States may have grown accustomed to violating the rights of American citizens, but that does not bootstrap those violations into something that is constitutional.

Wednesday, February 23, 2005

Lileks' mistake

As much as I like practically everything James Lileks writes (Bleats, Backfence, Newhouse, Joe Ohio, the list goes on...), he's mistaken in thinking that facts point to evolution. He makes a good conclusion, however, that "we could avoid conflict if teachers felt free to lead the class in philosophical speculations". That's all that we are asking for in the first place - the right to discuss rational alternatives to the cult of Darwinism.

UPDATE: Proverbs Daily says the debate is important.

2 comments:

sackofcatfood said...

"rational alternatives"? But wouldn't that encourage dangerous things like free-thinking and forming one's own conclusions?

Hatless in Hattiesburg said...

ach! what was i thinking by thinking?