The press release linked below crossed my email today and given the subject
of it, National Council on Bible Curriculum in the Schools vs. Bible Literacy
Project, I thought list subscribers might have an interest. It can be
viewed in full at: http://www.earnedmedia.org/kjos1130.htm.
Jim
When they describe the National Association of Evangelicals as "liberal",
they lose a lot of credibility with me right from the get-go. I'm as
interested as anyone in being aware of the "end times", but this press release
seem a bit "out there" to me.
Brad
- Original Message -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The press release linked below crossed my email today and given
the subject of it, National Council on Bible Curriculum in the Schools
vs. Bible Literacy Project, I thought list subscribers might have an
interest. It can be viewed in full at:
The press release contains at least one error of fact. The Bible Literacy
Curriculum is described in the press release as not using the Bible. This is
incorrect .Each chapter begins with an assignment of relevant Biblical passages
which are to be read by the students in connection with
--- Rick Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marci: I somehow overlooked your post. And I wanted
to respond because I think you and I finally agree
on something. You said:
It [Christmas] is also alive and well in the
public sphere, even though it is now sharing billing
with other
Shouldnt we be careful in applying
American notions of free speech to other cultures and traditions? Sweden may have
had good and sufficient reasons for taking a different position on the question.
I would be curious to know if the Swedish Court relied at all on American
cases.
With regard to whether the Swedish high
court looked at US cases, I would think that it did not, or at least, that if
it did, that US
cases wouldnt necessarily be any more persuasive than any other nations.
I would think that it would look first to its own statute and then to the
European
I've certainly heard the argument that Western democracies with
histories of Nazism or Communism might be justified in suppressing Nazi
or Communist speech even if the U.S. might not be; I think I understand
the argument, though I find it unpersuasive. But I'm puzzled why some
I was under the impression that free speech
was considered a universal human right, not merely an American notion,
regardless of whether governments acknowledge it as such or not.
And I cannot even begin to conceive of a
good and sufficient reason for putting people in jail because
they have
