From: Michael Roberts (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Sep 27 2003 - 03:29:50 EDT
Why it should baffles me as Darwin was such a well-meaning caring and moral
person, who happened not to be a Christian.
Consider his care for animals; picking upa nd saving a toad lost on the
Menai Bridge in Wales
storming out of a sheepdog trial because of cruelty to dogs (what would he
do at a rodeo)
Care for people; his abhorrence of slavery and mistreatment of blacks (how
come he's charged with racism?)
support of chimney sweep boys, South American Missionary Society and many
Why - he was more moral than most Christians.
So Darwinian should have good vibes.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Miller" <email@example.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 5:10 AM
Subject: Re: Darwinian and non-Darwinian (was Re: RFEP & ID)
> In my experience, "Darwinism" is commonly used as a pejorative that
> simply means "all aspects of evolution that I find objectionable." It
> is hardly ever defined, and is certainly not used in any consistent
> manner. I doubt whether many who use the phrase in public debate could
> even give a clear definition.
> An interesting part of this is that back during the conflict over
> science standards in Kansas, it was the anti-evolutionists who wanted
> to change the word "evolution" in the standards to "Darwinian
> evolution." Attaching the word Darwin to evolution produces an almost
> visceral negative reaction in some people.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 27 2003 - 15:13:34 EDT