Creationism: The New Evolution
That being said, I'll move on.
Today, Eric Wang of the Cavalier Daily comments on the intelligent design debate.
The notion that intelligent design threatens science is also flat-out wrong. One's belief in evolution has no bearing on one's understanding of the interaction of chemical molecules, the laws of physics or even the functioning of biological organs and processes. The opposition to intelligent design is rooted not in science, but in prejudice and passion.Only, it is more than this. It is also based on fear and persecution. The idea that science can be challenged seems to scare many evolutionists, so rather than discrediting it, they resort to personal attacks like the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Evolutionists make this out to be some sort of crusade by the "fundamentalist, Christian right", and demonize (or at least chastise) them for it. Any challenges to the scientific evidence for evolution are discredited as holding no basis in science (that is, they must only be found in viewpoints based in faith), or are "corrected" with other evidence.
Though, perhaps they have more to fear.
Just as one cannot understand debates between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, Republicans and Democrats or capitalists and communists, one cannot understand the debate over evolution if teachers are not allowed to present the debate. And what is so objectionable about debate? After all, the only ones debate has ever harmed are those with bad ideas.Even as smug as many evolutionists can be, that last statement should be very obvious.