|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Anti-Science bill in Indiana..... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Where is the origins of life subject typically taught as it stands? In science class. Origins of life, when taught in K-12 science classes typically is about 1-2 pages in a 9th grade biology book. There just isn't that much that anyone thinks needs to be said about the topic to kids of that age. The real problem is that even talking about the origin of species is enough to cause a conflict with what creationists think ought to be taught. And essentially no creationist K-12 parents are interested in having their child subject to a comparative religion course in which Genesis gets compared to that stories about Gaia giving birth to the sky which then coupled with mom to birth the Titans. After all, the true fight is with evolution and evolution would not belong in a comparative religion course. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Right. How does that differ from what I said? Even more perplexing is that I received a jeer from DA who never does that sort of thing I don't know if it is different. I commented because K-12 biology classes either say nothing about origins of life, or are extremely tentative about abiogenesis. But, removing the abiogenesis material from the curriculum would be utterly unhelpful to a creationist, because it is the origin of species teachings that conflict with the origin of life as related in Genesis. Arguably, teaching evolution or any other scientific theory on the origin of species shouldn't even trigger the bad things in the statute. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I beg to differ. Remember: a majority of creationists arguments against evolution boil down to a strawman about abiogenesis. Even the creos that accept "micro"-evolution abhor abiogenesis. Yes, microevolution within a kind. In other words, creationists don't accept mch of anything. Biology taught without abiogenesis would be no less anathema to a creationist. The fact is that abiogenesis is a very minor part of the curriculum. It's usefulness to creationists is a way to wedge in creationism under the guise of teaching the controversy. Removing abiogenesis from the curriculum would still leave in common descent, with man having a common ancestor with chimpanzees. Do you really think that a creationist would be happy with being able to argue that God created unicellular life which subsequently evolved into every living and extinct species of multi-cellular life?Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
No and I am confused as to why you even asked me that. I was trying to demonstrate why removing abiogenesis from the curriculum wouldn't leave a biology course that was even a tiny bit more acceptable to creationists. W-hog has expanded on this idea.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
purpledawn writes:
Why turn science class or any other class into a comparative religion class when students can already take a comparative religion class to compare religions and their views on various subjects.Would you have preferred they left it as it was, teaching only christian creationism? The later would be more honest, but it would mean that the course would not be taught in public school. The above seems relate to purpledawn's point. Putting a comparative religion course into a science class, unless the science class was studying anthropology, would be totally out of place. I don't think we include other similar "sciences" in science class, so there is no constitutional compliant reason for such a curriculum. Although it doesn't come up much in discussion here, but I could imagine an effort to force a Creation/Flood friendly version of per-history into K-12 history classes.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Obviously spiritual crisis is something that parents will have to clean up, not the government. Christians should not want to cause family conflicts I don't really like the above wording. I think a creationist would find it insincere. I think I'd comment on the possibly of atheist teachers ridiculing and denigrating Christian beliefs by giving equal weight and treatment to obviously bogus stories like the ancient Greek/Roman origin stories or to the creation story in Norse myths. And what if some teacher decides to present Bible type Creationism by using the Koran, and totally skips the presentation of Genesis? That would seem to me to be allowed by the Indiana legislation. Despite any fears I have that the original law might pass muster with the current Supreme Court, I think a law or school board policy designed to prevent the above types of mischief would not seem Constitutional even to Justice Scalia.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I saw that approach in a letter that was sent before the vote. My guess is that any school that entertains the idea of teaching creation science, would probably address the Christian loyalties of their science teacher(s). Supposedly the school systeam would still have a choice on whether to teach creation science or not. Yes, but the idea is to prevent the law from being passed or alternatively to stop a school board from acting on the law. I don't believe mandating that the Christian perspective is taught would pass constitutional muster, while arguably permissive language that only allowed such teaching it combination with other religious teaching might. I agree that once the policy gets down to schools, a non-fundie's complaint and law suit is the only chance to derail the law.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Yes, indeed. Demonize those evil fucking atheists. Give people even more reason to be disgusted at the word atheist. The demon already exists in the mind of the creationist. Invoking that demon in order to derail the bill wouldn't seem to give any body a new rational. As a matter of fact, if I were a teacher faced with the discretion given under this law, I'm sure that some creationist observing my class would come to the conclusion that I must be an atheist.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
If the operative question is whether one species can become another, then science itself is on trial here. There is irrefutable evidence that new species are being created through evolution. It was the observation of the creation of species that Darwin wrote about in the Origin of Species.
What is actually considered by Fundies as not possible is the evolution between kinds, where kinds is defined as some fuzzy, and unexplained grouping of the animals directly created by God during Creation week. Unfortunately, the bible lists only a teeny number of kinds of animals. Are different species of finch kinds? Who knows? There is absolutely nothing scientific about denying that evolution between kinds is impossible. The idea is strictly based on an interpretation of the Bible that creationists believe. In my opinion, if Indiana's lower house is dominated by Republican's, then complaints that the law is 'too fundie' are unlikely to prevent passage. Your legislature fears only one thing; a pounding in court that will deplete the coffers of the state and local budgets. But it is imperative that you make the effort. Some legislators will listen and raise the issue during debate. And debate increases the change that unconstitutional legislator rhetoric will get onto the record. And again, evolution explains the diversity of life, not the origin of life.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
So you are suggesting PD provide a strawman attack as fuel for her letter? Or do you have something against atheists? No, not a strawman. I'm suggesting that PD threaten fundamentalists creationists with the boogeyman, because they will understand that. If my original post was unclear, surely my previous response to you should have made my proposed strategy clear. I didn't mean to imply anything about what a real atheist might actually do. Given your own quite frequent vocal attacks on even non creationist Christians who are not bothering you or threatening to load up public schools with religious dogma, I do find your thin skin a bit amusing. But no insult was intended to any atheist. By and large the atheists on this board are insightful, polite, and very well educated. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Obviously bogus" as compared to what? Genesis? I'm at a loss to understand this question. The whole point of my proposed question was that creationists would not want a course in which the goofy creation stories they don't believe are discussed on an equal footing with the goofy creation story they do want pushed in public school.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Explain to me why I should see the likes of you as any different from creationists? I don't care how you see me. I know that your attacks are indiscriminate and therefore they don't carry any weight with me. And I didn't attack atheists. I even acknowledged that I was just as likely to follow the course of action as an atheist. I don't even believe the course of action that I described was a dishonorable one. Yet a creationist would find the action abhorrent. You appear to be looking for a fight, when you aren't being opposed. I'm not going to oblige you any further.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Their true beliefs should be given more attention when children are taught US history. Their treatment of the native population in New England will show more vividly what these people were actually like.. History curricula has always been subject to all kinds of political manipulation by school boards and concerned citizens, and there are essentially no first amendment implications in twisting and tilting history. As a result we see efforts to remove Thomas Jefferson from history, to pretend that large number of slaves willingly fought for the South in the civil war, and to thoroughly discredit anything other than unfettered capitalism. It shouldn't be any surprise that intolerance is re-branded as religious freedom in history textbooks.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I think you are yielding on some very important ground; namely that creationism does not represent the beliefs of all Christians. Not all denominations and sects of Christianity rage against evolution in the way that some fundies do.
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
With regards to the court cases, it appears that the bill's authors are counting on being able to over turn those cases. I'm not sure they aren't right about that.
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024