Here's the link to the Pew survey.

<span class="reporttitle">Religion A Strength And Weakness For Both Parties</span&gt

Aside from their influence on the Democratic Party, there is an even more widespread perception ­ held by two-in-three Americans ­ that liberals are going too far in trying to keep religion out of schools and the government."

If Moderates feel comfortable giving in to breaking down the separation of Church and State, than let's hear it from them. Make the case.

Personally, I'm leaning towards upholding the Constitution.

But it seems to me that it's all or nothing. If we concede this to the Party of James Dobson, how do we defend NOT conceding everything else?

If you give in to this, you lose the authority to stop the rest of the Theocon agenda.

Thanks for linking.  I thought my post would probably get lost in the all the news about Katrina but the results of the Pew survey were too significant to ignore, particularly the margins, and I hadn't seen anyone else mention it. 

The Reason article you linked to was a great read.  Thanks.

...

Alas. What a sad state of affairs. I agree with one of the other commenters that polls oughtn't to be taken too seriously, but it makes sense that one of the great obstacles to the triumph of science in America would be a huge bulk of the American people themselves.

I don't consider myself to be a scientific absolutist, and I'm not against the teaching of creationism. IN RELIGION CLASSES. This is what amazes me. Sure, let's consider various alternatives. Let's even teach our children that there are faiths that do not accept much of, say, the theory of evolution. But don't pollute science classes with what belongs in religion classes.

Physics in physics classes, metaphysics in metaphysics classes. It should be that simple. The problem is that the IDers are taking the fight directly to science, and this is why science needs to respond.

You are quite right that polls are useful tools and simply reflect current perceptions -- perceptions which can instantly reverse when presented with newer perceptions or just differently worded questions.

And I will admit to being biased in my conclusion.  I find the discussions of which creation myth should be taught in public schools both irritating and tiresome.  My answer is neither.  Certainly not beginning at grade 4 as some curriculums do.

No one yet knows or can prove the origin of life.  And just because animals and plants can be shown to change by adapting to their environment or by mutation doesn't disprove the existence of God.

This whole issue is a distraction.  Note in my post that I predicted that the the healthcare and poverty results would be ignored in favor of discussing evolution, religion and flag-burning. 

...

I happen to disagree with Michael as well, but there is a question in this survey that favors his position:

Many Think Scientists Disagree about Evolution

There is no public consensus about how scientists view evolution. Opinions about what scientists believe are strongly associated with one's own beliefs on the subject. Most Americans (54%) think that there is general agreement among scientists that evolution has taken place, but a substantial minority (33%) says that no such scientific consensus exists. By an 82%-13% margin, those who accept natural selection theory see a scientific consensus on this issue. Among those who take a creationist position, a 46% plurality thinks the scientific community is divided over the evolution question. 

<img border="0" src="http://people-press.org/reports/images/254-12.gif" alt="Misapprehension" title="Misapprehension"> 

Fully a third thinks there is disagreement among scientists on this subject.  The goal of the ID folks is to convey a sense of controversy to justify teaching "all sides." It may be worthwhile to make it clear, somehow, that there are no sides.  How you do that without feeding the idea of debate seems tricky to me. I still like the Flying Spaghetti Monster approach, but if you did believe that scientists were not unanimous, then you might well want to know why all views couldn't be taught.

Sorry for not responding sooner.  I got caught up in the Katrina spectacle.

I very much believe in religious freedom.  I don't want to lose it but one of the surest ways to do so is to disrespect the religion of a significant majority of the country.

I believe in minority rights but not minority tyrannny.  Challenging the majority of a community's prayers before their own public events and displays in their own jurisdiction of religous symbols that are offered primarily in good will is politically stupid, a term I got from this article by Irving Kristol.

What is happening now is a backlash against minority or even individual rights pushed too far.  This has provoked extremists at the other end of the spectrum and now we all stand to lose a some of the openness and good will that once existed in both the greater religious and scientific communities.

Having made my own peace with the conflicting creation myths of Genesis and evolution long ago, I think other people should have as well.  

I do object to teaching either theory, evolution or intelligent design, in grade school.  There's simply no good reason for it.

...