Public university hires leader in intelligent design

10 posts on something that was a minor part of the message of the post in question because someone else (I don't think anyone in the conversation was offended) might get offended and the actual point of the post was ignored. Great stuff!

[edit] I don't even get the "ou" and "ouself" thing. (Google does nothing!) Especially when we have perfectly grammatically correct "one" and "oneself" which are gender neutral.

Duoae wrote:

10 posts on something that was a minor part of the message of the post in question because someone else (I don't think anyone in the conversation was offended) might get offended and the actual point of the post was ignored. Great stuff!

Sorry you were offended.

LarryC wrote:

Shouldn't your MDs have regular re-accreditation exams and case requirements? If a dude changes ou's belief system and is now using the MD to Trojan ouself into a University; this seems like a problem better solved by making sure the person is actually a practicing clinician or experimental scientist, preferably the former. This sort of solution also takes care of MDs who do nothing to update themselves on current practice and knowledge.

For an on-topic response, a person in the US needs a medical license to practice medicine. They can lose their license, but retain their Medical Doctorate. License requirements are (I think) determined on the state level. I'm sure Coldstream would be a better source than I for how that all works.

Why is it off limits to question a person who was recently appointed as a science professor at a state university on the grounds that they wrote a book to promote a movement whose entire goal is to insert religious beliefs as science into state run institutions? He literally wrote the book on inserting faith belief into public school science programs. Can anyone get more apt than telling the fox to guard the hen house?

The answer needs to be something other than, religion is always special and can never be questioned. Do mormons who are proponents of child brides get a pass to teach in elementary schools?

I don't think anyone's suggesting it's off limits to question or talk about these things. I think, for me personally, I can't speak for anyone else, the way some people were doing it was overly broad in who and what they were accusing of things. It wasn't: hey, what's going on over here? Are the right checks and balances in place for this appointment? And more: These people should never be allowed to even think about doing a job they can do because I disagree with their thoughts on things.

As for a Mormon who believes in child brides teaching in an elementary school. I don't see the problem. If they're not a convicted paedophile and teach the curriculum properly without somehow inserting their beliefs into it I don't see why they couldn't beyond an irrational fear of something "different".

Stengah wrote:
Duoae wrote:

10 posts on something that was a minor part of the message of the post in question because someone else (I don't think anyone in the conversation was offended) might get offended and the actual point of the post was ignored. Great stuff!

Sorry you were offended.

Yeah, you wish I was offended, then we'd get to the spanking! :p