> I believe you are correct on your perception of intelligent design and evolution. I have never seen any contradiction in the two.

There is none, and can be, if you actually grasp their natures.

Religion and Science are not in contest with one another. One does not preclude or argue with the other. There is no true overlap (although there is some apparent overlap at fringe areas where one might argue over which notion belongs where).

Science is about provable, testable things. If it isn’t provable, it’s not Science. God is not provable (more on that in a moment) and thus Science has nothing to say about Him.

Faith, and Religion, is about the unknown and unknowable. It’s about what you can’t prove, but believe anyway. Hence, it, too, does not address any problem of Science.

There’s no overlap, really. Science is about provable things, Faith is about unprovable things.

Evolution is sufficiently demonstrable that it’s clear that, if the universe was created by God, then He did so by either the mechanism of evolution, OR by planting evidence which makes evolution scientifically verifiable and justifiable. ID is based on an inherent assumption of God, or something of sufficient power and ability so as to be pretty much the same thing. This is not a testable hypothesis, ergo it’s not, and never can be, science. It’s a matter of Faith.

Now, a side comment, which I think people often fail to grasp about Evolution vs. ID.

I think it’s a rationally demonstrable fact that God, assuming He exists (and I do) wants us to believe in Him based on Faith alone.

If God wanted to be proven to exist, it’s not like He’d have much of a problem parting the heavens and saying… “Yeah. I exist. What about it?” He has not done so, ergo, He wants us to believe in Him based on Faith. Why this is I shan’t begin to speculate. But it makes rational sense, and there’s some measure of biblical support for that argument, too.

Now, given that, it seems clear that the common ID argument that “the world could not exist without God” is itself a presumption of Proof of God.

Since we’ve already reasoned that He doesn’t want to be Proven, it must follow from that that Evolution (or some alternate scientific theory, at least) MUST WORK.

The universe as we know it cannot be demonstrated to require God

In fact, it should show no sign of really needing God to exist at all. There should be sufficient evidence inherent in it that it is capable of bootstrapping itself up from nothingness.

Whether that’s just because God used some technique for bootstrapping it that He wasn’t absolutely required for, or if He just created it with a wave of His hand, and included those necessary elements to make it appear as though it was bootstrapped is irrelevant to the question of Evolution or ID. ID is not science, and cannot be — it should be taught as Religion or Faith. Evolution is Science, and should be taught as such. But one doesn’t preclude the other. One can accept the notion that a creator created things via evolution… or created them instantly and left behind clues to the chain of evolution.
And just because one believes in evolution, does not mean one cannot believe that God was a/the guiding force behind it.

The two aren’t at odds with one another. Any “arguments” between them are false arguments deriving from failure to understand what is Science and what is Faith.

.

Well, unfortunately, “classic Dems” are kind of like “moderate Islam”. I’m sure both exist but they somewhat lack the visibility of the “other kind”.

I know they both exist, I’ve seen or interacted with both types. But they don’t consitute even a very visible minority, and, as such, can only blame themselves for the ire directed their way.

Re: the hard and hateful right

You must receive email from a number of unreasonable or hateful persons on “the hard right”. I sympathize with your inbox experience.

I know and love persons whom I consider both hard right and misguidedly hateful in various areas. They send me email. However, I know those persons in real life. Those misguided persons are neither powerful nor influential amongst their peers.

I wonder if you might be reacting to powerless and uninfluential persons who found their way to cable internet connections and email accounts? I wonder if the “hateful right” represent much more than the spreading popularity of the internet amongst all demographics of income and education and reasoning ability?

Re: Intelligent Design

I look forward to your expanded post. Spurred by reading a previous post here, I spent a few days trying to learn more about ID. It’s my impression that many or most ID persons believe DNA/genetic coding is clearly a gift from God and is part of God’s plan. If this is not your impression, I am interested to know why.

Re: Immigration/Amnesty

I just want to emphasize
1) I am in favor of our nation controlling our borders, and
2) I’ve no hatred for immigrants.

Once we better control our borders, we can then consider solutions for the millions who have been here a long time.

Your blog has been fabulous all Fall. Thanks for being so interesting.

As for Hillary, I do like the articles at Hillbuzz, but I think they’re kidding themselves when they call Hillary a centrist. She’s a centrist only in comparison to Comrade Senator Obama.

I always thought that Daschle urging Obama to run was a way to get even with the Clintons for losing Congress. Now I am hoping that Daschle and Rahm Emmanuel are puppetmasters despite the surreal pick of Joe Biden who is now chained to his teleprompter. Even Nancy Pelosi was pushing Chet Edwards of Texas because the current Dem majority in Congress are Blue Dogs. The Black Congressional Caucus was pushing Sam Nunn.

Guess wanting the Catholic vote won out. The ethnic Catholic vote is still the bloc to watch (more than 1/3 of PA voters and probably as high in NY, NJ and CT).

It would be helpful if the evolution of the Republican Party was not anti-science. Makes centrists uneasy.

The standard Republican response to defeat is despondency. The Democrats? Anger. And while anger may not be the optimal response, it can rapidly mutate to resolve.

And you’re right…one of the standard counters that the Democrats have developed to effective Republican attacks is to whine about “civility”. Whereupon the Republican will stop doing what is working, and do something far less effective.

Both habits are annoying…but can, perhaps, be reformed into something useful.

Neither am I. I can’t listen to that guy, he just seems to keep repeating himself. And he seems to have a much different recollection of Regan than I do. Reagan was not some kind of ultra-conservative. In fact, Regan was constantly having to battle the far right in California and when he was running for President.

I also feel much as you do on the party affiliation. Some people that think they are far right conservatives are actually far to the right of most Republicans. Peggy Noonan, Frum, Brookes, et.al share very little political views similar to mine. Obama and I share exactly zero views. I’m probably an 80% believer in McCains views. I feel that if I want to continue to have those views, or more accurately, express them publicly, Obama has to be defeated. I don’t agree with McCain about not fearing Obama, he is the most destructive person to run for President in my lifetime.

vote for the Republicans.

Most people don’t notice it and lump all Dems in as one and throw the paint at Dems in general which irks the ‘classic Dems’ who don’t buy the ‘progressive’ agenda.

Right now it is the DNC/CPC Congressional Progressive Caucus that is trying to do what Obama did years ago with the New Party alignment. Fusion parties were allowed then before SCOTUS said no.

The extreme far left Nutroots/DNC/CPC is trying to take over the control of the Dem party which they use as a vehicle rather than try to form up their own party with a split and leave them as a third party.

They would pull maybe 25 to 35 % of the base with them at best based on the states where they are strongest and even those would be split between the two groups.

I think the combination of the classic or blue dog or dixiecrat dems along with independents and repubs will carry this and by margins that will surprise many unless there is major fraud at the polls.