FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-26-2003, 08:36 AM   #11
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: toronto
Posts: 420
Default

anyone contacting their representative might want to bring voices for evolution to their attention.
caravelair is offline  
Old 07-26-2003, 10:51 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Orion Arm of the Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 3,092
Default And another...

There is a second bill as well.

Quote:
(1) The teaching in a public school science class of the methodological naturalism hypothesis as an explanation for the origin and diversity of life shall not preclude also teaching the design hypothesis as an explanation for the origin and diversity of life. A public school official shall not censor or prohibit the teaching of the design hypothesis.


(2) As used in this section:


(a) "Design hypothesis" means the theory that life and its diversity result from a combination of chance, necessity, and design.

(b) "Methodological naturalism hypothesis" means the theory that nature is all there is and that all phenomena, including living systems, result only from chance and necessity.

They think that "methodological naturalism" is a hypothesis. That is kind of sad.
Valentine Pontifex is offline  
Old 07-26-2003, 11:19 AM   #13
RBH
Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 15,407
Default Tactically speaking ...

The version with the "Creator" language is preferable since it's more likely to be whammo'ed by the courts. Let it pass, then sue their knickers off!

RBH
RBH is offline  
Old 07-26-2003, 11:53 AM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: anywhere
Posts: 1,976
Question

Just out of curiosity, has there been a court ruling yet with "intelligent design" specifically in the language? I wonder what is taking the DI and IDnet people so long...
Principia is offline  
Old 07-26-2003, 12:15 PM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: US east coast. And www.theroyalforums.com
Posts: 2,829
Default

Quote:
(b) "Methodological naturalism hypothesis" means the theory that nature is all there is and that all phenomena, including living systems, result only from chance and necessity.
Since when does methodological naturalism mean that nature is all there is? Someone's either mistaken or lying. Sounds as if Phillip Johnson has been getting at them.
Albion is offline  
Old 07-26-2003, 03:37 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: East Lansing
Posts: 72
Default

DAMNIT!!!! What the hell are they doing! My reps going to hear from me. Well they can try to pass it, but I don't think that Granholm would sign it, then again she's been doing a lot of republican things lately.
Adrammalech is offline  
Old 07-26-2003, 07:43 PM   #17
RBH
Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 15,407
Default

Principia asked
Quote:
Just out of curiosity, has there been a court ruling yet with "intelligent design" specifically in the language? I wonder what is taking the DI and IDnet people so long...
I think it's that they haven't yet managed to get that language into anything official yet. They tried with Ohio's State Science Standards and failed, they tried in at least one local school district in Ohio (mine!) and failed, and I'm not aware of anywhere that they've succeeded in getting explicit ID language into a curriculum standard or passed and signed legislation.

RBH
RBH is offline  
Old 07-27-2003, 09:35 AM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,302
Default

Having lived in Michigan for 10 years, this only surprises me in that it had not been done a long time ago. Both sides of the political spectrum here lean towards creationism - the right-wingers for the obvious reasons, the left for the simple fact that a largew chunk of the left in MI is made up of minorities in urban areas, whom, in MI at least, have a tendency to be very religious. When I lived there, a local news station (FOX 44) ran a story on a poll of metro Detroiters in whihc it was reveal;ed that 60+% accepted biblical creation.

MI is also home to the "Something Better News" in Grand Rapids, MI. The SBN is a right-wing christian weekly newspaper that - and I always found this funny - you could get delivered for $12 a year, or pick it up at dozens of local business' (which I boycotted whnever I saw a connection) for free...
pangloss is offline  
Old 07-27-2003, 06:09 PM   #19
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 255
Default

Yeah, this stinks. But it's not the first such bill to be proposed in Michigan legislature. Hopefully this one will go the way of the previous attempts.

I hold the opinion that attempts at legislating science reflect the will and intention of those who advocate such laws. I sincerely believe that these people know that this isn't science. Rather trying to pass such laws merely reflects a means to an end; it is not about promoting scientific inquiry, but about preventing religious inquiry.
At, of course, the expense of Constitutional rights.
Kosmo is offline  
Old 07-27-2003, 07:06 PM   #20
Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Gilead
Posts: 11,186
Default

Thanks for the heads-up. Not a Michigan resident myself, but I currently work at U of M so I'll pass this along to the masses. Guess when it didn't work in Ohio, they just decided to move one state north. Too bad they're into Canada next...

Roland98 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:31 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.