Slashdot Mirror
WSJ Refused To Publish Lawrence Krauss' Response To "Science Proves Religion"
First time accepted submitter Kubla Kahhhn! writes Recently, the WSJ posted a controversial piece "Science Increasingly Makes a Case for God", written by non-scientist Eric Metaxas. Noted astrophysicist Lawrence Krauss wrote a simple and clear retort in a letter to the editor, which the WSJ declined to publish, but Richard Dawkins did.
So they didn't print a letter.
You not only missed the article but the summary also. What was not printed was an attempt at proof FOR religion, not against it.
Hope we don't offend anyone by saying their religion and religious leaders are wrong about everything.
Science has no place saying any such thing, any more than religion has any place commenting on science. You don't *ever* mix science (which deals with the natural world) and religion (which deals with the supernatural world). Period. End of Story. And that works *both* ways. I don't expect a scientist to argue that science supports atheism any more than I expect my priest to start bitching about Einstein's model of gravity from the pulpit.
In this case, the WSJ should have refused to publish both the original article and the follow-up letters.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.