Yes. Stein gave a lot of time to the religion of ID. Also to atheists who were scientists. But he censored any mention of legitimate scientists who were also believers in the Christian God.
No where do I recall anyone but you claiming ID was a religion. ID tries to get away from the pure fundamentalist view of a 7 day creation and tries to point out the patterns and structures, numerical codes, relationships which seems to be a part of life and the universe… it asks questions, as lomng as it is only doing that it is not a religion. That is YOUR interpretation of the ID message.
Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul II are saying that in the end Theologians have the final say on whether a theory is compatible with Catholic Church teaching. But they specifically say that scienc cannot explain the human person from a purely materialist viewpoint which Darwin tried to do.
"Taking into account the state of scientific research at the time as well as of the requirements of theology, the encyclical Humani Generis considered the doctrine of “evolutionism” a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the opposing hypothesis. Pius XII added two methodological conditions: **that this opinion should not be adopted as though it were a certain, proven doctrine **]and as though one could totally prescind from revelation with regard to the questions it raises."
newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02tc.htm
ID scientists are asking questions, why not allow those questions. barbarian is acting in total disregard for this statement that Darwin’s Theory should not be treated as a certain, proven doctrine.When you do that then Darwin becomes part of your religion.
Barbaian:
He (Ben Stein) claims that science is about killing people. He even claimed (falsely) that scientists were ordering people into the Nazi gas chambers.*Stein: When we just saw that man, I think it was Mr. Myers *, talking about how great scientists were, I was thinking to myself the last time any of my relatives saw scientists telling them what to do they were telling them to go to the showers to get gassed … "
Barbarian, even you admitted the Nazi’s were doing scientific experiments. I posted the site for the scientific Institute in germany associated with the Nazi regime and thos scientists admitted it was a sad part of their history. The scientists in this country admit that eugenics came out of Social Darwinian ethics…in fact this is so widely acknowledged across the board on the internet, and I have posted numerous sites and articles on it, that what you are saying is a total fantasy. Do you even know what facility Ben Stein’s relatives were at? If they went to the facility with Josep Mengels was a doctor,eugenicist, widely respected before and even after the war, and he was never tried at Neuremberg.
"The center piece of Hitler�s speeches was call for �racial purity�, which was an idea the became the driving force of Dr. Mengele from a gentle young scientist into a sadistic killer that sent millions of Jews to their deaths and performed grotesque experiments on children (Lagnado and Dekel 44 - 46). actually became interested in Hitler�s speeches and ideas.
The final and most gruesome of all experiments were the operations. Thy would squeeze hundreds of children in these tiny living quarters. He applied to be an assistant at Vershuers�s Institute at the University of Frankfurt, and he was accepted. The gypsies were also allowed t keep their hair, and for entertainment they would put on what looked like an ongoing carnival where they would sing, dance, and tell stories, especially for Dr. Mengele would inject deadly amounts of typhus and tuberculosis into the body of a twin to see how long it would take to kill the child off, and then turn around and purposely kill their twin to record the different effects the germs carried in each twin (Shirer 1274). Mengele took the next step in his academic career. Mengele�s favorites considering that they lived like princes and princesses compared to many others at Auschwitz. Mengele where he would ask them for more information that would later be connected to the experiments he would perform on them (Lagnado and Dekel 57 - 60). The Gypsy barracks were exceedingly similar to the twins� barracks, in size and design, although there were many more people to a bed which made the barracks incredibly crowded…"
megaessays.com/viewpaper/85506.html*
*Stein: When we just saw that man, I think it was Mr. Myers *, talking about how great scientists were, I was thinking to myself the last time any of my relatives saw scientists telling them what to do they were telling them to go to the showers to get gassed … that was horrifying beyond words, and that’s where science — in my opinion, this is just an opinion — that’s where science leads you.
If Ben’s relatives were at Aushwitz then Ben was telling the absolute truth.**
Crouch: That’s right.
Stein: …Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people.
I just watch the movie last week: Sophie Scholl: The Final Days It had a wonderfdul scene with Sophie, a young nursing student during WWII in Germany arguing against the Nazi governent official. Yolu could see the opposing ideas. Sophie believed in liberty and compassion, the Nazi did not. We can agree that compassion for all is what we want to be the basis for law… You could also see the Nazi official justifyinf nazi policies on a warped idea of compassion…as if he were hellping society, and even helping those who were killed because they were mentally or physically unsound. Those ideas are stilll alive in our country today. I encourage you and Barbarian to look into how many abortions occur because parents are talked into the idea their child will be too disabled…or mentally retarded… Same policies, different countries, different circumstances, same results: death.
And scientists are still involved encouraging those life and death decisions.
"[Each year in America fewer and fewer disabled infants are born. The reason is eugenic abortion. Doctors and their patients use prenatal technology to screen unborn children for disabilities, then they use that information to abort a high percentage of them. Without much scrutiny or debate, a eugenics designed to weed out the disabled has become commonplace.
Not wishing to publicize a practice most doctors prefer to keep secret, the medical community releases only sketchy information on the frequency of eugenic abortion against the disabled. But to the extent that the numbers are known, they indicate that the vast majority of unborn children prenatally diagnosed as disabled are killed."
/COLOR]
This blood libel so upset the Jewish people that the Anti-Defamation League denounced his behavior:
**The film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed misappropriates the Holocaust and its imagery as a part of its political effort to discredit the scientific community which rejects so-called intelligent design theory.
Hitler did not need Darwin to devise his heinous plan to exterminate the Jewish people and Darwin and evolutionary theory cannot explain Hitler’s genocidal madness.
Using the Holocaust in order to tarnish those who promote the theory of evolution is outrageous ;;;;"
Barbaian, and the Jewish Defamation league is obviously in denial of historical record: The Nazi hated the Jews, it is true, but they hated other people who would damage their idea of a pure Aryan State as well…
"
Goebbels, Nazi Minister of Propaganda, noted:
“The Fuhrer is deeply religous,** though completely anti-Christian****. He views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so. It is a branch of the Jewish race… Both [Judaism and Christianity] have no point of contact to the animal element, and thus, in the end, they will be destroyed.”
constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/id2.html
Christianity was an extension of the jewish religion…equally abhorent to the Nazi’s idea of racial purity and basically secular idea that a state of pure blood germsn would bring about a higher civilazation based on ideas that mixing bloods slowed the evolution of mankind…Neo-Darwinian ethics…
Mary is very unhappy that Darwin did not say that man was just an animal. …She’s in denial about those things, because she really, really wants Darwin to think of man as merely an animal.
Darwin did just say man was an animal.
He saw man different only in “degree” but not in kind from animals and thought any animal could develop a moral conscience
just as man possessed given time and evolved intelligence.
"Darwin focuses less on the question of whether humans evolved than he does on displaying that each of the human faculties considered to be so far beyond those of animals—such as moral reasoning, sympathy for others, beauty, and music—can be seen in kind (if not degree) in other animal species (usually apes and dogs)."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Descent_of_Man,_and_Selection_in_Relation_to_Sex
The direct quotes from Descent of Man posted here show Darwin speicifically said man was no different from animals and Darwin stated he was not like other Naturalists who would put man in a different classification.
Barbarian is reinventing what Darwin said, and I have no idea what his motives for doing that are.
In Christ, maryJohnZ*
