bombs can be launched. The shoe shopping criticism might be a fair criticism. I'll just accept you will be equally condemning when those with whom you are more politically aligned commit similar acts of insensitivity.

I would like to see a congressional committee look into what the Democrat leadership's activities where during Katrina. I'd love to see Senator Kennedy's and Clinton's personal itineraries during Katrina.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.24.05 (12:52 pm)

Reply to: kurtmaddox

Personally I could care less if he gets "some" in the oval office. Like I said in my post from the goofy email that's been circulating... if a simple blow-job will make you ready to impeach instead of the real evil stuff these guys pull as policy, for goodness sake let's arrange it. Maybe if his sex life was more satisfying, he be less inclined to screw us and the rest of the planet... I must be stupid cuz I really just don't understand the way some people prioritize what they consider "high crimes and misdemeanors." It's flat out crazy and just sets me to shaking my head in awe.

I mean Kurt, what the democratic pols were up to is moot. THEY're not in charge. Geez. Come on. You sound like the bank robber caught in the act complaining that the next guy in line had an overdrawn account.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.24.05 (12:59 pm)

Reply to: surrogate

You know, I will condemn Clinton for his act of Insensitivity by doing his thing in the White House. That's an apt description. A long way from treason though, and certainly only impeachable because of the political whims of the house majority at the time, and yes I know he lied in a deposition, as you would have in the same circumstances, and as I would have. Talk about being between a rock and a hard place.

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.24.05 (3:49 pm)

Reply to: surrogate

We agree more than disagree about the generalities here -- my point isn't to condemn Clinton because I'm a fan of the former President, his intellect, his political skills and his grasp of what works for America both domestically and abroad. My point is simply that villifying Condi Rice over some report that she might have bought some shoes during hurricane Katrina is EXACTLY the same kind of tripe that Republicans do when Democrats are in power.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.24.05 (4:44 pm)

Reply to: kurtmaddox

Make you a deal. You find me a few things she's accomplished in the last five years in either position thats made the country safer... I cited that example because it was dumb. Take it away... Still a well dressed, well spoken toady. And by the way, these guys are NOT Republicans. No Republican administration has ever, EVER run up a deficit like this for any reason, even in adjusted dollars... Heck, we didn't do this kind of crap under Lincoln to fight a civil war! No Democrat has ever run up a deficit like this either. My complaint isn't that they're Republicans... it's that they're NOT. This is a cabal Kurt. Everyone who leaves and speaks out? What happens to them? And what's funny is that they (the administration), after doing the careful character assasination, never take the responsibility for having hired the people they've now decided are all lying about what they've seen and done while working there. Watch... Colin Powel is slowly stating to speak out. He's careful since he has aspirations of his own, and he knows these clowns, but you watch, if he starts to drill anywhere close to the nerve? They'll trash him big time....which, as things are starting to go might be a plus for him in the long run. Nothing better than being vilified by crooks, which more and more people are finally realizing these folks are. Tell me, are you old enough to have been a Nixon apologist? I knew a few who held on till the very end. They wouldn't read the reports, they were convinced that the whole thing was cooked up by the democrats (or the comunists) and even when Nixon did his long series of interview with David Frost and basicly admitted the whole thing, they STILL just couldn't, or wouldn't, wrap their minds around what had become starkly obvious to everyone else... My Dad used to call them "Human Ostriches." Smart guy, my old man.

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (5:12 am)

Reply to: surrogate

Your comments are rhetoric and vective. Using words like "cabal" and making blanket pronouncements that imply Secretary Rice acts willfully against the best interest of her country prove the partisan nature of your anti-Everything Bush stance. Once again, I'm compelled to remind you that I'm not much of a Bush supporter. I can imagine much better leadership for America. I can also imagine much worse. I'm not sure why you feel Colin Powell has some kind of hyper-credibility. He is a moderate to liberal Republican. I wouldn't expect Powell and Rice to see eye-to-eye on policy or style. I generally like Powell and believe him to be a good man who cares about his country. But, like all of us, his caring about his country becomes political at some point. In the case of Power and Bush, the political also has a personal element. Powell is a very good example of a traditional Republican. He isn't a so-called "neo-conservative". Rice certainly is an ideological neo-conservative. Bush is obviously heavily influenced by a neo-conservative perspective, particularly regarding the long-term security interest of the U.S.

I'm not a neo-conservative. The major point of agreement I have with the neo-conservative perspective is that I believe everyone else is smoking crack if they believe that Islamo-facism can be dealt with in any way but to pledge and follow-through with the committment of the free-world to totally defeat it anywhere and everywhere it attempts to threaten democratic society.

Everyone who leaves and criticizes ANY administration gets the disloyalty treatment from the sitting administration. You say that the admin never takes repsonsibility for having hired the people they later criticize but you don't hold these ex-Bushies to the same consistency standard -- after all, weren't they once on board with the administration? Paul O'Neil is a great example. I like O'Neil -- but he made some naive' political errors that you just don't make at that level of government if you want to remain a part of an administration. Then, he tries to play the victim and cries croc tears all over his little book that made him a couple of million dollars. Is the Bush administration a Sunday School choir -- of course not. But if you think the Sopranos had anything over the Clintons, then you are naive! lol!

Deficits are a concern -- but not the kind of concern you raise and not the extent you raise it. We have already begun to grow out of the Bush deficit. The statistics are inarguable. Every subsequent deficit revision is significantly downward as the govt receipts have been outpacing expenditure growth for a few quarters now.

This is exactly the same experience as with the Reagan deficit after the massive Reagan tax-cuts.

Having said this, I don't believe the Bush admin is doing nearly enough to slow the rate of growth in govt expenditures. And yes, this is the crawl about the Bushies from true fiscal conservatives, like me -- that they have the program 1/2 right. I also agree that the Clinton/Rubin team were more effective fiscal moderates than the Bushies.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (5:24 am)

Reply to: kurtmaddox

I tryuly hope you're right... where I take exception is that ytou think you can exterminate an idea with military force... like shooting at smoke PLUS swtting the hornets nest (of a race of hornets with telepathic ablities to call other stingers into the fray from far and wide, or to tell them to bide their time...)

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (6:43 am)

Reply to: surrogate

Again, you are just hyperbolizing my argument -- I never said that military force is the entire prescription for defeating Islamo-Facism or any type of totalitarian scheme. In fact, the military aspect is only one aspect of defeating tyrannical philosophies and by no means the most important. Seeing the use of force against tyranny as 'swatting the hornets nest' is such a defeatist mentality.

Democracy. Freedom. Capitalism.

This is just another speed-bump along the way for the inexorable march of human freedom and self-government. The Islamic world is simply a few centuries behind. There are more admirable Islamic leaders who on the side of human rights and human freedom than I could list. The Islamic world will embrace democracy in my children's lifetime. Islamic peoples today are awakening to the principles of freedom and democracy. Once awake, no society ever turns back -- ever.

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (6:48 am)

Reply to: surrogate

I'm still a Nixon apologist! lol! President Nixon was way ahead of his time on foriegn policy and we would be a better country today had he not had those idiotic tape machines all over the White House.

If you think both parties aren't mean, nasty and cut-throat -- then it is you who are a "human ostrich" -- not me! :-)

Nixon deserved what he got. But, he was a decent man, a great politician and a good President.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (6:57 am)

Reply to: kurtmaddox

He was a good president, but a decent man? Who am I to judge... You're right... he got what he deserved... which mean's you're not a Nixon apologist... The people I'm talking about refused to even see anything he (and really, mostly a few of his underlings) did was wrong. He was ahead of his time in foriegn Policy... I assure you he would NOT have done what these guys have done. His whole idea of opening up China wqas based on making sure we avoided war with them forever, if possible. And listen... I was an LBJ critic too. Carter (I know, I know) I loved. I still think had we listened to the guy we'd sure not be in the position we're in today with regards to Foriegn Oil dependency. I wonder if Pastor Dave liked Jimmy Carter? He was, after all, a favorite son of Dave's State!

Dave?

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (8:03 am)

Reply to: surrogate

OMG -- Jimmy Carter is a better human being than I'll ever hope to become -- but his administration was an unmitigated economic disaster which made exactly the wrong macroeconomic policy decisions across the board and created the ugliest macroeconomic anomaly in US history -- STAGFLATION!

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (8:20 am)

Reply to: kurtmaddox

Then you don't understand some things my friend... but I'm not going to bother trying over this... one of these days we'll have dinner and yap it out. You certainly know better than to assume that the man was that much of an economic fool don't you? His choice was simple and correct, but it was an easy policy to knock (what were you? ten?) The premise was SOOO forward thinking and still true, but he was hammered... His idea would have spurred a much longer growth period WITHOUT the tripling of the deficit under Reagan and all the junk economic policy. ...But I simply gaurantee you don't know anything about it, nor have you studied it or you wouldn't say what you're saying. Good standard response though! Stagflation... oh jeez, it sure was... Funny how you'll "stay the course" in war, but not with a simple policy that would have made us independent, prosperous and fiscally sound by just tightening our belts for a little while... Kurt, you speak so well, and you are just plain... nah. I love ya.

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (9:34 am)

Reply to: surrogate

When we have that dinner I'll share my ecomomic credentials with you more openly than would be prudent for me to do in this forum ;-)

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (4:04 pm)

Reply to: kurtmaddox
Reply to: surrogate

I stay away from t-blog for a couple of days and look what happens! I read through your comments, and must admit you guys are more politically astute than I.

What do I think of Jimmy Carter? His Carter Center is amazing. His modeling of the Christian faith is quite admirable, although I think he was quite inconsistent with his embrace of the leftwing social agenda of the democratic party while in office.
My first vote for president was for Carter. Second for him also. (Then Modale, then I "saw the light") I believe, if the hostage crisis had not occurred, he would have been reelected. I do remember high interest rates, high gasoline prices, canceling of the olympics, and the long ordeal of the hostage crisis when it seemed the might USA was impotent. Carter was weak. We needed Reagan to restore the credibility of America.
Now, Carter makes a great "former president", although he should keep his mouth shut on current sensitive political matters and just build houses. But I could certainly worship in the same church with him, and would invite him to fill my pulpit anytime (fat chance of that!).

Surrogate, I think you are right, economically these guys in the white house are anything but true Republicans. But the war against Islam-fascist-terrorists-thugs trumps everything. This is WWIII, I believe.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (4:13 pm)

Reply to: PastorDave

Dave... just one question about your last statement as it's so jarring to me. You think Jesus would take that stand? And if not, who you workin' for?

Explain it to me please. I can understand someone feeling that way, but according to YOUR statement. you MUST think God's on "our" side... and doesn't love those who oppose our forces as much as he loves "you." Plus, you must think Jesus was full of **** when He SPECIFICALLY said to love our enemies. You don't get to have it both ways... period. Sorry.

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (4:33 pm)

Reply to: surrogate

Yeah! Kurt finally wins one!! Write this one down... it might be awhile before one of you Christians agress with me! lol!

Try this one on for size:

Jesus isn't on EITHER SIDE! Jesus could have taken hundreds of political positions when he walked this Earth. The fact that he didn't, in my humble opinion, really means something for Christians. You can be either devoutly Republican or devoutly Democrat and still be devoutly Christian!!

Love God with all your heart.

Love your neighbor as yourself.

Vote your conscience.

Respect the element of truth you don't understand in you opponents position.

(OK... the last 2 are mine, not Yeshuas!)

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (4:37 pm)

Reply to: surrogate
It seems you are using a favorite tactic of us preachers, seeking to induce guilt by taking a couple of statements, interpreting them out of context, and hitting the audience between the eyes with a stark choice. I don't know if God is on the side of America. I do believe these Islamists are devoid of conscience. How else do you explain their rampant and ongoing murder of civilians. True, innocents die as the result of American actions, but not as an intentional strategy. The only way to defeat such an enemy is to kill him. Would Jesus allow me to kill an enemy in the course of warfare? Perhaps. I oppose the death penalty. I opposed the Vietnam War. But I am not a pacifist. The Old Testament is replete with accounts of warfare.

I believe many things break the heart of God. Surely the Amercan love affair with the almight dollar grieve Him, and I believe will within my lifetime bring the wrath of God upon my generation. And I believe God's heart must equally be stricken by the murderous lack of love of these terrorists.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (4:40 pm)

you avoided the point and you know it Dave...

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (4:42 pm)

Reply to: surrogate
Sorry. As I was trying to formulate my thoughts, my wife kept talking and talking. But I think I got the thought across to you. Now, let's see, hows the best way to sleep on this couch?

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (4:44 pm)

Reply to: PastorDave

Dave,,, you forget these poeple think THEY are acting for love of God too...

That's why we are simply NOT ALLOWED to talk, inspire, or act in hate... and you do hate these people... it's a problem

---

posted by: PastorDave (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (4:49 pm)

Reply to: surrogate
Not intentionally avoiding. Must a pastor be a pacifist? Not according to my understanding of the faith. I respect those who disagree- Quakers, Menonites, Jehovah's Witness, etc.

Let me make a statement that might be rather jarring to you: I believe you can love a person and yet kill that person. Such is rationale for the involvement of a Christian in warfare, or police work, or executing the death penalty.

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (4:55 pm)

Reply to: kurtmaddox

you people refuse to accept the basic truth of the statement "love your enemies" and the power in it...

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (6:55 pm)

Reply to: surrogate

I would love to start a company called You People, Inc.

Check this:

Kurt Maddox
CEO
You People, Inc!
NASDAQ Symbol YPI
(Popularly pronounced Yipee!)

---

posted by: surrogate (reply)
post date: 11.25.05 (7:09 pm)

Reply to: kurtmaddox

smaht azz

---

posted by: kurtmaddox (reply)
post date: 11.26.05 (4:13 am)

Reply to: surrogate

see, you got me wrong again... i was just trying for innocent humor with that one - he he

Your Name:


Your Comment: