Mike S. Adams writes (and Denyse O'Leary concurs):
In the famous 1925 Scopes "monkey" trial, Clarence Darrow stated: "For God's sake, let the children have their minds kept open - close no doors to their knowledge; shut no door from them. Make a distinction between theology and science. Let them have both. Let them be taught. Let them both live." Have you ever met a 21st Century liberal who believes that both evolution and creation should be taught in schools?
Problem is, Darrow never said this. It was Dudley Malone answering William Jennings Bryan. An unlikely choice for the Scopes case, Malone ended up in Dayton because of connections with his legal partner, Arthur Hays, and had served as Undersecretary under Bryan when he was Secretary of State under Woodrow Wilson. Malone was probably as "liberal" as Bryan was.
And even the quote is wrong. It should read:
For God's sake let the children have their minds kept open--close no doors to their knowledge; shut no door from them. Make the distinction between theology and science. Let them have both. Let them both be taught.
As Tom McIver notes:
Malone urged that the children be taught both science (that is, evolution) and theology--and by theology he does not mean creation science. Significantly, he urges that these be kept separate, that they not be confused. Theology should not be taught in the science classroom and especially not as an equally valid scientific explanation ... In short, religious theories should not intrude in the science classroom.
- Log in to post comments
Creationists quoting inaccurately and out of context? I am shocked! Shocked, I say!
Why can Creationists &/or Intelligent Design advocates solve Sudoku Number Puzzles so quickly?
THEY JUST PUT A "G" IN ALL THE EMPTY SQUARES.
It's just a matter of faith! It's the same method creationists resort to in trying to prove their unsustainable "intelligent design theory". Creationists can just stop searching for reality by just assuming all gaps in current understanding and/or knowledge of evolution must be filled with a (G=god) solution. As Prof Richard Dawkins explains in chapter four of The GOD Delusion; "If an apparent gap is found, it is assumed that God, by default must fill it." Saves them having to think and question I suppose.
Much like the progress one makes by eliminating the possible numbers in each square as a Sudoku puzzle is solved, "gaps shrink as science advances and God is threatened with eventually having nothing to do and nowhere to hide." This of course "worries thoughtful theologians" however the greater worry for scientists (and the rest of us) is that groups through politics or fear will walk away from the "essential part of the scientific enterprise [that is] to admit ignorance."
Nothing is more dangerous than a, 'I have all the answers' arrogant preacher followed by a bunch of non-thinking 'god-botherers' driven by blind faith who absolve themselves from their societal responsibilities with the comfort of unquestioning feeble-minds!
Although some see Dawkins as a bit of a raver and less scientific in his arguments than he could (should) be, if you read Pascal Boyer's "Gods, Spirits and the Mental Instincts that Create Them", Dawkins' 'emotional' approach to battling the "ID" lobby is also needed.
caliibre