Deinonychus antirrhopus

I don't really see the contradiction. The big picture claim is that whether to teach evolution in schools is a partisan issue. Now that may or may not be true. To some extent it certainly is (the relevant votes in Kansas were often straight party-line) but if you want to say I'm exaggerating here, fine. But nothing I said contradicts that. What there is bipartisan opposition to is this particular compromise proposal. I can't believe you haven't heard of an issue where there is partisan disagreement and bipartisan opposition to a proposed resolution before.

Yeah you are exaggerating. Those who oppose evolution in school curriculums are part of the Right, but only part of Right.

I don't enough details about Kansas to know if your claims are supportive of your position or not. That is, were the Republicans voting against evolution also members of the subset that are usually characterized as Religious Right, or where they Republicans who are say fiscal conservatives.

"That is, were the Republicans voting against evolution also members of the subset that are usually characterized as Religious Right, or where they Republicans who are say fiscal conservatives."

Spot on. For example, there is probably not a single Ayn Rand-inspired-Republican who would support Dembski or any other of the junk-science attacks on evolution. I'd imagine Bill Buckley and his ilk would probably concur as well - just to give some examples.

Steve is dead on when he claims that this is not a Belief V Unbelief debate. You guys should check out the exchange between the intelligent design crowd and Fr. Edward Oakes, a strong opponent of the movement. Oakes shreds their arguments.

http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0104/correspondence-oakes.html

1) Darwinism is evolving. Scientists are trying to come up with the explanatory laws for chemical complexity

2) The I.D. movement is not only unscientific, they are anti-theological. Great Christian apologists like Thomas Aquinas are not so much worried about how awesome the cell is, but that things exist at all and seem to all work together nicely

3) I.D. makes theodicy impossible.

Indeed, anti-Darwinism is just a creature of a rabid religious group - its not a Conservative position per se.

Everyone is missing the point here, I think. I consider myself rather right-wing, but I am an atheist, and I believe that evolution best explains the existence of biological diversity.

The real question here is not a matter of whether creationism or evolution should be taught in public schools, but why has it become a political issue. Now, we can tug at the tangled loops of this gordian knot, citing this research or that in favor of one view or another, but it is futile, we are still dealing with a political process that is based on the will of the majority, or the fallacy of might(through numbers) makes right. It doesn't matter if we are dealing with evolution vs creationism or puke green walls vs diaper yellow walls, it is politicized, because it is a public institution.

The crux of the problem in this debate is the fact that we are dealing with PUBLIC resources that are handed out through a messy political process in a zero-sum game. Do we ever hear of private schools fighting over creationism vs evolution? No, because tax dollars are not being seized to fund them.

The only solution to this debate is to slice the knot through the middle. Cut the public out of the schools, banish the government from the process altogether. Conflict gone. If you don't like evolution, there are plenty of private schools that do not teach it.

What is or is not taught should not be subject to political control.

I think you have some good points, Brian. I would also say that its my impression that some of the fighting over evolution comes as a proxy for all the times that parents think that schools are indoctrinating their children. While I support the teaching of evolution instead of psuedo-science, I also support parents who do not want their children indoctrinated with things that are less education and more political correctness.

Obligatory pointer to the Alliance for the Separation of School and State:
http://www.sepschool.org

Republican: check
Religious: check
Thinks evolution and current cosmological theories best explain How We Got Here: check
Thinks Creation Science advocates are mostly full of bilge: check

Slart,

Right, that is part of my point. Not everybody on the Right believes in Creationism as a sciecne or that it should be taught in science courses.

Brian also has some good comments, in that part of the reason this issue is political is that it is because we are talking about public schools that are funded via coercive taxes. If we had only private schools in this country those who wanted to send their children to schools that taught evolution they could, and those who wanted creation could send them to schools that taught that.

While I personally think any parent that teaches their child that Creation Science is good science is doing a huge dis-service to their child, that is none of my business. I am leary of getting close to what could be a slippery slope of taking away a parents right to be a parent (at least without damn good cause--e.g. physical abuse).

Just providing you with a datum, Steve. BTW, I'm still having this as a topic of disagreement with my wife, pastor, and a few others.

There are quite a few on the Right that believe in the whole evolution science thing. I'm wondering how big that faction is. I have to also say that I know quite a few people who are like me: religious, conservative, but not buying into the whole "Creation Science" pseudoscience.