Little Hawk: It applies well as a warning against any and all repressive regimes or societies or groups or social movements that are setting out on a witchhunt against someone...anyone...whomever they have decided to target for the time being. Such people are often, in fact almost always, found on both sides of a highly divisive issue. They are the zealots and the haters. They accuse, they condemn, they attack, they hate, they do not forgive, they do not seek any accomodation, they do not look for common ground, they do not admit to their own faults and errors, they are proud, they seek total 100% victory over all those whom they hate and despise and feel morally superior to.

Th difference, of course, is that some groups want to force others to live a particular way, while other groups simply want everyone to mind their own business. In the current discussion, I see no reason to try to make accommodation with people who are denying civil rights to a large part of our citizenry. The two sides of this debate are clear, and there isn't much ethical gray area here. So I object your using words like "witch hunt","zealot", "hater", and applying them to both sides in this context. This discussion wouldn't be taking place if there weren't a lot of people who simply won't leave us alone. I have no desire to be in a debate, or to have any negative interactions at all. But I also refuse to have my civil rights trampled. Someone who isn't willing to defend freedom will soon not have it.

Little Hawk, your accommodation just makes you sound like you think they have something serious, thoughtful, or good to say. Should we debate with the folks who want to have Intelligent Design taught as science, or should we just say, "There is no debate. The whole idea is nonsense."?

Oh, and going back to a previous platitude of yours, I understand that they think they are being good and defending something they believe in. That doesn't matter -- it doesn't change the fact that what they think is good is a gross injustice and a horrendous invasion of privacy, and what they are defending is rights they claim for themselves but deny to others. And they should know better. There is enough information available to kill all the science arguments, and anyone with any moral sense knows you don't try to tell other people what to do in bed.