PZ Myers. 2005 Dec 11. Benny was kind of passionate, I guess. <http://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/benny_was_kind_of_passionate_i_guess/>. Accessed 2006 May 21.
Posted on M00o93H7pQ09L8X1t49cHY01Z5j4TT91fGfr on Sunday, December 11, 2005
Benny was kind of passionate, I guess
Never let it be said that I lack a sense of reverence or an appreciation of Christian mythology. On this quiet Sunday morning, enjoy this video of the Passion of the Christ.
And blame Sir Oolius if it isn't to your taste.
Posted by PZ Myers on 12/11 at 11:43 AM
Godlessness • Humor • Weirdness • 0 Trackbacks • Other weblogs • Permalink
Godlessness • Humor • Weirdness • 0 Trackbacks • Other weblogs • Permalink
-
Wow.. Good thing Christians rarely go on Jihad against filmmakers..
-jcr#: Posted by on 12/11 at 12:17 PM -
Well, at least it's better than Mel Gibson's version. Because it's shorter.
#: Posted by Zeno on 12/11 at 12:43 PM
-
Not nearly so tasteless as Mel's Jeezo-Pr0n.
#: Posted by Ken Cope on 12/11 at 01:12 PM
-
On the topic of Christian mythology, here is an excerpt from Gerald Massey:
Four consecutive scenes reproduced in my book are found pourtrayed upon the innermost walls of the Holy of Holies in the Temple of Luxor, which was built by Amenhept III., a Pharaoh of the 17th dynasty. The first scene on the left hand shows the God Taht, the Lunar Mercury, the Annunciator of the Gods, in the act of hailing the Virgin Queen, and announcing to her that she is to give birth to the coming Son. In the next scene the God Kneph (in conjunction with Hathor) gives the new life. This is the Holy Ghost or Spirit that causes the Immaculate Conception, Kneph being the spirit by name in Egyptian. The natural effects are made apparent in the virgin's swelling form.
Next the mother is seated on the mid-wife's stool, and the newborn child is supported in the hands of one of the nurses. The fourth scene is that of the Adoration. Here the child is enthroned, receiving homage from the Gods and gifts from men. Behind the deity Kneph, on the right, three spirits--the Three Magi, or Kings of the Legend, are kneeling and offering presents with their right hand, and life with their left. The child thus announced, incarnated, born, and worshipped, was the Pharaonic representative of the Aten Sun in Egypt, the God Adon of Syria, and Hebrew Adonai; the child-Christ of the Aten Cult; the miraculous conception of the ever-virgin mother, personated by Mut-em-ua, as mother of the "only one," and representative of the divine mother of the youthful Sun-God.
These scenes, which were mythical in Egypt, have been copied or reproduced as historical in the Canonical Gospels, where they stand like four corner-stones to the Historic Structure, and prove that the foundations are mythical.
#: Posted by on 12/11 at 01:46 PM -
How about a film about Giordano Bruno featuring, oh, about twenty minutes worth of the poor guy's flesh roasting and sizzling in the flames of his auto da fe?
#: Posted by David Mazel on 12/11 at 01:49 PM
-
Great!
Here's my take on how Bruce Lee would have made "The Passion".
#: Posted by Weakly World News on 12/11 at 02:14 PM -
The difference between Passion of the Benny Hill, and the Death of Giordano Bruno with Yakety Sax and cartoon SFX, is that nobody made a snuff film about GB tortured to death by the State at the conmand of the local theocracy so its audience could ecstatically soak in lurid, salvation-charged Kensington gore.
You know how Muppets in 3D at Disney World splash you with an actual drop of water as a stereoscopic squirt gun is deployed in the film? MG had to have been disappointed that he couldn't rig up every theater exploiting Passion that way.
The torturous murder by Theocracy of a human being, played for black humor and framed as it was, is far less appalling than reveling in MG's snuff film for some visceral religious charge. As satire, not even a Bush-packed SCotUS could condemn it.#: Posted by Ken Cope on 12/11 at 02:16 PM -
Not sure I see how either Bruno's or Jesus' death is amusing. Even if you are convinced that no Jesus' died that way, it's certain that people died that way and that death's don't come much worse.
So much anger.#: Posted by Cameron on 12/11 at 04:31 PM -
Even if you are convinced that no Jesus' died that way, it's certain that people died that way and that death's don't come much worse.
So much anger.
True. And even if you are convinced that no Stooge died that way, it's certain that some people have been hit in the head with sledgehammers and it didn't dent the sledgehammer nor make a gong sound.
So much nyuk nyuk nyuking.#: Posted by on 12/11 at 04:43 PM -
Even if you are convinced that no Jesus' died that way, it's certain that people died that way and that death's don't come much worse.
Oh. But since Jesus supposedly jumped up alive again a few days later - better than ever in fact, we figured it was no big deal.
Remember....Jesus had a bad weekend for your sins.#: Posted by Weakly World News on 12/11 at 05:58 PM -
"Oh. But since Jesus supposedly jumped up alive again a few days later - better than ever in fact, we figured it was no big deal."
Not sure you got my point.#: Posted by Cameron on 12/11 at 06:43 PM -
Did you have one?
#: Posted by on 12/11 at 08:00 PM
-
Monty Python made sport of the death by crucifixion of Jesus, a partially or completely mythical character. Real people were crucified thousands of years ago.
Monty Python made a comedy with fictional characters dying from smallpox. Real people died from it - several orders of magnitude more than died from crucifixion.
In Dr. Strangelove, Maj. T.J. 'King' Kong comically rode a nuclear warhead to his and millions of others' deaths. Real people have been killed by nuclear weapons. Lots of them.
Rudolph The Red Nosed Raindeer made entertainment out of Rudolph, a fictional character, being teased and not allowed to play reindeer games. Real people by the millions have been teased as children and not picked for games, and it's still happening all the time.
What is the difference between the four examples above?
Nothing - all are examples of entertainment being made out of the misfortune of largely or completely fictional characters. If we eliminated all comedy that was based on some character's misfortune, we wouldn't have much left but knock-knock jokes.
The only possible reason the crucifixion of the largely if not totally mythical Jesus Christ 2000+ years ago is any less suitable for joking than anything else is if you have some sort of reverence for or belief in that character. If you do, then your upset is understandable. Go ahead and enjoy it.
But don't expect those of us who don't see much difference between Jesus and Rudolph to worry any more about a Jesus worshipper's reaction than you would about some Rudolph-worshipping guy in a psych ward's reaction.
If your point is that we should exhibit some sympathy for the feelings of Christians, I would assert that atheists have shown far more respect for the concerns of the religious than the religious have for ours.
When in the words "atheist" and "secular" no longer are synonyms for evil and immoral in the minds of most people - then they may be just starting to close that gap.#: Posted by on 12/11 at 08:09 PM -
"If your point is that we should exhibit some sympathy for the feelings of Christians, I would assert that atheists have shown far more respect for the concerns of the religious than the religious have for ours."
Not my point at all. I just don't find suffering very funny. And before you say that I must be terribly boring, I would point out that when misfortune is presented as comedy, there is usually no attempt to exhibit the full scope of the pain involved. I don't recall anyone voiding his bowels at the shock of having a nail forced through his wrist bones in Life of Brian.#: Posted by Cameron on 12/11 at 09:02 PM -
I don't recall anyone voiding his bowels at the shock of having a nail forced through his wrist bones in Life of Brian.
Life's a piece of shit
When you look at it
The Pythons voided their bowels in song.#: Posted by Weakly World News on 12/11 at 09:18 PM -
Yeah, you're right--pretty much the same thing.
#: Posted by Cameron on 12/11 at 09:58 PM
-
Remember....Jesus had a bad weekend for your sins.
Without sounding too cheesy, thank you for this line. It's truly a gift I'll revisit for the rest of my life.#: Posted by on 12/11 at 10:06 PM -
Yeah, you're right--pretty much the same thing.
Yep. Both are popular fictions.
The difference is that the Eric Idle character stayed dead and so is more worthy of pity.#: Posted by Weakly World News on 12/11 at 10:22 PM -
dude, www, that was profoundly inane.
#: Posted by Cameron on 12/11 at 10:45 PM
-
wwn. excuse me.
#: Posted by Cameron on 12/11 at 10:59 PM
-
When the Romans quelled the uprising by Spartacus, they crucified thousands of slaves along the Apian Way. It was the standard form of execution for them. It wasn't just a few, it wasn't just hundreds, but thousands of people were crucified by the Romans. By the time of Jesus, they had it down pretty good.
#: Posted by DouglasG on 12/12 at 10:14 AM
-
Historical improbability isn't the real problem with the Christ story. The fundamental irrationality of the tale is the notion of atonement itself. A mother who perishes in the course of defending her children can be said to have died for another person. Somebody, however blameless, who is tortured to death does not thereby accomplish anything. The suffering is only meaningful if you buy into the magic causality of sacrifice.
#: Posted by Jim Harrison on 12/12 at 11:30 AM
-
"The suffering is only meaningful if you buy into the magic causality of sacrifice."
My point was that the suffering is always suffering.#: Posted by Cameron on 12/12 at 12:42 PM -
My point was that the suffering is always suffering.
Is Daffy Duck's suffering when his bill is shot askew and he has to spin it around before he can say, "You're despicable," always suffering?
Who suffers more? The Duck, or Sylvester's succotash? Brian, Eric Idle, or that guy fictional character from the dead and resurrected god story that springs magically back to life?
Now if you want crucifiction plus funny, look no further than Sam Kinnison.#: Posted by Ken Cope on 12/12 at 12:56 PM -
Not to my taste. I'm an ex-Christian to whom the Passion narrative no longer has any personal relevance, but at the least (fictional or not) it's still a story about some poor bugger who ran afoul of the PTB and got tortured to death horribly -- something which has happened, and still happens, far too often. I think that alone means it deserves better than the comic sound-track. Of course, some would argue that it also deserves better than to be the subject of Mel Gibson's manipulative gore-fest in the first place. They're probably right. Perhaps one's reaction to this depends on whether one takes it as mocking the whole idea, or only the movie (which I haven't seen, and have no intention to).
For actual funny (as opposed to mindlessly mocking) spoofs of the subject, I prefer Life of Brian.#: Posted by on 12/12 at 01:39 PM -
"Is Daffy Duck's suffering when his bill is shot askew and he has to spin it around before he can say, 'You're despicable," always suffering?'"
My apologies to WWN--this is far more inane.
Kizhe's comment largely summarizes my own position.
For what it's worth--while one is perfectly justified in claiming that Jesus was not divine or even divinely inspired, I don't see how it is reasonable to declare that the man did not exist.#: Posted by Cameron on 12/12 at 02:58 PM -
One fictional character's suffering is pretty much indistinguishable from another fictional character's suffering.
It's insulting to act as if it needs pointing out that "crucifiction is bay-ad, mmm-kay"-- it's a gawds-damned given.
Yes, my point is that Jesus is a fictional character. Do you have any compelling evidence to the contrary? Bonus question: why should the actual historicity matter? Does a story need to be merely dry historical documentary before it can be considered meaningful and relevant?#: Posted by Ken Cope on 12/12 at 03:55 PM -
Earl Doherty has done some of the recent good work on the history of Jesus question, if people want to look him up.
As for Gibson's movie, I'm more or less in agreement with those who find the notion of "redeemed in blood" to be abhorent. "Original sin" is just as bad. In fact, attributing group guilt in general leads to atrocities to this day ...#: Posted by Keith Douglas on 12/12 at 05:05 PM -
Cameron acts as if we're all guffawing like sadists at a human being's suffering. "Whoosh" doesn't begin to cover it...
I could no more be moved to rapturous religious ecstasy during a screening of Mel Gibson's snuff film, than Cameron could be reduced to hysterical giggles by seeing it sped up and Benny Hilled. Both responses are inconceivably alien and inappropriate to most pharynguloids. We live in a culture that thinks we should be tortured in eternal hellfire if we don't see The Passion as they do. The blasphemous film in question is not mocking human suffering, it's mocking MG's religious exploitation of human suffering. One can appreciate the joke without finding it "funny." I can never fail to applaud intelligent blasphemy, which this most decidedly was.
I shouldn't have to say that I'm disgusted by the torture of a human being. Giddy, Gawd-filled goosebumps at the prospect of Dolby Digital IMAX torture is as appalling and impossible for me to appreciate as it will be for me to laugh when the State I live in will put a man to death tonight, no matter whether he does or doesn't deserve it.#: Posted by Ken Cope on 12/12 at 05:19 PM -
We are all going to Hell for watching this
#: Posted by on 12/12 at 07:29 PM
-
I apologize for seeming to fervent. The only reason I brought it up is that MG's presentation (which I've only seen with the Benny Hill soundtrack) seemed terribly realistic to me, so much so that the suffering conveyed doesn't seem at laughable even if MG's goal is so. I suppose having said originally that I thought it wasn't funny and the response went along the lines of "it pokes fun at Xianity, hence is inassailably funny," I was a bit startled, and I think to find this video funny requires essentially ignoring the video itself. In any case, imo, the video was about as clever as Benny Hill was.
Oh well.#: Posted by Cameron on 12/12 at 08:23 PM -
I think your complaint isn't with the mocking of Gibson's movie then, but with Gibson's movie itself. The clip is a brief spoof of the movie, but The Passion wallows in the gore for hours.
#: Posted by PZ Myers on 12/12 at 08:53 PM
-
"If your point is that we should exhibit some sympathy for the feelings of Christians, I would assert that atheists have shown far more respect for the concerns of the religious than the religious have for ours."
Sorry, sir, but you are incorrect. The fact that atheists can freely attest to their "faith" in nominally Christian countries, while Christians in Atheist countries have been tortured, killed, brainwashed, raped, starved, imprisoned, persecuted...
You have Christians to thank for your freedom to atheism. And Christians have atheists to thank for...uhm...something will come to me, give me time...#: Posted by on 12/12 at 09:31 PM -
I haven't seen the movie, and perhaps you're right. I imagine though that someone could render the horror, gore included, in an artistically valuable way.
As ridiculous as MG's film may be, the short clip seemed quite realistic as far as gore and pain goes, and I can't see that speeding it up and setting it to music actually makes the thing funny. If it was rendered as in Life of Brian, sans realistic depiction of human suffering, I think it probably would have been funny. I get the impression that when others are laughing, they are laughing at the premise, not what's actually there.#: Posted by Cameron on 12/12 at 09:36 PM -
The movie producer must be a coward. If he had any guts, he would have done Mohammed.
Liberty#: Posted by on 12/12 at 10:15 PM -
http://postarchives.entensity.net/012505/media.php?media=jesus.wmv
Here's a.. uh, er, different POTC clip. NSFW.#: Posted by on 12/12 at 10:46 PM -
I see the Christian bashing PZ is up to his old tricka again. On a Sunday morning, nothing better to do than attack over 85% of the US population. Then all his adoring fans can comment about how stupid Christians are! Genius for a college professor shaping young minds. Funny, I thought Darwinism was in no way atheistic...on top of that, it's Myers who constantly brings up religion, yet he and others complain that ID is religion. Hmmm.
For the "mythology" of Christianity comment above- here's a paper from an atheist debunking that whole Luxor business:
http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/carrier_luxor_inscription.htm
More on Massey himself: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/masspp.html
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/massjc.html
and the fact that he refuses to be objective, merely skeptical and actually antogonistic (much like our friend PZ here!)
To others who commented about atheists and their so-called religious tolerance...we won't even discuss Michael Newdow, those who sue with the help of the ACLU, Stalin and communist Russia (that atheist society was SO big on religious freedom!), fascist Italy at one point, North Korea, or any of the other Godless governments throughout history. We also won't get into the fact that the US is the nation with the most fundamental rights in regards to religious expression, and darn it if a bunch of old white Christian men didn't set that nation up! Geez, we won't even mention this site itself, which is completely intolerant of religion, especially Christianity.
Finally, as to the Christ myth- not even liberal scholars today believe that Christ was mythical. Even the tiny minority associated with the Jesus Seminar, who stated their a priori demands that nothing supernatural or miraculous occurs before doing their "research" doesn't hold to a mythical Christ.#: Posted by Josh Bozeman on 12/13 at 12:22 AM -
I should add, PZ makes it quite obvious he knows nothing of the bible, considering he states "The clip is a brief spoof of the movie, but The Passion wallows in the gore for hours."
A college professor might have some degrees, but simple concepts can still go right over his intolerant head. It wallows in gore? Yes, because dying a horrible death for someone else should be sanitized! Next, PZ will be saying that war movies where soldiers die for their comrades are too bloody and should cleaned up...because, of course a personal sacrifice of your own life is itself "gory", and to realize the full truth of that sacrifice is "wallow[ing]" in it.
Have fun bashing everyone who disagrees with you, calling them the worst names you can possibly think of! I merely pray the names you come up with are really good ones.#: Posted by Josh Bozeman on 12/13 at 12:28 AM -
Josh Bozeman writes: "It wallows in gore? Yes, because dying a horrible death for someone else should be sanitized!"
You know, I thought Christians were supposed to love Jesus. I certainly would not be able to watch any of my loved ones being tortured for several hours, *in particular* if it was true. In fact, I couldn't bear watching *unfamiliar* persons being tortured for *any* period of time. I don't see how getting emotional scars is supposed to make one a better person.#: Posted by on 12/13 at 06:20 AM -
I should add, PZ makes it quite obvious he knows nothing of the bible, considering he states "The clip is a brief spoof of the movie, but The Passion wallows in the gore for hours."
Why does making a statement about the movie imply knowledge or lack of it of the Bible?
Josh, should you ever actually acquire a little education, you might discover that 'the Passion' was not based on the bible, but on a 19th-century book by Anne Catherine Emmerich, The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. I imagine the reason this isn't pointed out real often is because Emmerich is a bit of an embarrassment, being emotionally not real stable and wildly antisemitic. Here's a reference for you:
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/religion/anne-catherine-emmerich/
There are others, if you object to that one.
Have fun bashing everyone who disagrees with you, calling them the worst names you can possibly think of
Um, considering that you're the one who lumped together the people here with the ACLU, Stalin, Russia, and North Korea, I wouldn't go claiming any moral high ground in terms of debating
Oh, and Josh? Lose the gee-whiz, 'funny, I thought...' fratboy sarcasm. it's not real convincing.#: Posted by on 12/13 at 10:13 AM -
I have seen the movie.
As far as the gore goes, I rate it right up there with the work of Rob Zombie.#: Posted by PZ Myers on 12/13 at 11:34 AM -
//How clever, witty and... hmmm, I'm at a loss for words.//
As a blood-washed believer radically transformed by the love of Christ, I can only say that this is a bit sad. It seems that people would find better things to do with their time, but alas... I guess this is just how some people deal with the gnawing emptiness deep within.
I'm thankful for the immutable truth of the resurrection. I'm thankful for the liberation from sin & death provided through Christ's sacrifice. I'm thankful that the plan of redemption in Christ is beyond the realm of human invention (because if it were a human invention, it would mimic the performance-based works-righteousness of world religions.)
Ta ;)#: Posted by on 12/13 at 03:31 PM -
Having studied what Christ endured through his scourging, I can say that Gibson's portrayal is probably not far from what actually happened. If anything it may have been worse. Some medical experts have suggested that after the lashing with the Cat-O-9Tails whip, some of the internal organs would be visible. He would have been virtually unrecognizable after the treatment he endured.
And good points, Josh. It's terribly convenient how Atheists overlook the fact that more evil and murderous acts were committed during the 20th century alone, under the banner of Nietzsche-esque Materialism/Social Darwinism, than all prior centuries of "Christian" conflict.#: Posted by on 12/13 at 03:40 PM -
I get the impression that when others are laughing, they are laughing at the premise, not what's actually there.
Hey Cameron, glad the misunderstanding was cleared up. I think the important part of the Benny Hillified Passion is the Pieta tableau at the end, where the fourth wall is broken for a bit-- fixing her gaze on the viewer as if to ask what kind of monster could countenance such an atrocity. So far as I can tell, that would be the kind of monster that could laugh at a human being brutalized, the kind of monster that could get a religious charge out of the ritualized murder of a human being, or the kind of monster that could worship a monster that demanded brutal human sacrifice.
Mel Gibson can have his sick cult of bloodthirsty primitives. I'm so glad I won't spend eternity with the sort of groundlings that his Kensington gore was intended for. Those for whom Holbein's Christ entombed isn't lurid enough is the reason I have to side with Mark Twain, who said, "Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company."#: Posted by Ken Cope on 12/13 at 05:41 PM -
If we eliminated all comedy that was based on some character's misfortune, we wouldn't have much left but knock-knock jokes.
No craig, knock-knock jokes are comedy based on the misfortune of the listener. If we eliminated them, we'd all be much happier.
As for the video: if only all blasphemy were that funny. It actually brings up a good point: all this focus on his death is silly. It's his teachings and his Atonement that we should be focusing on.#: Posted by Tice with a J on 12/13 at 09:13 PM -
Hebrews: 9:21-22 & 9:25-28 -
"In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness."
"Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him."
--------------------------------------
It is only through his shed blood that our blood is made pure from sin. The Bible likens original sin to a disease of the blood. It only makes sense that one who's blood is pure from sin and who also shares in our human nature, could make the perfect atonement.#: Posted by on 12/14 at 07:09 AM -
Bombor, Bombor... please don't backslide. Remember, a cup of tea is just as good! Sing with me from your hymnal:
In times past, a vampyre was a monster
Drinking blood, destroying lives.
It made orphans out of little children
It made widows out of wives.
Blood is all in vein
Blood is all in vein
We've forsworn it evermore.
We've forsworn it evermore.
Now we see the old ways were abhorrent
They made vampyres feared and loathed
Full abstention is our new direction
We must take the higher road.
Do not live in vein
Do not live in vein
One drop is one drop too much
One drop is one drop too much.
Bombor, you can stop at any time. But you have to vant to stop. Remember the pledge, Not One Drop!#: Posted by Ken Cope on 12/14 at 11:43 AM -
*blank stare.
*crickets chirping.#: Posted by on 12/14 at 12:42 PM -
The essense of life is the blood.
Might make some uncomfortable, but it's true.#: Posted by on 12/14 at 12:45 PM -
Gosh. Now I'm confused...
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Uh, Jack, Jack, listen, tell me, tell me, Jack. When did you first... become... well, develop this theory?
General Jack D. Ripper: Well, I, uh... I... I... first became aware of it, Mandrake, during the physical act of love.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Hmm.
General Jack D. Ripper: Yes, a uh, a profound sense of fatigue... a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I... I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Hmm.
General Jack D. Ripper: I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women uh... women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I, uh... I do not avoid women, Mandrake.
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: No.
General Jack D. Ripper: But I... I do deny them my essence.#: Posted by Ken Cope on 12/14 at 01:21 PM -
The essense of life is the blood.
Might make some uncomfortable, but it's true.
While I'm delighted that you've figured everything out, I hate to tell you this, but, uh, no one's listening to you.
But dude? Get this blood fetish worked out. Kinda creepy.#: Posted by on 12/14 at 01:46 PM -
(sprays milk out of nose)
#: Posted by on 12/14 at 06:50 PM
-
As a Jew annoyed by Christmas and the Christian right let me ask one thing: PZ, how much did the Discovery Institute pay you to post this? http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/12/nature_magaziness_choice_blogg.html#more
You've put them over their year end donation appeal goal. Congrats.#: Posted by on 12/15 at 11:59 AM -
Well, gosh. I guess I should be trying harder to get the Discovery Institute to say nice things about me. That would make me a true hero of evolution.
As I mentioned before, I have seen Gibson's ghastly movie, and I think it entirely appropriate to lampoon it.#: Posted by PZ Myers on 12/16 at 05:34 PM -
Not the point. This conflict is political, not scientific, and not a harmless little culture war sniping match. Watching the progress of Cobb county on its way to the Supreme Court its hard not to conclude that we're losing. Its time for our side to get serious about framing the debate in a way we can win. If we're serious about science being neutral on the subject of the supernatural we have to give the example, and not alienate our allies. Thrusting evolution education deeper into the culture wars is a perscription for defeat.
#: Posted by on 12/19 at 01:34 PM