David Coppedge in the Crosshairs
by BradfordDavid Klinghoffer wrote, Protest David Coppedge's Persecution, Direct to NASA! Quoting:
From all appearances, supervisors at NASA's JPL abused their power in order to persecute Coppedge, a top computer specialist on the Cassini Mission to Saturn and a Darwin doubter. NASA's involvement means the affair is not like the recent Martin Gaskell case at the University of Kentucky which, in terms of generating taxpayer anger, stood to stir up residents of Kentucky in particular since they were paying for the whole thing. Here, with NASA being the federal space agency, every American has a direct stake in the matter.
David Coppedge is a creationist. Among radical atheists and naturalists that is akin to a child molester in their panoply of secular sins. He is also a very capable computer specialist. I did not write biologist or specialist in astrobiology did I?
There is a disturbing trend in America toward accelerated political correctness; uncodified rules that you better heed or else. That means devaluing free speech and freedom of religion. If you don't have enough courage to enact laws that inhibit behavior and beliefs you do not favor, you are likely to prefer the security of censorship to substantive exchanges. PC is the perfect option. Combine that with a government with a penchant for ubercontrol and you get a society slouching increasingly toward an authoritarian mindset.
Another issue merits attention. Coppedge is not merely a creationist, he is a Christian version of one. There are Muslim creationists and creationists of other non-conventional religious persuasions when assessed by American cultural norms. That group falls within a different category within the tortured minds of PC advocates. We need to practice diversity when dealing with them. Understanding. Tolerance. The contradiction is nauseating but perhaps explainable.
IDists have been tagged as wedge practitioners by critics. But the dubious charge never had substance. If some IDists did have a wedge strategy in mind they were clearly ineffectual. Take notes from the pros. PCers are experts at wedging. Security concerns? Try invasive virtual strip searches at airports or groping pat downs of grannies and children as an alternative. Two PC fetishes are served by this. Can't profile and security trumps unreasonable searches and seizure protections. Never mind the Israeli alternative. Not enough ubercontrol conferred by it.
God created heaven and earth and all creatures on this planet. Where's the wedge quashing this? Scientism masquerading as science. Science sez. Except when it does not. Watch these trends. They are unhealthy ones for a democracy.
January 31st, 2011 at 5:25 pm
Feel better? 11.9 million people through Ben Gurion in 2010,735 million flew in the US.See any potential problem?
Comment by velikovskys — January 31, 2011 @ 5:25 pm
January 31st, 2011 at 9:30 pm
velikovskys wrote:
No.
Comment by angryoldfatman — January 31, 2011 @ 9:30 pm
February 1st, 2011 at 6:54 pm
I don't see a problem with imitating the Israeli system either. The USA is obviously bigger but has many more resources too.
Comment by Bradford — February 1, 2011 @ 6:54 pm
February 1st, 2011 at 7:55 pm
Apples and Oranges.
Ben Gurion is a single airport. Every airport of similar size in the US could employ similar security. Larger airports could increase staff and use the same techniques.
What's the problem?
Comment by Daniel Smith — February 1, 2011 @ 7:55 pm
February 2nd, 2011 at 4:34 pm
I thought the mantra is smaller,cheaper,less intrusive.The Israeli system is slower,questioning each passenger,opening bags.Americans get upset taking off their shoes.I am not fan of the status quo, but if our fast food version is unacceptable it is hard to believe a slower,more costly method is feasible.And horrors of horrors the Israelis have to deal with the"pc fetish" of profiling.They are under the same silly misconception that it is a "unreasonable search" to profile. .
Comment by velikovskys — February 2, 2011 @ 4:34 pm
February 2nd, 2011 at 6:01 pm
velikovskys wrote:
From the Boston Globe reference at the link in the OP:
Profilers — that's what they're called — make a point of interviewing travelers, sometimes at length. They probe, as one profiling supervisor told CBS, for "anything out of the ordinary, anything that does not fit." Their questions can seem odd or intrusive, especially if your only previous experience with an airport interrogation was being asked whether you packed your bags yourself.
Also, congratulations on the attempted derailing of the conversation. Apparently you find nothing wrong with the religious discrimination involved in the David Coppedge case, nor the authoritarianism it hints at as mentioned in the OP, and must hunt for some tiny nit to pick. Sorry, it's not working.
Comment by angryoldfatman — February 2, 2011 @ 6:01 pm
February 3rd, 2011 at 6:15 am
Richard Dawkins thinks it's fine to deny people employment based on their religious views.
Except of course if an atheist is denied employment, then it's just bigotry.
Comment by Euphrates — February 3, 2011 @ 6:15 am
February 3rd, 2011 at 8:13 pm
Dawkins pulls a fast one in his argumentation by (admittedly – to his credit) using "absurd extremes" as analogies for religious belief. (But, in so doing, unwittingly shoots himself in the foot!)
Dawkins attempts to bias his audience against religious beliefs by equating it to such absurdities as "the stork theory" and "flat-earthers".
The problem is: those things are not religious beliefs!! What Dawkins fails to see is that his own beliefs are as irrational as the stork theory or a belief in a flat earth. In fact, those positions have more in common with Dawkins' own non-religious opinions on the workings and history of the universe: namely that beauty and order "just happened", that the universe "caused itself", that matter—for no particular reason—segregates itself into sophisticated working machinery, that "we can't know why" anything is the way it is… and all the other silly things atheists believe. (At least believers have a rational explanation for why the universe is the way it is!)
So, using Dawkins own examples, atheists should be discriminated against because their beliefs are as silly and absurd as flat-earthers who believe in the stork theory.
Comment by Daniel Smith — February 3, 2011 @ 8:13 pm
February 3rd, 2011 at 10:03 pm
Yes, I agree Daniel.
From the link:
Dawkins seems to be tacitly admitting that he can't deal with the case at hand, and goes on to build a strawman. This appears to be a recurring bad habit of his.
Comment by Euphrates — February 3, 2011 @ 10:03 pm
February 3rd, 2011 at 11:42 pm
Comments #6 and 7 completely destroy Dawkins “argument”:
Comment by MikeGene — February 3, 2011 @ 11:42 pm
February 4th, 2011 at 8:45 am
It looks like his parents (Coppedge) run Creation Safaris.
My bet is someone looked into that and that was the last straw for the JPL so they had to cut him loose.
Comment by ID guy — February 4, 2011 @ 8:45 am
February 4th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
Or an Ayn Rand worshipper. Oy vey. Or hell, a Dawkins toadie. Good lord. That definitely tells me something about a person.
Comment by kornbelt888 — February 4, 2011 @ 12:27 pm
February 9th, 2011 at 1:05 pm
David Coppedge has now been "laid off".
I expect the official record to say, "David has been an outstanding employee. Economic considerations have forced us to reorganize and eliminate positions and it is with reluctance we part with a loyal and longstanding employee. We wish him the best in his future endeavors…"
Similar farewell was given to Caroline Crocker…
Comment by Salvador T. Cordova — February 9, 2011 @ 1:05 pm