[asa] RE: Public questions for Denyse O'Leary

From: Denyse O'Leary <oleary@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu Dec 21 2006 - 15:23:01 EST

So, Denyse, let me ask you directly to respond to two questions. (1)
exactly would you regard as an appropriate response to Dawkins and
a response sufficient to have you admit that we do not ignore the claims
scientific materialism?

[From Denyse: How about making it a front and centre issue for 2007 to
the point where you are louder than Dembski on the subject?

I don't care if you don't. But IF you don't, don't expect me to cut any
slack. The volume of this problem (Darwinism demands atheism) has been
increasing for YEARS, as I have cause to know. I monitor such things for
the publications I write for. ]

and (2) Why exactly do you continue to bait the
ASA? Is it simply b/c (apparently) our members generally do not share
views on some specific topic of great personal interest to you? Do you
think somehow that we are advancing the materialist agenda?

[From Denyse: ASA - as an organization - interests me because it
functions like an Iron Curtain political church. It is - apparently
intentionally, at some level - not where the action is. The youtube and
godless movie thing is being used by Darwinists to promote atheism. Most
ASA members are very fond of Darwinism and do not think Darwinism
requires atheism. Shucks, I would expect to see ASA rush into something
like this with both feet ...

But I don't, do I? Dembski and his myrmidons, they do it. And ASA
members, of course, criticize him and them.

So I draw conclusions. Who wouldn't?

Here's one: ASA stays out of the fray because it would get smacked down
SO hard if it dared be relevant - and you are not used to that, are you?

But it is worse than that. ASA has never wanted to acknowledge that the
only reason it is let alone and the ID guys are not is that it does not
really address the use of Darwinism to promote atheism in a loud and
obvious enough way to represent any threat at all to those who are doing

And I am supposed to take ASA seriously? Aw, come on.

Go ahead. DO something. Prove me wrong. I'd love to write about that.
For what it is worth, I wrote about Alister McGrath's takedown of
Dawkins, and McG is no ID fan either.

(Not a pin drops. O'Leary at last looks for a different topic for her
upcoming column. ... )]

Finally, Denyse, as per our member Francis Collins, whom you call an
"intellectual lightweight." That is the last thing I would ever say
Francis myself. I would agree that his book is not a very deep
(in the intellectual sense, not the personal sense) of issues in science
religion, but neither is your book--which (as you know) I read with much
care (and I am acknowledged in your preface).

[From Denyse: My book - a journalist's investigation of a current
controversy - is irrelevant, as I make no claim to be an intellectual
heavyweight. People DO make such a claim for Collins (you just did) and
it seems we agree that his widely read book does absolutely nothing to
substantiate that popular view. I am glad we can agree on something.
Merry Christmas. - cheers, Denyse]

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Dec 21 15:23:34 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Dec 21 2006 - 15:23:34 EST