“I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.
Coons was talking about the FACT of evolution, and O Donnell interrupt him to say, "We'll you just proved not only how little you know about the THEORY of evolution but also about the Constitution." Then she said, "the theory of evolution is indeed a THEORY.
They were debating two different things. O'Donnell looks like a moron for appearing to not know evolution is BOTH a fact and a theory. Coons said nothing wrong.. He was talking about the fact of evolution.
If she were better educated on this issue she would have conceded that scientific facts should be taught in school, and the real debate was the theory of evolution. Coons probably baited her into looking like a fool, and she took it: hook line and sinker.
I bet if some journalist in Delaware goes up to O'Donnell and asks her, "Is evolution a fact?" she would say no.. and then when it hit the national news she'd say it was a gotcha question. O'Donnell would be a victim of a lamestream media..
She is arguing it shouldn't be taught as a theory unless ID is being taught as a theory... problem is, one is a scientific theory and the other is not. Again, it leads me to believe she doesn't know the basics about the scientific method.Where did she argue that it "shouldn't be taught in a classroom because it's a THEORY"? What's the timestamp for that line?
If she understood the scientific method.. she wouldn't be tricked by Coon's saying evolution is a fact, and she wouldn't have a problem with teaching ID in a non scientific setting.. It is not a science, it can't be tested.
It's valid to study scientific theory in a science classroom, it always has been..
how ironicI wish you'd apply some of that to what you write.
Last edited by SheWolf; 10-20-10 at 01:40 PM.
O'Donnell's camp is now saying the concept of separation of church and state is in the constitution. She was only pointing out the Constitution doesn't say it explicitly, which I think is rather pointless to debate if you value the concept.
YouTube - Constitutional Clash in Del. Senate Debate
One of you will end up here next!
What Cons did was not be able to quote the full amendment. He was aware of what they were discussing, the separation of church and state and it's existence or not in the Constitution.