I scanned some of Professor Voss’ proposed textbook changes. I admit that nowhere did I see him propose “therefore God, divine being, higher power, sacred text” or the like. But he does propose, “Other explanations for what is observed on earth should be examined.”
Well, he doesn’t talk about god, divine beings, higher powers, or sacred texts…but he must be talking about religion, right?
Therein lies the rub. What other explanations could there possibly be that are nonreligious? (Besides extraterrestrials.)
Well, Dr. Wright, if you are going to answer your own question…
There may be other possibilities, but only one will suffice. Of course, even though he shows quite well that ID is not necessarily religious, he goes right ahead and asserts that it is.
Intelligent design (note the expression!) in public schools functionally guarantees teaching/discussing religious ideas as “truth.”
Again, I find myself feeling somewhat sorry for someone so entrenched in their worldview that they are physically unable to see that they’ve just proven themself wrong. It’s really sad.