     |
|
The chances of even the first rung of DNA structure being reached randomly are 10 to the 87th power. That's 10 and 87 zeros, which translates to about 7 billion years. Now that is a slim chance! Despite these odds your child will be taught the theory of evolution at school. I can't prove scientifically that God made the universe but in fairness if the chances of intelligent design are at least the same as the above how come our children are not being shown that in public schools? It's American to separate church and state. I'm so glad it is, but it isn't American to separate Country and God - one glance at your money supports that. Some misguided souls among us are keen to expel God from law and science. Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois told a reporter last week that he "needs to look at everything" regarding Supreme Court nominee Judge John Roberts, including Roberts' faith. Tony Perkins, Family Research Council calls Durbin the Senate "attack dog" on faith. To Durbin, it is inappropriate to let your faith inform your conscience if you are a believing, practicing Christian. Concerned citizens like you should stop this foolishness. Tell the "faith police" that it is un-American to require a religious test as a qualification to any office or public trust in the United States. It is? Sure, for that's what is right at the end of Article VI of the US constitution. Government can for example require an oath of allegiance to the constitution but it may not prescribe a test oath as a qualification for holding office. Be careful Sen. Durbin - you are on thin ice here. Sen. Durbin recently compared American soldiers in Guantanamo to "Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or Pol Pot." For this he was roundly criticized and he backed down, apologizing on the Senate floor. He needs to be challenged again now, and I think you are just the person to do it. We don't want Supreme Court nominees to pass a religious test. Faith or no faith is not the point. Just like in the debate over teaching the origins of life we want equality of access to national office. Ever since being governor of Texas, President Bush has wanted more than one theory of the start of life taught in schools. Recently he shocked journalists saying: "Both sides ought to be properly taught . . . so people can understand what the debate is about. Part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought." The response of some American educators was predictable even though their evolutionary theory has not one but thousands of "missing links." They cried that there is no scientific evidence for intelligent design and no way to teach it. An opinion quoted in the Washington Post is that intelligent design is not a tested scientific theory but a cleverly marketed effort to introduce religious thinking to students. Much of this happened after civic authority figures in the USA desired that competing ideas challenging self-centered behavior, especially religious ideas, be purged from the language of state. This was for so-called fairness to those without faith. Someone ought to call a halt to the mad rush towards an intellectually anemic society where only a narrow band of ideas are deemed acceptable. Anyone straying from the liberal mainstream is hastily reprimanded to "be more tolerant." It is still America to say "in God we trust", but its less acceptable to say "in God we think" and as a recently sacked Christian red Cross official discovered; its completely inappropriate for "in God we speak." I've heard and read plenty of opinions claiming that we exist by random accident. None of that has hurt me. So how come saying the opposite is so detrimental? Solomon wrote: "The discerning heart seeks
knowledge but the mouth of a fool feeds on folly." Think plenty and speak
a little on these matters for this is still the Land of the Free.
Be sure and read Michael Novak's..."In God We Trust" Does the new century mark our last? Is our present moral fog a transient time of trial, those hours cold and dark before the ramparts' new gleaming? Are we near our end or at a beginning?" Our history books neglect an important influence —religious principles. George Washington said in his Farewell Address that most people are not going to have virtue or good habits in the long run without religion. This Judge sees you even when you're alone, even with the doors closed. This is a Judge who knows whether or not you paint the bottom of the chair. Republics depend on virtue that holds up under such tests.
|
