Comments on: Jack Kemp Phillis Schlafly: Evolution as Evil Plot

By: plunge

plunge — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 00:10:55 +0000

Considering that even Jack Kemp has no idea what “in the image of God” even means, I don’t see how you can be disillusioned, eactly. Oh no: I’m no longer… something (hand waving) or other, God. Or something. How depressing it is to not be that, whatever it is!

By: SHAUN

SHAUN — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:47:47 +0000

I really think it was a mistake on the part of Townhall.
Jack Kemp seems to me at least as a level headed common sense conservative.Schafly is a dusty old doddering dishonest windbag,she’s also Karl Rove’s godmother.

By: Robster

Robster — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:10:24 +0000

That is really sad. If Kemp is actually claiming this, and it isn’t a goof on the editor’s part, then it is a more blatant example of plagiarism than Coulter’s book.

Luckily, science isn’t based on majority rule, so the number of people who prefer superstition is immaterial to the discussion.

By: DJ

DJ — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:59:19 +0000

Question is - Did Jack Kemp plagierize Phyllis Schafly or the other way around?

They are identical articles, word for word, 5 days apart, each showing up in their feature article spots.

By: SHAUN

SHAUN — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 18:23:32 +0000

This editorial was actually written by the infamous Phyllis
Schafly link:http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2006/aug06/06-08-16.html on Aug 6. The Townhall site credited Jack Kemp

It’s still awful whoever wrote it

By: Christian

Christian — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 17:02:31 +0000

Wow, I just finished reading Kemp’s piece. I must say that his article is highly concentrated stupidity masquerading as an informed opinion. Now I must try to regrow the brain cells lost by reading it.

By: Kai-Mikael Jää-Aro

Kai-Mikael Jää-Aro — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:29:59 +0000

It has admittedly been a while, but I don’t remember that any of my childhood joys and ambitions had anything to do with being created in the image of God…

Biking, reading a good book, building a cool aeroplane model were and are dependable joys and ambitions regardless of whether gods exist or not and have created someone in their image or not.

By: GerryL

GerryL — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 04:35:25 +0000

Maybe we can just put it down to playing football without a helmet. So sad.

By: oldhippie

oldhippie — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:59:10 +0000

We could say Jack Kemp is slime, but that would insult the wonderful slime molds in the next post.

They do lie so:
“Where topics are taught that may generate controversy (such as biological evolution), the curriculum should help students to understand the full range of scientific views that exist, why such topics may generate controversy, and how scientific discoveries can profoundly affect society.”
There is no controversy in the scientific community about evolution, only about minor details. So if this is what they want to explore they chose the wrong subject.

“Despite bitter denunciations by liberals, funny thing, there has been a thundering silence about the one-third of her book in which she deconstructs Darwinism.”
I know pharyngula had a lot of posts about the total absurdity of Ms. Coulter’s take on evolution. I am sure that was not the only discussion.

By: sharon

sharon — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:17:02 +0000

In May, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the decision by a Clinton-appointed trial judge to prohibit the Cobb County, Ga., school board from placing this sticker on textbooks: “Evolution is a theory, not a fact [who says? it may yet be proven fact… it’s not been dis-proven, therefore inaccurate to say, “not a fact”], regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.”

That’s a pretty bold statement coming from people who boast of approaching things with an open mind.

By: Jon H

Jon H — Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:15:13 +0000

Speaking of which, the recent release of George W. Bush’s alleged reading list for the summer was conspicuous in the complete absence of any science content, apart from a single book about Oppenheimer.

Which probably has more to do with Bush’s WMD fetish than anything else.

Assuming he actually read it.