Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!MC.LCS.MIT.EDU!KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU
From: KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Newsgroups: mod.politics
Subject: "Creation science"
Message-ID: <12253968751.33.MCGREW@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Mon, 10-Nov-86 23:20:46 EST
Article-I.D.: RED.12253968751.33.MCGREW
Posted: Mon Nov 10 23:20:46 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Nov-86 07:12:56 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 24
Approved: poli-sci@red.rutgers.edu


    From: ~joe testa~ <TESTA-J%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>

    >From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
    >
    >...  I agree that "creation science" is completely bogus, but I
    >feel that nobody should be compelled to pay for the teaching of
    >something they find repugnant.

    How much sense does is make to legislate bogusness? ...

  None at all.  That was exactly my point.  If people are going to be
forced to pay for education they should have control over what is
taught.  If we, the scientists, find that what the public wants taught
is bogus, we should perhaps try to find another way to finance the
schools.  We have no right to impose our opinions on others, even
though we are right and they are wrong.
  If I find someone writing an incorrect computer program on his own
computer on his own time, I have no right to force him to correct the
program.
  Followups to Poli-Sci.
                                                              ...Keith

-------