Home » Culture, Intelligent Design » The Wisdom of Starbucks — Allowing All Sides a Place at the Table

The Wisdom of Starbucks — Allowing All Sides a Place at the Table

Here’s what’s appearing on Starbucks coffee cups that’s relevant to our concerns:

The Way I See It #224
Darwinism’s impact on traditional social values has not been as benign as its advocates would like us to believe. Despite the efforts of its modern defenders to distance themselves from its baleful social consequences, Darwinism’s connection with eugenics, abortion and racism is a matter of historical record. And the record is not pretty.
– Jonathan Wells, Biologist and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design.

The Way I See It # 220
Evolution as described by Charles Darwin is a scientific theory, abundantly reconfirmed, explaining physical phenomena by physical causes. Intelligent Design is a faith-based initiative in rhetorical argument. Should we teach I.D. in America¹s public schools? Yes, let¹s do it ­ not as science, but alongside other spiritual beliefs, such as Islam, Zoroastrianism and the Hindu idea that the Earth rests on Chukwa, the giant turtle.
– David Quammen, Author. His books include The Song of the Dodo and The Reluctant Mr. Darwin.

SOURCE: www.starbucks.com/thewayiseeit

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

5 Responses to The Wisdom of Starbucks — Allowing All Sides a Place at the Table

  1. I have noticed that ID advocates are not afraid of debate or contrary opinions.

    It is those who are afraid of debate and attempt to stifle contrary views who have “fragile world-views” and demand special protection.

  2. I don’t mind debates nor contrary opinions. But I do mind when someone blatantly misrepresents reality.

    Case in point:

    The only faith required by IDists is the “faith” that there is a reality behind our existence and science can help us uncover and explain that reality.

    And in the end the anti-IDists will NOT let ID into any classroom. For once it is introduced in any classroom other than the science classroom it will soon be discovered that it is being presented in the wrong setting.

  3. The David Quammen quote is a very poor choice by Starbucks. A serious mis-representation of what ID is.

    If anything requires blind faith, not based on evidence, it is Darwinism.

    ID is intuitively known by all everywhere.

    Otherwise why did Dawkins have to invent “designoids”? Clearly there would never have been a “designoid” explain-it-away stance if the impressions of design were not ubiquitous.

    Maybe Starbucks should have quoted an evolutionist with a bit more brain.

    But then again, quotes by non-thinking Darwinist vidiots and mooncalfs can only help ID. ;-)

  4. But then again, quotes by non-thinking Darwinist vidiots and mooncalfs can only help ID.

    I think I’ll chalk Starbucks up as being on our side :-)

  5. When invited to debate Tom Woodward, a prominent Australian who wrote a book against intelligent design just last year said he was a bit rusty and would prefer not to.

    I thought demolishing ID is so easy that any thinking person could do it with no preparation.

Leave a Reply