One Sunday a year the Unitarian Universalist Church of Augusta celebrates its members' birthdays.
They cut 12 cakes, one for each month of birthdays, and invite people of all ages to sit and eat. This year the festivities included one 200-year-old with a Unitarian background: Charles Darwin.
The Darwin Day celebration is one of many worldwide to mark the bicentennial of the scientist's birth, in addition to 150 years since the publication of The Origin of Species.
The church included a science fair in its service, and a benediction from Darwin's seminal work, controversial still for the case it makes for evolution through natural selection.
Celebrations -- and the accompanying protests -- will continue through Thursday, which is officially Darwin Day.
Answers in Genesis, the nonprofit behind the Creation Museum in Cincinnati, has organized two national conferences to equip Christians with a biblical response to what it calls the "cultural phenomenon" of evolution acceptance.
Local churches have, in the past, held similar workshops for their congregations.
Two years ago, Christ Church Presbyterian in Evans held a two-day seminar, The Truth of Creation and the Lie of Evolution, with courses titled Dinosaurs: Those Terrible Lizards and Intelligent Design or a Blind Watchmaker.
The church hasn't planned any workshops this year, said its new pastor, the Rev. Duncan Rankin. He says that though he disagrees with Darwin's work he doesn't want to create a false dichotomy between religion and science.
"On one hand we can appreciate the serious consideration for the whole topic of development," he said. "But at the same time we've got to disagree with Darwin's presuppositions. It's a classic divide."
And yet, the Rev. Rankin says, "even with such a disagreement, we can understand his conclusions. We just wish his work would have 'evolved' into other directions."
Most Americans seem to agree.
In 2006, 63 percent of Americans said they believe humans and animals have always existed in their present form, or that if evolution did occur it was guided a supreme being.
A 2005 survey, also from the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life, found that 64 percent of Americans supported the teaching of creationism alongside evolution in schools.
Georgia was in the throes of that dispute when Cobb County schools placed stickers on science textbooks to explain that evolution was a theory, not a fact. The case was settled out of court, in favor of those who wanted the stickers left off the books.
The stickers did also go on to say that the material "should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered," which in itself is something the Unitarian Universalist Church supports, though its members draw different conclusions about evolution.
"There's nothing more Unitarian than asking questions," said Sarah Keen, who led part of the Darwin Day celebration, including a children's program.
Darwin, she said, "was right about a lot of stuff but was wrong about a few things. But the important thing is he kept asking why. That's what today is all about."
After a tag-teamed sermon by Andy Reese, a former medical researcher at the Medical College of Georgia, and Randy Raymond, an engineer at the Savannah River Site, the congregation sang its closing hymn.
They chose the song A Firemist and a Planet, about animals and natural wonders, and who deserves credit for it all.
"Some call it evolution. Others," they sang, "call it God."
Reach Kelly Jasper at (706) 823-3552 or kelly.jasper@augustachronicle.com.
The Augusta Chronicle ©2010 Morris Communications, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Back 
"And yet, the Rev. Rankin says, "even with such a disagreement, we can understand his conclusions." ------ Must don't understand, period. They don't understand that Charles Darwin didn't make the sweeping accusations that is claimed by others of his work. Darwin made a thesis based on direct observation, and submitted his thesis for fellow scientists to debate (good science). What happened that caused the rift we see so much now, was caused by Stephen Jay Gould distorting it (bad agenda/ego driven science). Compound it with a regular circus of folks now known as debunkers (to distinguish them from true skeptics -- skeptics will change their opinion upon presented with evidence, debunkers will defy reality to remain smug in their delusions), we have a farce P.T. Barnum's sucker quote readily defines. Most of the conflict is based on ignorance, agendas and egos. For those who believe in God created all things (as even I do), there's also room at the "inn" to believe evolution was also created by Him (which I also believe). How this issue has become so dividing is a black comedy, as mankind again shows it wants to limit God's potential. God can do anything and humans are clueless WHY.
Proverbs 3 4-6 explains it all for those "Christian" zealots.
Referring to the Unitarian Universalist group as a church is to assume there is no such thing as a cult. I guess it's all semantics, but it seems to give credence to an organization that tries to make all things equal at all times.
Unitarians and Southern Baptists in the same article. This should be a fun thread.
PT, hope you know the UU church is the church that Deists would attend if they want fellowship. You know Deists like Thomas Jefferson; Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine? Do you even love the USA, let alone honor our Founders????? Everytime you post such crap you look worse, truly. Next thing we'll hear from you is Christian Scientists are a cult, too (won't even mention the Mormons, since it's clear how bigoted you are with the Universalists).
The bottom line is that all this discussion is useless...God is the Great I Am...He has always been and always will be...That is fact...He made the earth, the Universe and all that is...Now what people need to be sure of is if they are going to leave this life to live with God always or live a life of torment in Hell...That is a sure thing...Heaven or Hell...
You're right Sandy, UU and Christian Scientists brings out the bigot in me. I'm also bigoted against child molesters, rapists, pro-abortionists and most socialists. So what?
Don't forget blacks, jews, Asians, mexicans, muslims etc *looks over at patriciathomas* I'm yet praying, I wonder why you didn't list everybody on your REAL list you are racist against? Why did you STOP at child molesters, rapists, pro-abortionist and most socialist? Surely your list goes on and on the TRUE list that is.
I wonder if you will be like Elwin Wilson patriciathomas from Rock Hill SC? LOL. Do you know him?
fruitpaper, you're still a raging racist, I see. No need to try and project that image on me. It doesn't fit, you tiny minded waste.
LOL you just need to FESS up and stop beating around the bush who you are racist against... don't hesitate, tell the truth, you are a 57 year old WHITE man, and we know that age bracket what really is in you... *SHRUGS*
being wrong all the time certainly doesn't seem to bother you, fruit. I guess you're used to it. (It's 58)
Believing your God will punish you for rejecting him will never allow you to view the evidence against him unbiasedly!
Hey have you been over to Elwin Wilson's home lately, I thank God he changed Mr. Wilson's mind and is able to forgive his racist KKK ways, *looks at Patriciathomas* *SHRUGS* again.
Believing anything a cult preaches because it has church in it's name is not good planning.
patriciathomas=Elwin Wilson one day God is going to change your mind.
We should all believe in Zeus.
oh 58 year old WHITE man with a long pony tail *I'm still praying and SHRUGGING* God move on his heart and change his mind QUICK. I wonder will your story make Augusta Chronicle headlines like Mr. Wilson.
Here is a short selection from Wikipedia. It should be helpful for all of you to be aware of the real title of the great man's great book. Note the shortening came after the Civil War. "The book's full title is On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. In the 6th edition of 1872 the title was changed to The Origin of Species." Charming, no? I wonder which races Darwin favoured? (British Spelling of favored.)
"You're right Sandy, UU and Christian Scientists brings out the bigot in me. I'm also bigoted against child molesters...." ------- Wouldn't have a white bedsheet to wear, you know like a diaper, too?
Why SandyK is your's in the cleaners?...Are is it the Black Panther Fist in vogue today? Gosh now I just popped my typing hands for jumping in like that but "goodness gracious sakes alive and puppy dog tails" I could not let it pass me by...:-)
We education-challenged would normally associate the word 'cult' with bad deeds or, at least, with unexpected unfortunate consequenses. I wonder if the resident experts here could list some (any?) of the despicable activities the decent people of Unitarian-Universalism and Christian Science are involved in, which so direly threaten these experts' own miserable lives and self-confidence??
The Fundamentally literal preachers ot the self proclaimed inerrant King James originated religious literature called "Holy Bible" is to the Creator of this planet and all on it as the ponzi con-artist Madoff is to the investors. But, not to worry because the sun can and will swallow this planet as easily as a Madagascar chemelion can eat a gnat.
Oatmeal2 your mind is seared with an hot iron. Come to Jesus while you have time, he will make your life brand new.
Sandy what the heck are you talking about Gould. Gould did all he could to bridge the gap. You are talking about Richard Dawkins building rifts. Gould was one of the most respected evolutionary biologist of our time. Contributed punctuated equilibrium, spandrels, etc. If you compare Gould to Dawkins-Dawkins is a midget in peer-reviewed publications and novel ideas. None can compare-read Structure of Evolutionary Theory. His name goes up with Fisher, Mayr, Dobzhansky, etc. Gould saw religion and science as separate domains-non-overlapping majesteria. Gould was a true scholar, natural historian, and a brilliant scientist, but unfortunately he knew it too.
Bubba, that period of time there was a rush of sciences to learn about life. With the industrial age, man had more free time to ponder (let alone money to fund such research). Scientists then were spending a heck of a lot of time on classifying species. A little trivia, as so many don't know REAL history. There was an Scottish anatomist by the name of John Goodsir (medical students may recall of him), his brother and him did much the same as Darwin -- and personally a better job (absolute brilliant scientists), but being Scotsmen at that time discrimination was rife, no Scotsman could gain fame as an Englishman like Darwin. Darwin wasn't the first of his day, as fellow scientists of the day like Goodsir were doing the same studies at different points. We're in the pickle today largely to how Darwin's work has been hijacked and promoted by others like Gould, and now, Dawkins. Darwin never promoted some "direct link", he did submit his observational evidence for discussion, though (and at that time it was before men were dug up earlier humanoid skeletons to even associate that type of evolution).
I don't mind the stickers claiming evolution is a theory, just don't try to teach religious doctrine as science in publicly funded schools.
Sandy you're completely ignorant of the subject so hold your tone. Darwin made popular ideas already held by other scientists. The Islamic world had long past made the same observations. Species today is meaningless. It can be defined phenotypically, as a eco-niche, genetically, reproductive isolatable, or cladistically. While taxonomist still hold true to the notion of species (although corrupted by numerous inconsistencies since genome sequencing)evolutionary biologist see "species" as a theoretical not a real entity-the interest is in populations and pop genetics.
"Gould did all he could to bridge the gap." ------ Gould turned Darwin's own thesis into something that never was presented in the first place. It's was presented as a thesis based on observation (and at a time before a fossil record was even found). The point is, Darwin's work was politicized, when it never was the intention of the author to claim it's some fact. He had a theory, but that is all. Today, paleoanthropology is rife with it's own classification problems (e.g., lick thumb and judge the wind scenerio -- nope, classification isn't much more scientific as assumptions based on ideas of bone sizes = which family what species belongs too. Being that the bones are petrified, there's also no chance of extracting DNA to subclass the earlier humanoids [why they rely on other dating schemes, which also are prone to errors, especially contamination of the strata]). So, any "facts" is still up to debate (personally we'll have more luck finding the origins of the universe, than our own species).
Oh I get it now....."skeptics will change their opinion upon presented with evidence, debunkers will defy reality to remain smug in their delusions),"...that explains the barry followers..I'm just saying...........................