Off Topic — HabitableZone

Off Topic » in reply to There are about 5.5-6 billion reasons I'm not laughing.

In reply to your first question:
Mary Anne — (archived)

As for refuting theology with science...isn't that what the evolution vs. creationist battles are all about?

NO.

Even to phrase it like that is putting a match to gasoline.

Theology as a whole is not at issue in the creationism dust-up. Theology is a subject outside of science. It would make just as much sense to try to refute sonnets with scientific theory, or use science to disprove a folk tale. It says nothing about the poem or tale, but shows that the scientist has no sense of proportion as well as no appreciation for things outside his field. He would be, in fact, acting with regard to his discipline the way a fundamentalist acts toward his faith.

The creationist/evolution argument for the science side must start and end here: Science is based on doubt and evidence; religion is based on faith and belief. Science has no quarrel with faith, but faith, nor any of the conclusions of the faithful predicated on their belief, have no business in science. If the faithful want science to acknowledge their beliefs, they will have to present them in a way compatible with scientific methods of inquiry and proof. That means leaving their faith behind. But then it's no longer faith, is it?

Science in the laboratory, faith in the houses of worship. And each to its own classroom. Amen.

You see the many nations in which religion has a say in governing the people and you can see why education advocates and scientists can't ever let the lions lay down with the lambs.

Good. I expect your check to Americans United for the Separation of Church and State is in the mail. Please remember that Muslim fundamentalists are not the ones attacking science in American classrooms.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (103 posts)