Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Religion & Law Blogs -> Thoughts in a Haystack

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Religion & Law

: Thoughts in a Haystack

Now It Gets Interesting

By John Pieret

ADVERTISEMENTS

It seems that there isn't just the accommodationists and the incompatiblists. There are the True Incompatiblists? and the not-so-true incompatibilists.

According to Larry Moran, Jerry Coyne (and, presumably, PZ Myers, who has taken a similar position) are not the real sort of incompatibilists:

If [under the US Constitution] the proper teaching of science promotes a "religious" point of view, namely atheism, then science can't be taught in public schools. It's fun to watch the contortions that many atheists have to go through in order to escape the obvious conclusion. ...
Jerry Coyne tries to get around the problem by concentrating on the teaching of evolution (just the scientific truth) and not "science" ... I think this is disengenuous ...

Now we'll have to keep all the players straight. May I suggest we all call the True Incompatiblists "Churchillian Incompatibilists" and the untrue-blue incompatibilists the "Chamberlainian Incompatibilists"?

I believe there is some precedence for this.

_______________________________________

P.S. Can a Courtier's Reply for those who claim that an understanding of the intricacies of American Constitutional law is necessary before criticizing Chamberlainian Incompatibilism be far behind?
.

Full post as published by Thoughts in a Haystack on June 21, 2009 (boomark / email).