This isn't a conflict between liberals and conservatives. It's a conflict between rational and irrational people. Most conservatives are rational, but they're willing to court the votes of the dangerously and sickeningly irrational to win elections.
Thanks for stating that you somehow think this is liberal-vs.-conservative issue right from the start. Saved me the trouble of reading your post.
Most of you know that I am a teacher (not science.) I am in favor always of presenting more than one side or opinion to something. For instance, in History class, I think most people would want all sides presented to certain historical events. For instance, some people say that Hoover was responsible for the Great depression while other people think Coolidge was. Now I know that's not a good example, but hopefully you get my point. I'm not saying that a teacher should favor creationism. But, why not do one unit on the theory and give some of the evidence for it (and there is) and against it. It won't change the minds of kids either way. I'm sure you'll agree that in order to intelligently debate a point, you must be familiar with the arguments of the other side. Republicans need to know what Dems believe and vice versa. In order for kids and adults who believe evolution to be able to answer creationists, don't you think they need to be familiar with that theory? That's all I'm saying, just expose kids to it so they know how to respond to the theory, regardless of what they believe.
But Creationism is not a theory. How hard is that to understand? To tweak Ombak's example above, it's like forcing an 20th Century American Lit class to include an instruction manual for a vacuum cleaner because, you know, it has words too, and it was written in the 20th Century, then getting all pissy because the damn liberals won't accept that vacuum cleaner instruction qualifies as literature. The problem with Creationism is that it's not testable. It is not self correcting, and in fact, refuses to correct itself. It is not based on any empirical evidence or observation. It's based on some made up ********. It goes from hypothesis to conclusion without any attempt at a proof. It's not that Creationism is wrong. It just isn't science.
Thank you. No one is arguing that 'creationism' shouldn't be taught because we want to keep the information from the kids, It shouldn't be taught in science class, because it isn't science. It isn't some alternative theory, it is faith. Get it?
Skipshady nailed it pretty well.. The real goal of education if you ask me, is to teach the kids the questions, not the answers. Obviously you can't do this for every topic (2+2=chair) but with constantly changing, objective questions like "how did the world begin" why not let the kids mull over the answer, since no one REALLY knows? Go ahead, tell them that a bearded white guy made existence as we know it in a week, and really...see how long kids take it seriously.
Jalgpall, I've read your whole post and I think you're arguing a whole different topic. First of all, let me begin by covering this very basic and needed concept to put the whole point of this thread into perspective. The question: Should Creationism be taught in school as a science? Answer: No. Reason: To be a science, it must be testable. Creationism is very much composed of FAITH, which cannot be tested. Therefore, creationism cannot be tested. Therefore, creationism is not a science. That's at the heart of the debate, no matter the manner in which people present their points-of-view. We (most of the people on this thread) are just saying it's NOT a science, and should not be treated as such. These still don't offer us any 'testable' material. #1 is wholly faith. #2 and #3 require a belief (aka FAITH) in God which once again, can't be tested. By the way, #3 is the one that I feel the church will move toward over time. It's a master stroke really, and one they should definitely allow to 'breathe'. Nothing wrong with this. Ideas, theories, explanations are being 'tested' in your description of this "Intelligent Design". Thy're using scientific methods to test a 'science'...evolution in this case. Okay...we're talking about evolution in this thread...not Darwinism. Okay, but what has this to do with science class? Darwin's waterloo was Genetics. He had little to no understanding of it. I don't even know if he was aware of its existence. Gregor Mendel, a monk and "father of Genetics", was the first to delve into the science of genetics. Other than that, Darwin's theory of Natural Selection is widely accepted, and even has been seen in action on an island somewhere off the coast of...South America...I think...and happened so recently as to be video taped. The short story is that on this island lived two finch species: a thin-billed finch and a thick-billed finch. Their relative population masses on this island were around 60% and 40% (this is from memory) with thin-billed finches comprising the larger percentage. Both survived on a variety of nuts on the island. One year, a terrible drought killed off every type of nut except one, a thick shelled nut. Only the thick-billed finch was able to penetrate this nut, and so the following year, the thick-billed finch was 100% of the finch species on the island. The thin bills had all died out to the last bird. This is Natural Selection, and it's pretty damn conclusive. Again, creationism fails to qualify as a science. Evolution can be tested, thus...it's a science. This sounds an awful lot like philosophy. I think it's fine, but still doesn't put creationism anywhere near the category of 'science'.
I'm not sure you understand the definition of the word "science." link, please, or at least some details The word "theory" has a specific meaning in science, and you're not using it here. You're using the general meaning of the word to cloud the discussion. Right, we also needed sweet, sweet crude. Thus, the Stupid Pointless War. Look, you can't prove there is no such thing as witches. So just to be safe, let's do some witch dippings. Starting with your wife and daughter. What's wrong with that? If the water accepts them and they drown, at least we'll know they're in heaven. Because your side isn't informed. (OK, in your specific case, your post is NOT 100% bullsh**, so if you cut out the bullsh** part, then we could have a good discussion. But in general, anti-evolution folks post 100% bullsh**.) When we study Shakespeare, we don't test the theory that a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. We take that passage as the poetry it is. We don't rail at Dickens for the logical impossibility of it being BOTH the best of times AND the worst of times. (Talk about flip flopping!!!) Teach religion in church. Teach science in school. Problem solved. No, Osama, there's nothing wrong with that. Where it gets f***** up is when people want their God to rule over all other gods, including rationalism. If you're so damn sure about your religion, then why are you afraid of evolution? Yes, it is truly pernicious the way that the poor Christians have to meet undercover, and live in constant threat of being fed to the lions. And it's terrible the way everyone in Congress and all the Cabinet secretaries are avowed atheists and the networks never show It's A Charlie Brown Christmas because they're pushing their satanic agenda. Look, I'm a Christian. I'm raising my children to be Christian. I don't want any snakehandler or tonguespeaker or priestfu**er trying to influence them away from the one true path to God's kingdom. Which is, of course, the ELCA. See, there's your problem right there. My denomination doesn't believe in creationism. We believe in literacy and rationality, and aren't inerrantists. By teaching your religious beliefs under the guise of science, you're interfering with my right to raise my children in my faith. You're imposing your religion on me. It's the same reason prayer in school is just about the most anti-religious thing imaginable. I, as most Christians do, teach my children to end their prayers with, in Jesus' name we pray. There's no way a school prayer is gonna have that, it's gonna be some generic bullsh** prayer to the Father of us All. Screw that. I pray to God. My children pray to God. PS...a birthday shoutout to the man who started it all, Martin Luther.
You know, it wouldn't be such a bad idea to test every girl entering high school to see if they sink or float. It would help identify witches early on before they corrupt the other students. Hell, if we're going to pretend creationism is science, we might as well use witch hunting methods as student evaluation tools.
Sure, why not? My religion teaches me 1+1=11, the word "superb" means "my pants are a little tight" and treats George Orwell's "1984" as historical text. By all means, why don't we teach everything my religion teaches me, and let the students decide?
So do the flat earth people deserve their own time then? Aha, you say, that's different! How, I say? Well, we can test it! We see the Earth is round. Sure, I respond, but its just God making it seem that way. There's evidence for a flat earth - how come the water doesn't just spill off the edge? I mean, have you ever made a ball of water which wasn't moving? No? I didn't think so. Oh, you say. But that's different. Because for that to be true, you kind of admitted God makes something different than what it appears scientifically! Right. Just like God would have to intervene for your creationism theory to work. Aha - now I've got you! You see, if I argue that evolution is just God's work, I can get away with teaching that the Universe was started by God! Sadly, no you can't. Because by that definition, physics, biology and chemistry would all have the same lesson - why do molecules bond? Because God created the mechanism by which they bond. And we all agree that's stupid. So if you want to teach creationism as a scientific basis, you're just teaching evolution. If you want to tell your kids that it was God who created homo erectus, and homo sapien sapien - go ahead. I can't stop you. I won't stop you. I couldn't stop you from worshipping Max Bretos as your personal messiah, despite the fact that you'd deserve a public rusty sporking for such a crime against nature. But don't you dare add "evolution was wrought by God" nonsense to MY children's schooling. Because I don't ask biology teachers to say "there is no God". I just ask them to teach science without religion involved. And the same should apply here. Otherwise, I hope you're prepared to teach the flat earth theory. And for Utah to teach their theories of migration - you know, how the prohpet Moroni came to Utah. Hey - its just a differing theory. Why doesn't it deserve its own time in the classroom?
I must have missed his 96th "******** you and the jesus horse you rode in on" thesis. Of course, Kelly Vargas might have an earlier draft Luther was working off on.
As a philosophical post...yes, perhaps. As an argument to include creationism as a science, it offers not a single piece of evidence, though I'm convinced that its author was tackling a different issue. A Red Herring in my estimation, or Straw Man. I sometimes confuse the two.
if you are going to teach christian creationism... cool, but teach the creation stories of all the religions/peoples in the world we are not a christian country, we are not a muslim country, we are not a hindu country, etc.... science does not make religions wrong or tell you not to be in the one you are in... it teaches one to pursue truth... i think it would be best to leave evolution to the science teachers and religious creation stories to another teacher... do a course covering many of the religions throughout the world... show them where the stories come from, how they differ, how they are same, etc. but don't give me some bunk about only teaching christian creationism... that's 100% retarded in a country that has seperation of church and state... and where public schools are a part of the the state and thus seperated from religion
Here is a link to a story published in this month's issue of Wired magazine titled The Plot to Kill Evolution. It does a good job of explaining how ID is making inroads, and why "let both sides of the argument be heard" doesn't apply here.
What Luther did was get people to read their own Bibles and have a direct, more personal relationship with God. Once that door was opened, the explosion of Christian sects was inevitable, as was the adoption of religious pluralism as a civic value (after little disturbances like the Thirty Years' War and the Holocaust.) See, that's the thing. These prayer in school people are trying to turn back the clock, literally, 500 years. That's not gonna work.
If Creationism is science, this too is science: God created man, and the man he created was black. They believe that God himself is the original and supreme black man. He is the supreme being among a mighty and powerful race of black men. All black men today are a part of this God-race. The black race is thus divine and superior to all other races. Modern day blacks came into existence some 66 trillion years ago when a great explosion ripped the moon from the earth. These black men explored the earth and settled the better places to live, two of which were the Nile Valley and Mecca. The white man is the result of genetic manipulation by an evil black scientist named Yakub. Through a special method of birth control, Yakub bred the black out of his experimental creatures until they were white. This took about 600 years to accomplish. Black is the symbolic color of good and white the symbolic color of evil. All colors are present in black, and all colors are taken out of white. The whiter Yakub's creatures became, the less good there was in them and the more evil there was in them. The final product was so evil, they became devils. The white man is the Blue Eyed Devil, the cause of all suffering in the world. The creation of the white man occurred some 6,600+ years ago. A great mothership orbits forty miles above the earth. Black scientists originally used the mothership to raise the mountain ranges of the earth by dropping bombs. At some time in the future, God will bring this mother plane back into the earth's atmosphere and bomb the cities of the world. The bombs will burrow one mile beneath the cities, and then all explode at a given time. When this happens, the evil white race will be purged from the world.