I think it is a good thing if they teach in schools what the intelligent design “theory” is and what it is based on, as long as it is made on an objective mind. Examining every belief & point of view is a good thing; it promotes open-mindness and forces people to be more acute towards the explanations & reasons that they take for granted. When it would become a bad thing would be if it was imposed as THE truth, condemning & without teaching objectively the evolutionism theory and the Facts on wich it is based too.
The problem with a lot of the big religions, and that is at the origin of the one with the creationism defenders, is that lack of open-mindness and that tendency to feel that they have to convert people to their view. The scientific method is: Here are the facts; what conclusion can we make of it? But the creationist one is: There is the conclusion; what facts can we find to support it? And what is also deplorable is that they spread major comprehension errors about what is really evolution.

As for the question about the origins, I agree that nothing will ever be found to contradict that life here comes from intelligent design, even if we come to be able to show that life can born out of inorganic matter by chemichal reactions. Pushed to that limit, they’ll always can say: ok, it can be; but what proves that it’s what happened, and not that a superior being saw to it?
And about the initial event... my knowledge expectations don’t go that far. What was there before the big bang? Where does the matter come from? We don’t even know well what the world is made of... And it is not a question to wich I need an answer to the point of choosing one. Same for the question of what’s after death.

Quote
So did anyone catch the part about the loss of free will in a materialists world? How would you non-believers answer that?


Free will can be explained in another way that does not contradict the materialist point of view and that also fits the evolution principle. Take what Erich Fromm states like the essential characteristics of the human condition: the decreasing of the instinctual determinism and the increasing of the brain. Man’s decisions aren’t taken for him by the instinct, he doesn’t know automaticly where to go and what to do; he is conscious and has to make choices. And the consequences of that conciousness are the insecurity, helplessness and disorientation, wich Man prevents to get drown by by searching for answers to all those hard questions, that quest to have certitudes and the tendency to rely on religions. There would the cultural aspect come from. Man is a product of nature but would transcend it; he makes himself.


Now, see an evidence of the evolutionism (and how some people seem to have evolved less that others <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin1.gif" alt="" />):

[Linked Image]
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/devil.gif" alt="" />


LaFille, Toujours un peu sauvage.