Once upon a hoopty...

I do so love having friends both more liberal and more conservative than I in their political views.

So, in talking to one such friend, I feel i must make an addendum to my previous statements concerning the current court case.

Point the first, I am a Christian and my beliefs do include, to at least some extent, the creation of living things by God. As others have mentioned and let me intone my agreement, I do not think that teaching this in a classroom is appropriate, unless it does have some scientific weight to it. Being that I am not a scientist, I can only assume that all my friends who working or have degrees in a field of science have valid points in saying that thoughts of Intelligent Design have no basis in science. Point taken, point accepted. If there may be some scientific weight to an arguement for Intelligent Design, likewise, I think it would be inappropriate to exclude it from the classroom, at least in mention, but that doesn't seem to be the case now, so it's beside the point.

Point the second, the best argument for putting the phrase (whether or not it need some editing) in a science class is to allow the teacher to address a political/religious concern that, at least in this day and age, will be in the fore of most students' minds throughout the evolution discussion, if it isn't treated at the very beginning. A certain school-teacher friend of mine mentioned to me that school teachers, this court case aside, are free to do so if they so wish, meaning that all this court case would do is require such statements to be said/read aloud. It is a bit silly to require this, but I'm still not opposed to it because i don't mind appeasing people on points that are relatively unimportant. I think any high school science teacher worth their weight would want to get this topic quickly out of the way so that they can teach and the students might actually be listening.

Point the third, This means that the only major point that the court case is fighting for is requiring the provision (or announcing the provision) of material explaining intelligent design. I think that such is a worthy cause, although I doubt that the points making it worthwhile are being fought for in the current case. The only way such material would be appropriate is: The Material is not merely a discussion of Judeo-Christian beliefs on Intelligent Design, but explores all other options as well, including the marriage of Intelligent Design with Evolution [It was mentioned to me at this point that "Intelligent Design" is merely a different wording for "Creationism" and that it is still the same group of Conservative Christians that are fighting for it. Even if that is true on the surface (which is to say, the beliefs of those people who are funding the legal side and most if not all of the supporters), the inclusion of material on "Intelligent Design" must by its attempted use at a more general term, provide more general information. Intelligent Material would offer critique of Intelligent Design while discussing it and I think that if someone from the Evolution side of the argument were to write such material, describing beliefs and noting points both opposing and in favor of Intelligent Design, it might be more helpful to...well, to either the shutting up of the other side, or at least their being made to look fools. As it is, neither side will consider the other and both just want to throw mud.]

I don't suppose there is any way to make a state-sponsored board to provide and approve such material and let it go to state legislature or something.

So that: *ahem* If by "Intelligent Design" they mean "Judeo-Christian beliefs on the origins of life on earth," then I am opposed. If they mean that, because that's the only thing they really want added, but they are actually adding in a well-rounded discussion of alternatives to Evolution, I am in agreement, because the motives of the supporters is really beside the point, if they are doing the right thing. If they are trying to get subject matter that is not considered science taught in a science classroom, I am opposed. If they are trying to require that a teacher mention that there are other opinions and that there is material available to read about them, I don't really care either way, although I think a short mention will help out the teacher in the long run. I think the points being made are valid points in this court case, but I think that instead of constantly shooting down the people who are doing it wrong because of this little thing and that little thing, a committee ought to be created to sit down and do it right. [And I mean on the state level and may the federal government get its unconstitutional nose out of education.]

[disclaimer: The following is not an attempt to woo anyone to any side, but an attempt for me to get my thoughts straight, as I tend to do so better in written word.]

Intelligent design in the classroom. My first thoughts are "what's the big deal?" It seems like saying what the media seems to indicate the teachers in Penn. are being pressured to say should be a happy middle ground for both sides. It seems like being upfront and getting the hot topic out of the way so that class can continue seems like a good idea. I'm under the impression that the school board is requiring (encouraging, demanding) teachers to say that some scientists do not agree with the popular view of evolution and in its place have theories involving intelligent design, perhaps waste 2 minutes giving the basics of what that would mean, maybe even mention that it is largely relgiously-based, instead of science-based, and then go on with, "but we're not going to study that any more in this classroom; we are going to study evolution, and that is what you'll be tested on." Maybe I am misunderstanding the situation and that is not at all what is happening. However, the above scenario seems to be the best way to not have to deal with what is a passionate topic for some on both sides of the fence. It seems odd to me that no one is willing to compromise on this in an age where treating all beliefs as equal is popular. Both sides are only interested in a full-scale, 100% win.

I do believe in intelligent design. I'm not much of a scientist and I don't think I really understand all the information that is going into evolution, but i do know that the theory is continually, if I may, evolving. All of that really is beside the point, because i do believe that a science classroom is a place to teach science and scientific method. I know there are people who share my beliefs in intelligent design who are extreme in their position about it being taught in a classroom and evolution not taught in the classroom, but i don't think this court decision is giving into their extremism. It seems like a sensible resolution that moderates can accept and then drop the issue.

I don't know too much about the specific case, if there is more information to know than the general, nation-wide debate (although, that's not quite correct...the nation-wide difference of opinion?), so I can't make a very educated opinion on this court case. I'm not much of an expert on science, which is why they aren't calling me in as a witness, so I can't argue either side very well from a scientific point of view. I guess that's all I have. I wish people didn't get so mad about all this.

...are good for the soul. And I am happy to find that even at my bitterest, I cannot stand to not be at peace with the world around me.

It has lately occured to me that I have a short man complex. I don't like tall people. I avoid meeting them, I assume they wouldn't like me even if I did talk to them. Even the times I've tried to talk to tall people, I cannot find anything in common. They don't do any of the same things I do. They don't like any of the things I like. I guess I'm speaking generally, but I cannot think of any specific examples of tall people who I have gotten along well with. Even with Jerris, I always felt like there was something keeping us from being close friends. Okay, so I just remembered Marshal from high school and Andrew, another roommate, both of whom are in the 6 foot realm. Maybe it's just tall people I've met lately. Maybe I'm letting specific instances get me down. What? You want examples? Well, let me just prove what a jerk I am:

So today, we're playing ultimate frisbee (a common sunday afternoon activity for us gringos). A guy is guarding me (i kinda feel bad that I can't remember his name, even if I wouldn't actually spell it out here if I did remember) and he is roughly 6'7." This makes his armspan so big that there is absolutely no way to get the frisbee around him. So I throw too low for his arms (up high) to block and he blocks me with his feet. Nobody sees any problem with this but me, apparently, so I merely try to use my legs to block him. I'll remind you at this point that I'm 5'6" and the really short part is the legs. I'm a short-legged fella. I always fit on bus and airplane seats, comfortably. Always. First time i try to leg-block, I fail. Later he uses his legs to block someone else. It still makes me mad because I see it as a cheap move and my complaining that it's not a legal move just makes me look like a whiner. "Oh look at Adam, he's a big legalistic nerd who always has to play by the rules." So, maybe I get a little too mad. I kick twice in the air and at the second kick, he has moved forward a little bit (and it currently throwing the frisbee) and I kick him in the stomach. He gets mad (and rightly so, I wasn't trying to kick him, I just wanted to tick him off...which I suppose makes me even more of a jerk). He tells me that it looked awfully deliberate. I tell him I can see how he might see that, but i did not mean to kick him. Truth is, if my legs were as long as his are, I might have kicked his hand instead, which is what I was aiming for, as that is where the frisbee was. I was happy to see that I was calm, because I genuinely was sorry I hit his stomach, but maybe he should have punched me in the face. I've had it coming for a while. As it was I walked off the field. This is another of my poor qualities: upon encountering conflict, I usually walk away instead of hanging around to solve the problem. I don't think I do this with close friends, but i definitely do with people I don't know at all. In fact, I was just thinking how I wish I could solve all of this by deciding never to play sports again, but that's not the right answer, either. I'd rather not play than play mad; it's just not fun anymore if I play angry. I wasn't angry at this point, but he was, so instead of trying to recreate the scene again, I kept the incident from possibly recurring by walking off the field. Shortly afterward, one team won, still not sure which, as we were close when I left the game. I told him I was sorry, and I am, but I'm still not interested in making things better with him, because I'm petty and I hold it against him that I'm sorry I wronged him when I feel like he is not sorry he wronged me (although, I doubt he feels that he wrongs me or thinks that I feel wronged).

So, I guess this means that I don't want to forgive him...and for whatever reason, I don't want to forgive tall people in general for having been born with an athletic advantage that i could never overcome. I actually blame them for having been born the way they were, can you believe it? And I definitely feel like they consider me a lesser person, dislike me for being too short, or too smart, or not athletic enough, and I let all that get to me, as if it matters what they think. I'm so petty it's ridiculous.

It's amazing how right one feels in the heat of the moment, only to look back and realize that one was way out of line. I hate being a jerk. I wish i was a better guy.

I should've been punched in the face. Maybe that would've knocked some sense into me.

I was just remembering elementary school. My 5th grade year, we moved to Mississippi (those of you who are thinking of humpbacks and crooked letters right now are sad, sad souls) and I had a hard time fitting in with people. So, the one kid who had lived there forever and had a hard time fitting in with people thought it might help his cause if he had some lower lifeform to pick on, namely, me. I ended up hitting him and we had in-school suspension. He showed me the ropes, having been there mulitple times before. So, of course, my sister, being the loyal sibling that she is, took to holding a grudge against the boy's little sister (who was in my sis's grade). I was recalling a movie their fourth grade class made together starring both my sister and the other boy's sister. It was funny. Their roles were slightly antagonistic. I do love my sister. Thanks for holding up your end of the feud, Lulu.