I speculated that the Washington state ballot proposal was motivated by the recent noise over atheist displays in the state capitol, and I was wrong. An interview with the woman behind the proposal reveals several things: 1) she really is something of an incoherent dingleberry, and 2) the primary impetus for this idea was — don’t be surprised — creationism. Here’s what she says:
“I think probably at least that more creation science is overlooked as not belonging in the public school system because of the religion (aspect),” she said.
She was impressed by Tom Hoyle (he has a Ph.D. in Christian Apologetics!) of a Northwest creationist ministry, which sort of tells you all you need to know.
I’m looking forward to the revised version so we can see if they have added extra crazy to it.
I’ve read that seven times, and I still can’t figure out what it means.
Well, she’s not entirely wrong.
The problem is that she thinks there’s something wrong with not pushing her demented delusion onto the children of sane taxpayers.
What’s this harlot doing speaking for herself, much less anyone else, anyway? She’s supposed to be at home popping out babies and doing what her husband tells her to do. I think she needs to read her own damn morality fable and remember her damned place.
/sarcasm off
“more creation science is overlooked as not belonging in the public school system because of the religion”
No duh, no doubt it is overlooked because the of the religion: the religion makes it not science.
IANAL, but would that give a prima facia case that this measure is unconstitutional? She’s admitted that she was motivated by the absence of cretinism (or, as she indicated, creationism) in public schools.
Since intent is / should be considered under the law, then her intent behind this initiative is to force the teaching of creationism, which the SCOTUS has already ruled unconstitutional.
Again, IANAL and could be wrong, YMMV.
‘”I think probably at least that more creation science is overlooked as not belonging in the public school system because of the religion (aspect),” she said.’
Nope wrong hunny bunch…tis because Creation Science is a crock of dinosaur poo in the original state of emergence…
I like this quote from Hoyle in the article:
In the other thread, I asked a creationist what the creationist “Theory of Origins’ was — specifically. Its mechanism, process, description? I see that Mr. Hoyle has fleshed it out.
“Wow, nature is awesome, it’s very well designed.”
If I were a public school student taking a test, and I had to write an essay question asking me to “Define and describe one possible theory of abiogenesis,” I know which one I would pick. 20 seconds, and done.
Impressed with Tom Hoyle? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
I know that a discussion has come to an end when the other person starts to quote Kent Hovind or Ray Comfort. But Tom Hoyle works just as well.
The IDiots in Seattle must be behind this. They probably have a warehouse full of “Of Pandas and People” that they want to unload.
So, the schools don’t push religious ideas as science. BooHoo. We scientists are still waiting for creationists to publish in the peer reviewed journals. Ergo it ain’t science.
Glad to know fundies will continue to willingly flaunt and ignore law, reason, logic and common sense. It’s not oppression, it’s freedom, Jebus-says-style! Why don’t they just state that they really want a facist theocracy instead of contiuously calling their actions and desires democratic. When you talk about arguments from ignorance, the IGNORANT part needs to be really emphasized.
Good luck with the idiots, Washington! Don’t submit to religious oppression!
To me, there’s something extremely hilarious about a sophisticated, tenured educator calling someone a “dingleberry”. That description made my day.
I just read the linked article. You would think the author would have mentioned the major league ass-kicking ID received with the Dover trial. If this somehow makes on it on the ballot and wins, the proposal would certainly be challenged and destroyed in court.
It’s expensive for governments to defend and lose these trials, and they’re using tax payer money to do it. That alone should have merited a mention in the article.
Strangebrew @6:
[creaotard]
That’s how Noah kept the ark clean for the dinosaurs, He put the poo in crocks.
[/creaotard]
So she gets it, but she doesn’t “get” it.
Mind numbing to say the least.
1) Evil members of the evil Darwinist conspiracy don’t go around saying they’re wrong. Read the damn pamphlet some day, will ya!
2) Enough with the dingleberries. There’s a reason The Good Lord invented safety razors.
Hey, we all “know” the bananna was designed to fit in your hand, right?
I live in western Washington, and believe me, we have our share of fundie crazy persons. And yes, their intent is to force the word of god on others and especially their children, and they will flatly tell you their mandate is to do so.
Well that does it, I’m sold. Where do I sign?
Wow… this stuff never ceases to amaze me- and make me giggle… eventually.
We’re known for our “shoot yourself in the foot” people’s initiatives in Washington… but usually it’s less symbolic and more about indecisiveness and crippling our state financially- only to try and fix it when it’s too late. Not so much on our kookiness like this woman.
I wonder if Ramtha is included in that….
I’d vote for this initiative if they changed the wording from “supreme ruler of the universe” to “supreme flying spaghetti monster of the universe.”
Maybe we can get two signature drives going??
“”You don’t have to mention God, you can simply emphasize the fact that wow, nature is awesome, it’s very well designed and that macroevolution is an insufficient mechanism to explain all this stuff,” he said.”
In other words, turn off your mind and babble.
“I think probably at least that more creation science such as is overlooked as not belonging in the public school system such as because of the religion purple monkey dishwasher such as double ice cream cone waffle JEEEEEEEEEESUS.”
So she thinks she can overcome the First Amendment with a rambling initiative, does she?
Take it around to the fundy churches, and you’ll get your signatures.
But don’t be surprised when most people in the state quit “overlooking” creationism long enough to call it atavistic bullshit.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/6mb592
RAM @ 16
I think you’d want to say that the fundies want to mandate the word of god onto others as they believe that their god commands them to do this.
If you go to the text of the proposed inititive, you’d see that she uses the word “creator” three times. And, at line 42, the word “creator” is in BOLD. In fact, it’s the only word in the text that is in a bold type. This should have been a clue that she was a creationist, but it was easily overlooked considering the whole thing is a nutjob piece of crap.
‘Hoyle disagrees with Struiksma and says it’s OK to teach evolution in schools….
“You don’t have to mention God, you can simply emphasize the fact that wow, nature is awesome, it’s very well designed and that macroevolution is an insufficient mechanism to explain all this stuff,” he said.’
Whisky Tango Foxtrot!
This is going to be extremely amusing if it really does get farther than where it is now. I can see the lawyers salivating now. This woman reminds me of one of my students who continuously tries to get me to convert to her way of thinking. She sent me an e-mail emploring me to sign the petition to stop the PTB from removing christian broadcasting from cable TV. She sees conspiracies around every bush. She recently became pregnant for the first time is and suddenly more reasonable. It must be the Oxytosin. She finally stopped sending me the creotard e-mails.
I don’t have any way of asking this honestly without it sounding, well, stupid. However, I want to give it a go.
In all of the reading I have done regarding Intelligent Design and Creation Science (extensive reading, btw), I have yet to find or understand through the rhetoric even the most rudimentary scientific assertions.
Is anyone aware of any scientific research in the fields of Intelligent Design or Creation Science that even begins to approach validity or legitimacy? I think the closest I have come is some of the hogwash about irreducible complexity, but even at that, it couldn’t even hardly be considered a scientific hypothesis, by my understanding of the definition.
Again, I iterate, this is an honest query. I am not trying to bait anyone, I just have scoured the resources available on the internet and have yet to find anything even remotely resembling science from these fields!
They call it “Creation Science”.
We see over the last 20 years or so an attack not just on evolution, but all science, including geology, astronomy, and biochemistry (even denying our understanding of the genetic code) because these disciplines conflict with their infexible ideas about their rather weak and unimaginative god. But they can’t deny the enormous advances made by science and the benefits of the technology it has spawned. So they imitate science by creating institutiuons and universities to persue “christian science”. They have become a sort of scientific cargo cult – building labs, wearing white coats, publishing in journals, etc – in the hope that their god will one day restore them as the true arbiters of knowledge. Like other cargo cultists, they haven’t a clue why acting out these rituals is not enough, and it irks them that real scientists don’t respect them.
I call it Cargo Cult Science.
LOL, Kim Struiksma doesn’t seem to know that in Washington State, we eat creationists for breakfast. And Tom Hoyle should savor his 15 minutes of fame. His question and answer periods after his lectures are like shooting fish in a barrel.
Evil(tm) Evolutionist
How about we tell them: You can teach creationism in the schools when it comes up with one–just one–verified prediction. Then we can watch their heads explode while they try to figure out how to turn “wow, nature is awesome” into a verifiable prediction.
From the article:
1: how does a law that limits what we can say about religion protect our liberty?
2: why does the Supreme Ruler of the Universe need the U.S. Goverment’s help in protecting his/her/its endowments?
Qwerty, #22, I do agree this is the intent in this case. But again, my initial point was, oh yea, we have the crazied here in western Washington too.
I have close work assiciation with a two fundie ministers, and quite a few others others in local churches, and in listening to them talk amoung themselves, and of course trying to convert me as an identified Athiest, (they get extra bonus god points if they did!), it has been flatly stated their mission is, if they can’t reach adults, to go after the children. They have repetedly noted the Boy Scouts does a great job of this, and many of them are involved specifically for that reason. And they know to become involved in school boards to force influence childrens education.
RayB @ 26 – great post. Love it.
#25
No, you’re not missing anything when you can’t find the science in ID or Creation “Science”. It isn’t there. That’s really the issue. They have no science so they resort to tactics like legislatively requiring their fairy tales to be taught, or proposing debates with real, actual scientists, who, as we’ve seen right here on this blog, dismiss them out of hand.
Irreducible complexity is about the closest they’ve come, that or Dembski’s magic Design Detecting Filter. Both have been destroyed so many times by real scientists we’ve all lost count. They haven’t, because they weren’t counting in the first place. They simply pretend it didn’t happen and go on pretending Behe and Dembski actually mean something.
Dirty Harry,
It’s no surprise that you haven’t noticed any scientific output from the creationists. They don’t even attempt to do real science. They start “labs” every now and then, but these labs produce almost nothing, and on the rare occasion when any publication comes out of these labs, the findings have absolutely nothing to do with creationism.
The truth is, they aren’t interested in the science. They’re culture warriors, and their primary interest is in promoting their religious and cultural doctrines in public schools. According to Intelligent Design advocates (see Wedge Memo), the theory of evolution is responsible for the degradation of our culture, and they want to change that. They see imitating science as a means to an end. So they aren’t producing any science because they aren’t interested in science and have no intention of doing any science. They just need to appear to be doing science, so they can influence public education.
“Cargo Cult Science” is a partially accurate description for some creationists–at least, for those who ignorantly believe that they are doing science. But many of them, I’d bet, are well aware of the fact that they’re not doing science. Rather than “cargo-cult scientists”, I can think of a better term for them: “Con artists”.
The problem with creation science is not that it has religious aspects, so much as that it has no scientific aspects.
Hoyle has a Phd in christian apologetics? What the fuck is that supposed to represent? All legitimate Phd’s should be outraged at this insidious defaming of the doctoral degree. It’s a wonder they don’t grant a Phd in Crackerology! Wow, we are heading down the road to bedlam!
On a somewhat related topic, in as much as it deals with brain power, the March Scientific American has two excellent articles which are worth reading:
“A Quantum Threat To Special Relativity” and
“Saving New Brain Cells” – about how fresh neurons arise in the adult brain every day, and unless challenged with the right kinds of complex learning tasks, they will perish. So get more of Science into your brain and kick out that religious crap so that the sensible cells don’t suffer!
PZ (or anyone)
Is there a sense that these types of things, and the “teach the controversy”/”academic freedom” attempts, have been getting more numerous over time, or is it simply the case that they’ve always been made but it’s simply easier to learn of them, even when they aren’t local?
Why do these nuts get any time in newspapers? No wonder they’re all going bankrupt, no journalistic standards.
Ray B @ 26
Good post, but I protest the use of the word “Science” with that pernicious idea or any other demented thinking.
How about, “I call it “Insanity”
Korn has something to say on the evolution of incoherent dingleberries:
Christian apologetics?
Sorry, but I believe a bunch of crap? Sorry, I can’t help it?
You can get a Ph.D. in that?
When it mentioned science in the bill, it made it kind of obvious that it’s an attack on evolution.
Actually, I think we should work to get this passed. It is so overly broad – probably to include all religions – that the FSM would work as “Supreme Creator of the Universe”!
Ray Ladbury #28:
Hypothesis: If a supreme creator of the universe exists, he would have made nature awesome.
Experiment: Is nature awesome?
Conclusion: Yes, nature is awesome. Therefore, the hypothesis that a supreme creator exists is supported.
It sounds stupid, but so many of the claims they actually make come down to just that.
In the last thread, posters pointed out that the Constitution already prohibits state-sponsored religion (and for the purposes of the courts, atheism is defined as a religion). So what’s the point of her ballot proposal?
It was obvious to me from the beginning that she wants to stop the teaching of evolution because she considers it tantamount to teaching atheism. This argument has been tried in CA courts before and has always lost. Science isn’t atheistic, it’s secular. Not mentioning a totally unnecessary creator in science classes is not equivalent to teaching that god doesn’t exist.
Right, don’t mention god, just imply none of this is comprehensible unless we invoke a magic man. Yeah, that’s still not going to work.
Nature is awesome, but it isn’t necessarily well-designed, and at any rate macroevolution is completely sufficient to explain any apparent design we do find.
So not only do these people fail to see why science isn’t atheism, they fail to see why their religious presuppositions aren’t science. And this ideological blindness is the reason why they lose in court every time.
I’ve always wondered why, if creationists are so interested in giving intelligent design a fair chance in science classrooms, they aren’t equally interested in making sure ‘Darwinism’ doesn’t get more time in church on Sunday? Afterall, if these are just two equally valid concepts about the origin of modern humans, why should one be favored over the other. Teach the ‘controversy’ in all venues!
From the article:
“Hoyle disagrees with Struiksma and says it’s OK to teach evolution in schools. He argues that evolution is a legitimate scientific theory, but it’s incomplete and can’t fully explain the existence of design in nature. And he is upset that schools don’t allow those conversations to be had in public schools.
“You don’t have to mention God, you can simply emphasize the fact that wow, nature is awesome, it’s very well designed and that macroevolution is an insufficient mechanism to explain all this stuff,” he said.”
Pffft.
He’s obviously had far more experience than her at this stuff, and knows that saying that “evolution is wrong” is never going to get anywhere. Mind you, I still don’t understand why he (or any “creation scientist”) bothers. Fuck, the guy’s been “actively involved in creation science missions for over 20 years”… why hasn’t he done any fucking SCIENCE in that time, instead of preaching bullshit?
Publish a fucking paper, you lame creationist motherfuckers. Let’s see you do some science.
/rant.
I think I’m ready to initiate a class action suit. A suit, against Paul Zachary Myers and any contributors to his blog’s, Pharyngula, content. It is my contention that after years of reading stories illustrating in grand detail the vast sea of stupidity that a great many of my fellow citizens happily eat, drink, bathe, and perform other bodily functions in, is starting to affect my sanity. The compulsion to return to his blog is now beyond my capacity to control, kind of like driving past a severe car accident – you don’t want to look, but you do anyway, in the hopes of seeing something grizzly. Grizzly, in the religious sense, is pretty much served up here many times a day. Anyone who cares to join the suit, should contact me.
I need to rest now.
I just checked out Hoyle’s site for as long as I could stomach it. I loved this topic:
“In the Beginning: God or Goo?”
What do all these creations have against mud puddles and goo? As Carl Sagan said, “The fact that we are comprised of matter doesn’t make us less, it makes matter more.”
I personally am proud to have origins of goo.
Wow… Hoyle has a Ph. D. from an unaccredited institution in Christian Apologetics. How Hovindian.
“I have a Ph. D. in Truthology from Christian Tech.” (As usual, the Simpsons got it right.)
Oh my brain…I went into the comments on the story there such a deep well of incoherent stupid.
Once of the choice ones:
“Theories are things you cannot test in a lab. Relativity is a Theory because we can’t test it, but Gravity is a Law because we can do it with math.”
headdeskheaddeskheaddesk
And if nature is ‘well designed’ goddamit I deserve some SERIOUS warrantee work on my knees because they don’t work all that well at ALL!
Hey, Santorum is out and about, spreading his frothy mix of right wing bellicosity and religious inanity.
** OT **
Phelps banned from UK:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/19/britain-bans-us-cleric
[quote]”In the Beginning: God or Goo?”
What do all these creations have against mud puddles and goo? As Carl Sagan said, “The fact that we are comprised of matter doesn’t make us less, it makes matter more.”
I personally am proud to have origins of goo.[/quote]
Of course, it may be true that God = Goo. Perhaps those people have never thought of that.
“We, the people of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this constitution.”
Thank you, Washington State, for putting that idiotic sentence into your constitution and making Kimberlie’s ballot measure possible!
“Goo” is atheistic; “dust of the earth” is holy. It’s really really important that the original material not get wet.
What’s scary is millions of American Christians are just like this lunatic, and the moderate Christians don’t care.
That’s one I reported for abuse as “Other, Lying”.
We’ll see…
My friend Goo says P U!
I’m pretty sure that the Washington State constitution explicitly bans teaching creationism, far more explicitly than does the US constitution:
“No public money or property shall be appropriated for, or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or the support of any religious establishment.” (Section 11 – it goes on to allow for using public funds to hire a chaplain for public hospitals, jails, and so forth). Nobody can seriously make the case that creationism and the crypto-creationist mumbo-jumbo that is “Intelligent Design” are anything BUT “religious instruction”.
Gosh, Ya Think?
It amazing to me how Christians seem to think that the best way to make this a better world is to hide their heads in the sand and ignore reality.
La La La La my supreme being is real La La La the easter bunny isn’t real La La La Jesus was real La La La the tooth fairy isn’t real La La La The fact that the tooth fairy and the easter bunny provide exactly the same amount of evidence for their existance as God and Jesus means nothing La La La Atheist are evil because they’re “worldly” and look to science and fact instead of invisible late bronze age myths for their morality La La La.
My Gosh! Do their delusions have no end?
This is the same magic as the motto “in god we trust”. Put on our coins sometime aroud the civil war, it now means “this nation was founded by christians”.
“Supreme Ruler of the Universe”
cue: Queen
song: Flash!
Ming the merciless, Supreme Ruler of the Universe.
(Really. I was listening to a Greatest Hits albumn by Queen when I read this preamble – Bohemian Rhapsody to be exact – and immediately tuned into Flash) hehehehehehehe
“Galileo, Galileo, Galileo, Galileo, Galileo, Figaro”
Can’t test Relativity eh?
HA!
Wow, there’s a whole lot of crazy packed into 25 wasted years of life.
Alex at #47:
I know you didn’t mean it this way, and I’m only pointing it out because, as malapropisms go, it’s delightful (and not doing it to be pedantic or spiteful).
And suddenly I thought:
“Does the Pope shit in the woods?” and “I once shot a bear in my pajamas. What he was doing in my pajamas I’ll never know.” (with apologies to Groucho Marx).
Thanks for the smile!
No kings,
Robert
Oops – missed a closing quote there…
HA!
Scott Hanley @ #55:
Should one also avoid feeding it after midnight? :P
A bit O/T: Earlier this week the NDAK Lege voted to recognize the life of a foetus as beginning at conception. I wrote a little about it here.
And wondered how that sterling, HighPlains/Liberal Bloviator Ed Schulz had anything to say about it…
JimNorth at #61:
Thanks for the earworm.
Which reminds me, creationists might earn a lot more respect if they’d hurry up and invent the rocket cycle!
No kings,
Robert
I suppose if I was as stupid as some of these creationists, I’d want to elevate my lineage as much as possible.
Yeah, I may be dumb, but my great-great-times-infinity-grandfather is GOD, SO THERE! Stamp-stamp, no erasies!
Raytheist at #48:
Is that what the kids are calling it these days?
. . .
Hello? Is this mic on?
No kings,
Robert
DesertSon @ 65
Thank you for that. Grizzley != Grisly. I learnt something new! (and feeling quite sheepish about it as well)
Lol.
Cheers.
Holy crap — I think I live about a block away from the Grace Baptist Church referenced in the Herald article. Their churchboard’s most recent witticism:
“Evolution is to science what quackery is to medicine.”
You could hear the irony meters spoinging for miles…
Hoyle gained his Ph.D at the Californian Graduate school of theology.
“What is perhaps most noteworthy is that since its inception Cal Grad chose to operate independently of any federal accrediting agencies’
Enough said…
But if you read further..
‘But what about federal accrediting agencies? The history behind “accreditation” is a history involving government loans and grants and a federally governed system to make sure that government money goes to schools that demonstrate a record of legitimate operation. Certain standards are expected and the agencies oversee that these standards are met in order for students to apply for federal loans and grants. As stated earlier, when Cal Grad was founded its leaders made a purposeful decision to work within the regulations of the state law while at the same time choosing not to participate in federal government programs for loans and grants.’
In other words is is a classic jeebus lovin degree mill…
Standards will not be as advertised…that is for damn sure!
“Candidates for degrees must demonstrate an exemplary Christian character, a commitment to communicate the truth of the Word of God and manifest promise of usefulness in Christian service.”
Says it all…be a whore for jeebus!
Posted by: Desert Son | February 19, 2009 5:12 PM
Alex at #47:
I know you didn’t mean it this way, and I’m only pointing it out because, as malapropisms go, it’s delightful (and not doing it to be pedantic or spiteful).
you don’t want to look, but you do anyway, in the hopes of seeing something grizzly. Grizzly, in the religious sense, is pretty much served up here many times a day.
Shakespeare. I wanna say Winter’s Tale. “…While greasly Joan doth keel the pot…”
Dunno why, it just stuck, etymology-guy that I am…
LET’S ALL ACTUALLY HELP TO GET THIS MEASURE PASSED!!!
Just imagine this scenario:
Passerby: “hey, is that your Christmas display?”
Christian: “yes, yes it is…I am proudly displaying my faith”
Passerby: “that’s nice and all, but Kimberlie Struiksma’s new law says that if anyone denies a Supreme Ruler, they can’t use public funds or land.”
Christian: “but I don’t deny God! I pray to Him every day!”
Passerby: “sorry, the law doesn’t say anything about a specific god…let me just ask: Do you believe in Vishnu, Supreme Ruler of the Universe in the Hindu religion, or do you deny His existence?”
Christian: “I deny it of course! I am a Christian!”
Passerby: “Okay then, Denier of a Supreme Ruler, start packing up that silly Manger scene before I have it removed… and if the removal squad isn’t here soon, it will be my civic duty to kick it down!”
yeehaw!
The quote, from the movie Animal Crackers, goes: “While hunting in Africa, I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got into my pajamas I’ll never know.”
‘Tis Himself at #77:
Thanks for the clarification. I modified the Groucho quote intentionally as a kind of good-natured counter-malapropism ovation in response to Alex’s (honest) “Grizzly” remark in which I found humorous delight, which is why I appended “apologies to Groucho Marx,” intending it as simultaneous acknowledgment that I had misquoted (with purpose), while hoping to still point credit in the direction of the original speaker.
But you’re right: it’s an elephant, indeed, in Animal Crackers.
No kings,
Robert
This woman is from Blaine. I grew up in Bellingham, which is the real “city” that Blaine is close enough to, also the home of Western Washington University.
That whole area – a majority of Whatcom County is full of crazy. Most of Washington is sane – Whatcom County is where all the crazy goes. Growing up there is part of what made me an atheist in the first place.
I can’t see how a Supreme Leader of the Universe would be perfection, not compared to one without anchovies and with extra cheese.
I wouldnt be surprised if the Dishonesty Institute has something to do with this. I bet you that the woman behind this (Kim Struiksma) is really Casey in drags!!!!
Here’s a proposed lesson plan for her: Islamic science. One diagram shows the power of prayer accumulating; another shows how prayer is like electromagnetism. I’m sure she’ll want to get those acknowledgments of Allah into math and science class.
If she wants us to take her crazy, then she has to take everyone else’s crazy.
And the previous article is about defying the religious crazies…
Guess what’s on the enforcers’ chopping block now? Sinful, unscriptural, ungodly, lecherous…..
Valentine’s Day.
“You don’t have to mention God, in fact we hope that you don’t. We hope that you just talk in pseudoscientififc terms about how well designed life is, ignoring any embarassing religious stuff that will prove that there isn’t a rational critical mind behind all the creation “science” blathering. We also hope that you don’t read any of the mountains of evidence showing that evolution is the best explanation for all life on Earth. As that would spoil our petty little fantasy of a passive agressive deity that loves you, but kills on a whim.
I’m afraid us creationists are so weak minded we’ll invent any old shit to preserve the ignorant delusionary worldview that we desperately clutch like a teddy bear, in an attempt to ignore reality”.
If you apply a logic filter to the words of creationists this is invariably what they are really saying.
God this is sad. She’s not even bothering to pretend she’s not a creationist! I thought I.D. was the latest fashion among superstitious reality-deniers?
I hope to god there aren’t enough patsies out there to sign this, though it will probably gain some traction in the eastern half of the state.
Hugh Troy gives a summary of Creationist thinking passed through a logic filter.
Actually if you pass it through a logic filter it reads something like this:
“…”
Does she want the hospitals shut down also? Medical attention directly opposes the will of god no matter how much they try to argue otherwise.
The quote, from the movie Animal Crackers, goes: “While hunting in Africa, I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got into my pajamas I’ll never know.”
If you’re going to correct a quote, get it right.
“One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas I don’t know.”
did you ever read john martin rohde’s long rant published in 1904 titled “God and Government OR CHRIST OUR KING IN CIVIC AND SOCIAL RIGHTEOUSNESS?
http://www.archive.org/stream/godgovernmentorc00rohd/godgovernmentorc00rohd_djvu.txt
it’s interesting to scan. and a good reminder that these same lunatics have been around since time began. they’re less well spoken these days, but never mind, their goal is the same.
j. martin rohde has a great grandson who apparently doesn’t know his great grandfather was a nut.
Oh, I know exactly what this is about. The unremittingly amusing folks at WorldNutDaily have been bitching for a while now about how the stimulus package “outlaws religion” because it says that public funds can’t end up in the hands of any institution promoting a religious point of view. This is just their attempt at a “gotcha” moment.
RayB #26
I have heard of the Cargo Cults before, a response to the planes dropping cargo on parachutes to pacific islanders after a natural disaster of some sort, but I really loved this one….I promise it is genuine!!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6734469.stm