<<Many are very nice people, and are entitled to their beliefs, but of so
little faith that they have to eliminate others beliefs in order to affirm
their own - very sad.

Good point and very true. I've been on the receiving end of that penchant
to destory and have never understood why my beliefs threaten those who
disagree with me to the point of making them literally spit venom.

I'm not a biologist, and could not defend or prosecute evolution if my life depended on it. From what I remember, evolution is a reasonable reality
of modern science. I'm sorry I don't know more, but law school doesn't
teach biology and you can't do it all.

To be fair, though, dogma is dogma whether it be scientific or religious.
In my opinion, the best we can do is take what evidence we have, draw
what conclusions we can support, and then keep open minds as we
search to discover more, in both science and religion. After all,
the main problem with our species, as I see it, is the arrogance that tells
us we know it all and can do anything. That attitude gives tunnel vision to
scientists and religious fanatics alike. After all, is a scientist with unsupported data any more credible than a religious zealot who claims to know it all?

Unfortunately, in the search for truth there will always be a spectrum and
bad ideas will always be tested. The Kansas Problem will ultimately prove
its own folly like every other bad idea. But I'd rather have this freedom to
test ideas than a scientific board of inquiry dictating its own dogma like
some kind of bizarre post-modern inquisition, even if some results are
clownish and may result in the short term miseducation of some children.

Gosh, haven't we all been miseducated at one point or another? I know I
have -- I only wish it hadn't been so expensive. :-)

Brent Ripley
brentr at hawlaw.com