I echo George Murphy's concerns about how this amendment *will* be
interpreted, vs how it *should* be interpreted. I strongly support what the
amendment acually says about teaching this subject, and strongly wish that
schools at all levels will talk seriously about religion and science, taking
both seriously and not dismissing the importance or thoughtfulness of
either. I might have written such an amendment myself, frankly, in language
close to this.
I fear that most people, however, will see this as promoting creationism in
some form. Ironically, IMO creationists (no less than secular
evolutionists) fail to take religion seriously; ie, they fail to engage the
major religious questions raised by evolution, and dismiss as irreligious
most (if not all) attempts to do so.
Hence the amendment has my guarded support.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 21 2001 - 13:13:32 EDT