If students in the classroom were to sequence on paper in columns A and B the creation accounts of Genesis 1 against Genesis 2, the students would note the two sequences do not match. This would raise theological questions as well as scientific questions.
Just as we can disprove scientific theories on creation, we should allow students to rule out theological theories or scriptural texts on creation.
Charles Darwin wrote in a letter: “The impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance seems to me the chief argument for the existence of God.”
Darwin also concluded his book, “The Origin of the Species,” “I see no good reason why the views given in this volume should shock the religious feelings of anyone. It is satisfactory, as showing how transient such impressions are, to remember that the greatest discovery ever made by man, namely, the law of the attraction of gravity, was also attacked by Liebnitz, as ‘subversive of natural, and inferentially of revealed religion.’ ... There is a grandeur in this view of life (evolution), with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.”
It seems that Darwin could acknowledge the possibility of a creator, designer or God who set evolution in motion. But, it seems to me that many so-called creationists have closed minds. They cannot acknowledge the possibility that any creator would also create evolution.
Perhaps, some day, evolution theory will be proved inaccurate and inadequate, in part, or in whole.
But, so, too, might all of our religious notions and texts about God creator, and designer.
CarmelDear House Speaker Bosma,
I read Feb. 22 in The News-Sentinel that you criticized Rep. (Bob) Morris for his stance on the Girl Scouts of America. A short Google search backs up Morris’ claims of the national agenda of the GSUSA. It is not the same organization that focused on family, community service and attaining life skills as it was when I was a girl.
This website tells the story of Patti Garibay, who spent nearly 20 years as a Girl Scout and a leader. She started American Heritage Girls because of the changing feminist agenda.
Please take a look: www.in.gov/cgi-bin/legislative/contact/contact-2-5.pl?data=h088
I was an active member of the Anthony Wayne Area Council of the Boy Scouts of America for almost 15 years. For five years, I was on the Catholic Committee for Scouting, a national joint venture between the Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts to promote Catholic values to our Catholic scout troops.
Even 10 years ago, we were very concerned about the partnerships that the GSUSA were making with Planned Parenthood and gay rights organizations.
Rep. Morris needs to be commended for the strong pro-life, pro-family stance he has taken by speaking out against the GSUSA. Those are the values that I saw in him when I voted for him.
You need to do some research into what your money is going to be supporting when you purchase 278 cases of Girl Scout cookies.
Precinct Committeeman #186