<html>
<body>
This article just appeared today: Question, if intelligent design,
as proponents argue, is not creationism in disguise (and doesn't assume
God), then how can rejecting intelligent design board members be a
rejection of God???? Just amusing to watch the logical
gymnastics.<br><br>
Robertson: Pa. Voters Rejected God<br>
<b>Nov. 9, 2005</b> <br>
<hr>
<b>(CBS/AP) </b>The Reverend Pat Robertson says Pennsylvanians who voted
members of the Dover Area school board out of office for supporting
"intelligent design" rejected God as well. <br><br>
Eight school board members who wanted high school biology students to be
told that intelligent design is an alternative to evolution lost their
re-election bids Tuesday. <br><br>
On Thursday's broadcast of "The 700 Club," Robertson told Dover
residents, "If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to
God." The founder of the Christian Broadcasting Network explained,
"You just voted God out of your city." <br><br>
Plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit charged that intelligent design is
biblical creationism in disguise. A federal judge must now decide if the
ousted school board's policy is constitutional. <br><br>
Dover is about 20 miles south of Harrisburg, the state capital.
<br><br>
A similar controversy has erupted in Kansas, where the state Board of
Education on Tuesday approved science standards for public schools that
cast doubt on the theory of evolution. The 6-4 vote was a victory for
intelligent design advocates who helped draft the standards. <br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
<br>
At 01:39 PM 11/8/2005, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Send Vision2020 mailing list
submissions to<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>vision2020@moscow.com<br><br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab><a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/vision2020" eudora="autourl">http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/vision2020</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>vision2020-request@moscow.com<br><br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>vision2020-owner@moscow.com<br><br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of Vision2020 digest..."<br>
<br><br>
Today's Topics:<br><br>
1. kirk email (Michael)<br>
2. Re: kirk email (Chasuk)<br>
3. pork (lfalen)<br>
4. kirk email (Michael)<br><br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 12:52:22 -0800<br>
From: "Michael" <metzler@moscow.com><br>
Subject: [Vision2020] kirk email<br>
To: <vision2020@moscow.com><br>
Cc: Douglas <dougwils@christkirk.com><br>
Message-ID: <200511082052.jA8KqRXC050617@mail-gw.fsr.net><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br><br>
Dale Wrote (see his link):<br><br>
The U.S. Supreme Court held in McDaniel v. Paty (1978) that ministers
may<br>
serve in state legislatures and hold public office. If a minister may
serve<br>
in a public office, certainly he may testify as an individual before
a<br>
public office. Just because you are a pastor doesn't mean that you lose
your<br>
rights to speak. But that doesn't keep zealots from fighting for
that<br>
result. <br><br>
<br><br>
Me:<br><br>
I just called Wilson to confirm what I thought his position on this
is.<br>
Generally speaking (i.e. with qualifications regarding abnormal times,
etc)<br>
Wilson is very sympathetic with law not permitting an active minister
to<br>
also hold public office. And I know I don't think a minister should
be<br>
permitted to hold public office while they are actively serving as
a<br>
minister (although Dale's statement of the ruling is ambiguous
here).<br>
Wilson can testify as an individual, and I'd think he could even testify
as<br>
a prophet from God, but I don't think that MCDaniel v. Paty is a
good<br>
justification for it, although it certainly seems to legally justify
it.<br>
Separation of Church and State is a wonderful fruit of
Christianity. <br><br>
<br><br>
Now we can all be friends and start talking about sex again.
:-)<br><br>
<br><br>
Thanks!<br><br>
Michael Metzler<br><br>
<br><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL:
<a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20051108/d31c4070/attachment-0001.htm" eudora="autourl">http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20051108/d31c4070/attachment-0001.htm</a><br><br>
------------------------------<br><br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 12:55:36 -0800<br>
From: Chasuk <chasuk@gmail.com><br>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] kirk email<br>
To: Michael <metzler@moscow.com><br>
Cc: vision2020@moscow.com<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab><ef6f41de0511081255q655c7a7cifc91f47c40d63cea@mail.gmail.com><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252<br><br>
On 11/8/05, Michael <metzler@moscow.com> wrote:<br><br>
> Chas Wrote:<br><br>
> I'm curious: what would constitute sufficient evidence to haul it
into the<br>
> public square?<br><br>
> Me:<br><br>
> Ok, perhaps you are right. This is why I followed up my
comment with the<br>
> fact that "at the very least
more judiciously."
Perhaps the implicit<br>
> conclusion behind the presentation of the evidence needed more
moderation,<br>
> or perhaps it could have been presented as a fact without any
assumed<br>
> conclusion. What you think?<br><br>
I don't know, truthfully. I believe that Vision2020 can reasonably
be<br>
likened to a "court," at least in the sense that it is a jury
of our<br>
peers. My analogy now makes me wonder: who is the
judge? Scott<br>
Peterson was convicted largely on circumstantial evidence, so we do<br>
have precedent. In a civil trial, circumstantial evidence is used
to<br>
establish liability. I know, Vision2020 isn't always civil
(pun<br>
intended), but doesn't this at least establish Nate's liability, if<br>
not Doug's culpability?<br><br>
If too much circumlocution and circuitous analogies gives you a<br>
headache, I apologize. My head is certainly hurting.<br><br>
<br><br>
------------------------------<br><br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 13:18:57 -0800<br>
From: lfalen <lfalen@turbonet.com><br>
Subject: [Vision2020] pork<br>
To: vision2020@moscow.com<br>
Message-ID: <2abfdf1dd70d653c241f572261d47fd1@turbonet.com><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br><br>
The following is from an article by Stephen Spruiell in the November 7,
2005 issue of National Review. Any typo's are mine.<br><br>
Rep. Don Young stuffed two bridges in to the highway bill recently passed
into law. Combined the bridges will cost taxpayers $454 million just
slightly less than the amount Alaska will give away in PFD checks this
year. Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) checks are paid to Alaskans out of
state'd royalties on oil and gas. This year the state will distribute
roughly $510 million to Alaska's 600,000 residents or about $845 apiece.
Alaska has no stae personal income tax or sale tax.<br><br>
On top of this payment they are getting two unneeded bridges. one is
designed to connect the town of Ketchikan (population 8,000) to its
airport on nearby Gravina Island (pop. 50), supplanting a ferry
service that currently makes the trip in about seven minutes for a fare
of $5 t0 $6. The other is the infamous bridge to nowhere. It is a bridge
between Anchorage and a small rural area called Point MacKenzie ( pop.
11). Citizens Against Government Waste ranks Alaska firs in per capita
pork spending. <br><br>
Here are just a few of the goodies Young and Stevens have steered toward
alaska in recent years: $1.8 million for berry research; $1.8 million for
sea-otter recovery; $10 million for a pyschiatric treatment facility; $48
millions subsidies for the timber industry; and $500,000 to paint a giant
salmon on an Alaska Airlines jetliner. <br><br>
A study by Taxpayes for Common Sence revealed that the $285.5 billion
highway bill contained 119 special projects for Alaska, totaling almost
$1 million. Of the $24 billion worth of pork in the bill Alaska got 4%.
Don Young compared it to hunting. " i'm always looking for a bigger
Head" He said about Ted Stevens " i'd lkie to be a little
oinker, myself. If he's cheif porker i'm upset."<br><br>
My comment: I thought Robert Byrd was bad. These guys make him look like
a piker. Maybe Chris would loke to comment on Alaskan politics<br><br>
Roger<br><br>
<br><br>
------------------------------<br><br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 13:38:52 -0800<br>
From: "Michael" <metzler@moscow.com><br>
Subject: [Vision2020] kirk email<br>
To: <vision2020@moscow.com><br>
Message-ID: <200511082139.jA8LcvNZ089917@mail-gw.fsr.net><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br><br>
J Wrote:<br><br>
First, I am curious - are you comparing CC to being like an
organization<br>
such as the Mafia? So that makes Doug the Godfather? Was the
Godfather<br>
evil or political? Interesting.<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
Me:<br><br>
No, the Mafia would be local politics, and Wilson would be yelling
"Just as<br>
soon as I think I'm out they bring me back in!" He would then
have his<br>
heart attack and fall to the kitchen floor. I actually think there are
many<br>
analogies to the two plots. Once, Wilson was a ring leader in the
Mafia,<br>
but he's trying to repent; give him some space so that he can get his
life<br>
back in order and go on.<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
J Wrote:<br><br>
Secondly, with CC being the ONLY church in Moscow spouting out
political<br>
do's and don'ts, why do you feel it has to be an either/or situation
for<br>
CC/Doug? <br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
Me:<br><br>
This was one of my questions: Or is this a false alternative? Why
do you<br>
feel that it isn't an either/or?<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
J Wrote:<br><br>
Are you suggesting that we would see an even more increased effort to
have<br>
things run their way? Laws changed to fit their needs? People
run out of<br>
town or loose their jobs that they don't like? The overtaking of
buildings<br>
downtown be even more obvious and out in the open?<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
Me:<br><br>
Oh, man. Just think of what we could do. If we put all our
connections,<br>
congregation, church businesses, money (well), and my son with his
squirt<br>
gun into an aggressive and sustained political battle, we'd take over
the<br>
place. You'd see Joe and I debating philosophy on the front page of
the<br>
Daily News every day! Philosophers should be Kings! Said Plato;
philosophers<br>
will rule the land. Chas, Ted, Joe, and Michael would split the kingdom
into<br>
four secions. Or, I guess, the FBI would do us in before it got too out
of<br>
hand. <br><br>
<br><br>
J Wrote:<br><br>
What is more evil - people supporting their community for the betterment
and<br>
benefit of the community as a whole OR people claiming they are the
only<br>
ones with the truth and the rest of us better start getting in line
and<br>
stepping in rhythm?<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
Me:<br><br>
Oh no, you have it wrong. I appreciate and accept your point of
view that<br>
my moral views are disgusting and that my pastor is a lying racist.
No<br>
problem here in Diversityville as far as I'm concerned. <br><br>
<br><br>
I better stop before I start sounding sarcastic. Now, what about
Joe's<br>
epistemic concerns about a Christian foundation for
morality?......<br><br>
<br><br>
Thanks!<br><br>
Michael Metzler<br><br>
<br><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL:
<a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20051108/20d8cf75/attachment.htm" eudora="autourl">http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20051108/20d8cf75/attachment.htm</a><br><br>
------------------------------<br><br>
_____________________________________________________<br>
List services made available by First Step Internet, <br>
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<br>
<a href="http://www.fsr.net /" eudora="autourl">http://www.fsr.net
</a> <br>
<a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" eudora="autourl">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ<br><br>
End of Vision2020 Digest, Vol 18, Issue 71<br>
******************************************</blockquote></body>
</html>