Re: Yet more denigrating of Apologists (was Why?)

Glenn Morton (
Tue, 21 Apr 1998 19:41:25 -0500

At 08:13 AM 4/21/98 -0500, Ron Chitwood wrote of Jim Lippard's change from
Christianity to atheisim:

>He was welcome to change his beliefs, wasn't he. No one forced him or
>coerced him or belittled him .

You say this so cavalierly as if it is no big deal to lose someone from the
faith. I for one think it is a terrible thing to lose someone. Jim has now
by his argumentation on internet probably been instrumental in many others
deciding to leave the faith also.

>Now let me state the story of Danny Phillips -
>Danny Phillips was a 15 year-old high-school junior in the Denver area who
>thought for himself. His class was assigned to watch a NOVA programs,
>produced with government funds for National Public Television, which stated
>the usual evolutionary story as fact. Its story went something like this:
>"the first organized form of primitive life was a tiny protozoan....from
>these one-celled organisms evolved all life on earth."......Danny knew that
>this claim of moleculel-to-man evolution goes far beyond the scientific
>evidence. So he wrote a lengthy paper criticizing the NOVA program as
>propaganda. School administrators at first agreed that Danny had a point,
>and they tentatively decided to withdraw the NOVA program from the
>curriculum. That set off a media firestorm......The fact that
>administrators seriously considered any dissent from evolutionary
>naturalism infuriated the Darwinists, who flooded the DENVER POST newspaper
>with their letters. Some of the letters were so venomous that the
>editorial page editor of the paper admitted that her liberal faith had been
>shaken. She wrote that "these defenders of intellectual freedom behaved,
>in fact, just like a bunch of conservative Christians. Their's was a
>different kind of fundamentalism, but no less dogmatic and no less
>intolerant." I had editorialized the story in the interests of space,
>found in DEFEATING DARWINISM BY OPENING MINDS by Phillip Johnson, pp 34.
>Is that fair or not?

No it is not fair. I think both views should be taught in public school and
compared. But so does my former boss who is an atheist. He wants them both
taught because he believes in freedom of expression and he thinks that no
more YECs will be generated because while the YEC view would be discussed in
such situations, the difficulties would also be able to be discussed. And I
agree with him, very few would YECs would graduate from high school.

If you want YEC taught, are you also willing to let teachers teach what they
want to against YEC? Or does this only go one way--we can teach in favor of
YEC but not against? Fair is fair of course.


Adam, Apes, and Anthropology: Finding the Soul of Fossil Man


Foundation, Fall and Flood