Gore: creationism OK

[Max B. Sawicky]

. . .
The point isn't that religion is bad and science is good, but that
they make
different kinds of claims to truth, one based on revelation and faith
(or,
for some people, unthinking acceptance of comforting ideology), the
other on
evidence accepted in the field. Taking away the ability of localities
to
make dumb decisions based on inept thinking isn't anti-populist or
big-state-management or whatever. It *is* against dumbing down our
schools,
however.

I agree with the distinction between religion and science, and I
certainly would not advocate a pluralist presentation of evolution
that included creationism.

I disagree that "Taking away the ability of localities to
make dumb decisions based on inept thinking" is not
anti-populist.  It is anti-populist.  Whether it's worth
doing is another matter.

I have a personal interest in populism, but one part that I haven't
reconciled with or figured out to my satisfaction is the direct
democracy
theme.  I've never been a fan of it.  I've sat through too many
meetings
where too much time was wasted.

mbs