Bill Ounce,
I've been reading some of your posts, and find them intreging. I am curious as to what has driven you to study our founding fathers and as you call it creationist/revisionist/whatever. I have done some study in both of these areas - have read some Barton and some scientific creationism. I agree with many of your observations but right wing propoganda seems a bit harsh to discribe these peoples research. Barton's point in his research is to develope a thesis that our founding fathers agreed to design our government based on a Judeo-Christian philosophy (not that they were ALL Chritians) rather than modern mans bent towards Secular Humanism philosophy. He may at times get over zealous in his interpretation of the facts but I don't recall him being outright dishonest. And if we're going to call him dishonest what do we call my college professors and our high school text books who in my opionion were far more decitful in defending their humanistic philosophies. I think an honest appraisal is that all men are subject to their own bias. They choose the facts that support their thesis and ignore the facts that run counter to their thesis. How come you seem to beat only on the "Right Wing Christian Fundimentalist". I see more dishonesty on the left and certainly modern scientist are not wearing any halos either when it comes to honesty (lots of $ = lots of graft and corruption). As for the creationist after substantial study I find that they ask some valid questions. And in a free society I don't see why they should be ridiculed for asking them. Furthermore the mechanism that drives evolution has not even been observed in the laboritory and yet we have numerous books describing it in great detail as if it was fact. From a purely scientific point of view, neither creation nor evelution can be elevated to anything more than hypothesis.
By the way I agree with almost everything I've read from you, and espesially in regards to honesty. Without it your credibility is shot, and you will loose listeners.
Some would conider me as part of the "Religious Right", but I do not cosider myself that. Iam just a 46 year old Jewelry Designer/Goldsmith that is a die hard truth seeker (and a poor speller). I am on my local school board and am politically active, but I DO NOT want to have a state established religion, but I see nothing dangerous about people exersising that faith in public or in school. And my research indicates that our Founding Fathers would generally agree with that view. I think we must accept pluralism in our society but it is a disaster to try and reflect it in our law. We must agree on one philosohy as a foundation for law or we end up with total confusion. My vote is to stay the course with the Judeo-Christian Ethic.
Enough of my ramblings. By the way, who are you? Or is it bad netiquette to ask?
I don't even want to talk stocks. I just wish Greespan would find a hole and crawl into it! Maybe we sould pass the hat, take up a collection, and send him and his new bride on along honeymoon, Maybe to Bosnia. Thats not very Christin, is it?
God Bless,
Jim G. |
