Intelligent design in Louisiana (Erin)

Given he's got the nom, and is supposed to be trying to move to the center, I can't imagine its going to help.

Erin: You just had a bunch of people jump all over you for suggesting that our culture may not value the spiritual and it could have a negative impact on our everyday life style.

You had several people say that an ape is equally as important as a human being who is not yet born.

Traditional conservatives are, judging from things that I read on the internet, not comfortable at all with McCain and planning on deserting the sinking Republican ship that has deserted them on so many levels.

I think what you are really asking is will this legislation help or hurt Mc Cain's chances should he choose Jindal.

Considering that the above perceptions appear to be the norm, whadda you think, huh?

Helps if he thinks he can go the Rovian energize the base way. If he is going after independents, it hurts. Huck might be a better energize the base guy in many ways. He may have negatives hidden on his tapes. He is so good with the media that he might make it through that ok.

Steve

"Supposing that the McCain campaign really was considering Jindal for the vice presidency, would this help or hurt Jindal's chances?"

He's toast. Not a serious candidate for high office.

Jindal may be the next JFK-Obama-type rising political star...
but way more to the right of course...
he usually sounds highly knowledgeable and intelligent...
so...
it's surprising that he swallows ID and the baggage of all the unreliable ancient Myths that are associated with it...
oh well...
Jindal 2012...

meanwhile...
the second biggest voting block is women (the white vote is the biggest)...
so...
McCain NEEDS Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin...
with her, he wins in November...

McCain/Palin 08...

faith hope love joy peace to all...
Forgive God...

"As there is no scientific grounds for questioning evolution, the whole argument is specious and the courts will kill it."

You also have to wonder if courting an expensive law suit is the best option for a state so desperately in need of money. It will take years and cost some hundreds of millions to get this through the courts - where a judge will find that it's unconstitutional to teach religion in publicly funded schools.

This sort of thing as well as his belief he performed an exorcism in college added to his fiscal conservatism has pretty much destroyed his possibilities as a national candidate. I guess The Discovery Institute will always be able to find suckers to not only carry their water but pay a preimum for the bucket.

My bet is his fiscal conservatism in particular will doom him as a state politician fairly soon too.

Why does evolution have to be without God? Couldn't God have created a self sustaining system?

Chris

Chris: "Why does evolution have to be without God? Couldn't God have created a self sustaining system?"

Science uses a process of methodological naturalism which means that supernatural explanations are not allowed in science, but not ruled out of existence. By taking this restriction it forces scientists to dig deeper into natural phenomena. Otherwise the simplest answer to all questions would be God did it.

But science does not use metaphysical naturalism which is philosophical position that there is nothing but the natural world. So if you want to view evolution as a divinely guided process, then that's your right as part of your religion.

Daniel: "Does he really want to be the next Santorum?"

I like Rick Santorum. A less toxic election cycle, a more "reddish" state, a less cynical strategy by the Dems ... and Santorum would have coasted to a third term in 2006. And perhaps been on the ticket in 2008.

There is no mention of "intelligent design" in the quoted text. Even John West, the guy from the Discovery Institute quoted in the story, says that ID cannot be now taught in LA schools because it is not include in the state science standards.

Well if the Discovery Institute spokesman say it...

Judging from this list of comments, the only thing one is not allowed to ask questions about, is evolutionary naturalism. You can debate everything else, sex, deconstruct everything you read,religon,heck, even physics can't get quantum mechanics to work with Relativity, string theory has a run, then can't be proved, now we have the multiuniverse theory, which can't ever be proved, but is still taken seriously, along with many other things we are allowed to debate, but not THIS subject. Evolution explains some things about life very well. But not many other things. And this is NOT going away. Sorry. And it does not matter what the courts do, or academia, or whatever. People and scientist are going to keep asking pointed questions about some of the unproven suppositions evolutionary naturalism claims. And it will finally have to be allowed into civil discussion. Sooner or later.

Jindal won't help or hurt McCain. McCain is in a political no-mans land, having alienated a sufficient number of conservatives and having fallen for the "bait and switch" seduction of the independents.

Only some complete meltdown by Obama will help McCain, such as the revelation that Obama has been part of some black supremacist group for 20 years.

Oh, wait...

By definition, science is constantly questioning and challenging itself.

The problem is that those who want to question and challenge the theory of evolution are frustrated by the length of time required by the scientific method. They want their beliefs raised to the same level of respect as decades of development, tens of thousands of hours of field work, research, lab work and peer review.

A state law "requiring" the teaching of science make room for "alternatives" is nothing more than an attempt to bypass science.

Now, before anyone decides to jump on me, consider this: I absolutely agree that there are scientists who use their positions in political ways. They compete for grant money, for prestigious positions at universities and think tanks, and they are just as human as the ID proponents when it comes to ego-based pressures to have their voices heard above all others. Some of them do, in fact, use their personal influence to corrupt or abrogate the scientific method.

That said, bypassing actual science is not right, was never right, and we have disabled and dead people all around us to prove that it is not right -- referring to the pharmaceutical industry practices. Science works when its rules and strictures are followed. That it doesn't work fast enough to satisfy the crusade du jour or to bring home the profits doesn't negate the validity of those rules and strictures. If anything, it should prompt ethics-minded people to insist on them, not do away with them.