The end result is that you are picking the belief system of one ethnic group over the belief system of another. Is it right to subordinate the myths and values of one people over another group? This type of prejudice preceeds brainwashing as it asks the citizen to ignore their set of beliefs for one that is fed to them as "truth".
Good point almost. However not all faiths can equally attest to their validity and basis in common sense if not science.
Some people believe in a very overwieght prophet that abandoned his family in search of enlightenment, most believe in a prophet of some sort that is self glorifying, accepts glory and/or has achieved riches.
The reason my beliefs are bible based is that the bible stand out amongst spiritual guides in that the writers did not take glory for themselves, nor become rich. The pope is rich and have proclaimed self omnipotence so I am not refering to any particular version of Christianity either, as better than another. However the bible as a basis for faith stands out, and is scientifically correct in many areas.
The commandments to the Isrealites were hygiene based eg wash hand before eating. This given at a time when germs were unknown, the circle of the earth when generally the earth was thought to be flat, a lifeless earth at its creation, etc.
In one way it is wrong to say any particular faith has more going for it than another. On the other hand some faiths, and believers not attached to a particular faith, can defend the basis for their faith better than others.
Some believers in TOE are unable to defend their stance with any veracity also, I may add, yet still believe in the faith. Are these any less credible than a creationist that can defend their stance.
I think people should have choices in learning faiths at school according to culture. However if TOE is taught as a science it needs to be taught warts and all, not just the glossy stuff that looks convincing.
Some people believe in a very overwieght prophet that abandoned his family in search of enlightenment ...
"Very overweight"? If you're talking about Gautama Buddha, you are making the common western mistake of confusing him with Budai, who has a similar name but is a completely different person.
Anyway, back to the topic.
just an example of whatever.....some faiths desert common sense altogether. TOE is one of them.
Some follow religious leaders that act like mad men, do not live what they preach and should be easily discerned as being bogus. This is a plea to common sense.
Many faiths/religions/cultures adhere to similar creation stories eg floods. Perhaps there is truth in many. However, when it comes to defending ones beliefs, one needs to be able to defend the basis behind it, why they feel their basis is stronger than any other faith, including TOE.
I feel creationists that base their beliefs on the biblical creation have an excellent basis from which to start, as outlined in previous post. I see TOE as a faith and should be taught as such, separating it out of biology in schools.
There is no need to choose a particular version of creation to be taught in schools. Rather all that needs to be done is the truth, warts and all, of the current contradictions and debate within evolutionary theory to be taught and how this relates to the outdatedness of Darwins simplistic ideas.
It is about providing balanced information so that the community can be well informed and able to make an informed decision to accept TOE or any creationist model.
This is much more preferable to bullying students into only online of thought and being taught only the glossy side of TOE in public schools, most of which has changed or been refuted by the time text books go to print.
For me it does not matter which creation model is correct, as long as none of my ancestors were apes. The evidence, research, contradictions etc show me evolution is an unlikely event. I am not an IDer, yet abiogenesis is unlikely to have occured on this planet or any other.
For me, it is NOT about tuning the population into YECS, old earth creationists, IDers, or otherwise, I don't think. It IS about offering a basis for informed choice to the community and the future adults of the world. This may be accomplished by instigating a curriculum of TOE that includes the debates and contradictions within itself, considers all creationist refutes seriously, and teaches TOE as theory, not a fact. That may be a good start.
Only evolutionists think of themselves as apes. I can clearly see that mankind has advanced reasoning and perceptual ability that clearly distinguishes us from apes and any animal. It is evolutionists that ask common sense to leave the room, while trying to convince the community we are apes with all sorts of reasonings. Thankfully, your ancestors were never knuckle walkers though!!!!
Biblical creationists know mankind never were apes. The first man was created in the image of God by just as magical process as your natural abiogenesis. That is where I came from. You'll be happy to know that you have no ape ancestors either. Debating fossils is for another thread. I'll breifly say this. Homo erectus is a mix of apes and humans. I do not think your researchers can tell the difference, I am afraid.
Turkana boy is quite different to some other homo erectus examples according to new finds. So the human line is a bigger mess than the others, which I know is hard to believe.
It does not matter if ID or any other creationist models is offered alongside TOE. All creationist thinking exposes the flaws, contradictions and delusions of evidence past (eg LUCA, knuckle walking ancestry), so any would be beneficial to what is generally taught these days. The more important thing is that any creation model be taught with sincerity and not tokenism.
All need to engage the reasoning ability God (or evolution to some) gave them, that separates humans from animals and make an informed choice based on knowledge. This is preferable to having believe what some one tells you. The bible supports this action.
So really, there is no problem for me here. Where I have a problem is theory being taught as fact, which I believe is a misleading representation of the status quo.
John Sanford discusses how evolution is impossible due to entropy, all the taxons are a mess, particularly back past the family rank where a whole heap of kinds have been thrown together. Really to show all the warts would require a book, not a post.
It is not 150 years of refined detail. Seriously it is 150 years of an evolving theory that could not even predict the Y chromosome disparity in humans and chimps. You have evo researchers privvy to the same research disagreeing on major reasoning at times.eg, bird ancestry. After 150 years evolutionists have more questions then they have answers. Don't you think?
What is not being taught is that TOE is far from being proven, despite 150 years. In fact TOE was far more believable 20 years ago, when fossils were missing.
It is not about teaching any creation model as a fact either. It is about presenting the basis for all sides and the refutes also in a balanced way, so the community can choose individually for themselves how much weight they place on any model and if TOE is actually based on science.