From his latest column:
Liberals see the political value to teaching evolution in school, as it makes teachers and children think they are no more special than animals. Childhood joy and ambition can turn into depression as children learn to reject that they were created in the image of God.
He may not be in office any more, but this piece wins Kemp an honorary spot in the creationist-friendly political pantheon.
Update: Thursday 8/24 Turns out this is the work of the old foe of evolution, Phyllis Schlafly. Kemp's view on evolution remain a mystery. More here.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The only two sure things in life are death and taxes, the old saying goes. I think by now we can safely add a third certainty - reading a Phyllis Schlafly column will leave you baffled that someone could write such nonsense with a straight face. Her latest column, about the Supreme Court's current…
This is a long post from January 23, 2005, trying to tie in Creationism and conservatism through psychology:
I always loved animals and always loved science. I read the kids' science and nature books and encyclopedias, as well as adult stuff, like huge volumes about animals e.g., "The Life of…
In Sunday's post I wrote the following:
People like [Kevin] Shapiro, George Will, or Charles Krauthammer are lonely voices in the conservative wilderness, accorded about as much respect in the Republican party as pro-lifers are in the Democratic party. Every conservative politican of any…
I suppose everyone has someone who they consider an embarrassment to their alma mater. I can probably think of a dozen just off the top of my head regarding my undergraduate institution (including a number of politicians who shall remain nameless). However, one who really sticks in my craw is the…
Speaking of which, the recent release of George W. Bush's alleged reading list for the summer was conspicuous in the complete absence of any science content, apart from a single book about Oppenheimer.
Which probably has more to do with Bush's WMD fetish than anything else.
Assuming he actually read it.
In May, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the decision by a Clinton-appointed trial judge to prohibit the Cobb County, Ga., school board from placing this sticker on textbooks: "Evolution is a theory, not a fact [who says? it may yet be proven fact... it's not been dis-proven, therefore inaccurate to say, "not a fact"], regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."
That's a pretty bold statement coming from people who boast of approaching things with an open mind.
We could say Jack Kemp is slime, but that would insult the wonderful slime molds in the next post.
They do lie so:
"Where topics are taught that may generate controversy (such as biological evolution), the curriculum should help students to understand the full range of scientific views that exist, why such topics may generate controversy, and how scientific discoveries can profoundly affect society."
There is no controversy in the scientific community about evolution, only about minor details. So if this is what they want to explore they chose the wrong subject.
"Despite bitter denunciations by liberals, funny thing, there has been a thundering silence about the one-third of her book in which she deconstructs Darwinism."
I know pharyngula had a lot of posts about the total absurdity of Ms. Coulter's take on evolution. I am sure that was not the only discussion.
Maybe we can just put it down to playing football without a helmet. So sad.
It has admittedly been a while, but I don't remember that any of my childhood joys and ambitions had anything to do with being created in the image of God...
Biking, reading a good book, building a cool aeroplane model were and are dependable joys and ambitions regardless of whether gods exist or not and have created someone in their image or not.
Wow, I just finished reading Kemp's piece. I must say that his article is highly concentrated stupidity masquerading as an informed opinion. Now I must try to regrow the brain cells lost by reading it.
This editorial was actually written by the infamous Phyllis
Schafly link:http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2006/aug06/06-08-16.html on Aug 6. The Townhall site credited Jack Kemp
It's still awful whoever wrote it
Question is - Did Jack Kemp plagierize Phyllis Schafly or the other way around?
They are identical articles, word for word, 5 days apart, each showing up in their feature article spots.
That is really sad. If Kemp is actually claiming this, and it isn't a goof on the editor's part, then it is a more blatant example of plagiarism than Coulter's book.
Luckily, science isn't based on majority rule, so the number of people who prefer superstition is immaterial to the discussion.
I really think it was a mistake on the part of Townhall.
Jack Kemp seems to me at least as a level headed common sense conservative.Schafly is a dusty old doddering dishonest windbag,she's also Karl Rove's godmother.
Considering that even Jack Kemp has no idea what "in the image of God" even means, I don't see how you can be disillusioned, eactly. Oh no: I'm no longer... something (hand waving) or other, God. Or something. How depressing it is to not be that, whatever it is!