Should Evolution and Creation be Taught in School?

The 'ignorant' majority can still throw out the grey zone parts on the fringes of science if they decide to do so.
They don't have to teach that the evolving we see today means there was no Eden. They don't have to engage in over educated what if there was no Gods?Any majority in their right mind would keep people with your low opinion of them far away from their kids as well!

The 'ignorant' majority can still throw out the grey zone parts on the fringes of science if they decide to do so.
They don't have to teach that the evolving we see today means there was no Eden. They don't have to engage in over educated what if there was no Gods?Any majority in their right mind would keep people with your low opinion of them far away from their kids as well!

quote:

---

Which group's (or collection of groups') doctrines will be the guiding principles?

---

The bible is the supposed source for all of them. Why get into anyone's doctrines?

quote:

---

Would their origin stories be permitted in school, or not?

---

No. Would Jewish orgin stories be permitted in Bejing? Maybe in an after hours club, or private prayers, etc, out of respect, letting them believe and behave as they want, within the framework of the majority wishes.

quote:

---

are you limiting majority control to secondary and below, or would you also require majority control over state-funded colleges and universities as well?

---

No limits.

quote:

---

If the latter, which sciences would be directly effected (i.e., which sciences would be prohibited under your system from conducting basic research, etc)?

---

Are there any sciences that might be something a moral majority might not like? If so, why fund them? Is there some higher obligation there to fund anything at all?

quote:

---

This statement is self-refuting, but I thought I would make sure everyone else notices it.

---

Actually, faith is something shared by more than those who believe in God. "
1 The branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines.
2 Formal argumentation in defense of something, such as a position or system."Prayer is not a christian doctrine. A doctrine is---
"1. A principle or body of principles presented for acceptance or belief, as by a religious, political, scientific, or philosophic group; dogma.
2. A rule or principle of law, especially when established by precedent.
3. A statement of official government policy, especially in foreign affairs and military strategy.
4. Archaic Something taught; a teaching."The door swings both ways. Evolution also fits the description.My point was that a majority teaching it's kids basic precepts of the faith of their fathers is not some apologetics ministry. It is more like slapping the present ministry of truth into line with it's masters.

quote:

---

Unless the "stories" are, like the theory of evolution, supported by a mind-boggling amount of good, solid evidence in a multitude of different disciplines confirmed by a wide variety of different methods.

---

No, because the support only goes as far as Eden, beyond which all evolving is a dream. A story. A story that assumes no God, or creation, and explains accordingly. And don't hand us the line that it assumes no God because it can find no God. That kind of white cane reasoning is lame as well.

quote:

---

The evidence supporting evolution has become stronger and stronger over the past century and a half, and now the fact that life has evolved cannot be disputed by educated, reasonable people.

---

Life still evolves, but it started in Eden. A little evolution doesn't mean we started before the garden. It simply is how things work. Why make silly grandiose statements?

quote:

---

This is why the courts have ruled that creationism cannot be taught in the public schools

---

In your opinion! I guess you mean in the US, as well. Well, then, should we conclude that all knowledge lays in the US courts? If they decide otherwise, then we all change our minds?

quote:

---

It is becoming clear that your point is confused. By your own statement, you are committing the fallacy of equivocation, yet you do not recognize this.

---

It is becoming clear you have no point, let alone an ability to be cohesive.

quote:

---

It does not matter whether or not the majority accepts that creationism, Noah's flood, or Santa Claus travelling around the world bringing toys to all the good little boys and girls. The minority always retains certain rights in democracy, and in this country (the US) that has come to mean that they have the right to expect that state institutions will not present any religious dogma or tenet as fact or as an alternative to fact.

---

It ought to come to mean that the minority is put in it's place, and the majority are the belle of the ball. The minority have a right to exist in the existing structure which should reflect the beliefs and will of the majority. They have no right to expect in public school namby pamby, colorless, atheistic teachings as they may prefer. Go private for that.
Respecting a minority does not mean giving them the kids, the farm, and the keys to the smart car. It means not killing them or arresting them for having their different beliefs.

quote:

---

Why do you think your particular group's idiosyncratic interpretation would be the main one?

---

I don't. But the bible simply presented and simple prayer are not some factional thing. No dividing and conquering there. Look at the apostles creed, I think even the Catholics use it. Something like 'I believe in ....one God...creator of heaven and earth...' We don't need religion in schools so much as just the basics of heritage and to fill the gaps where beliefs are needed.

quote:

---

How do you justify this kind of oppression in light of Christianity?

---

Teaching kids about the majority beliefs and heritage and birthright, and salvation is not opression. It is duty. A God given command, right, and duty. Who would deny any majority that?

quote:

---

The overwhelming abundance of data support the statements.

---

Seems to support if looked at in a no God perspective. But that really says nothing at all. Beliefs and assumptions, my friend, that is all.

quote:

---

Do you have a different opinion? Do you disagree that the courts have rule in this manner?

---

You kidding? How many agree with the courts on a lot of major issues? Point is, if you accept these old men as you ultimate autority of truth, you are in bad shape indeed!

quote:

---

you have provided several different definitions for the words "faith" and "doctrine"

---

Don't blame me, that was a dictionary. You have a problem with dictionary definitions? I don't think the mods can help you there.

quote:

---

And in this country, it means not using public money and state institutions in support of purely religous doctrines.

---

Even calling the majority heritage beliefs religious doctrines, while advocating belief doctrines of your own is hypocritical.

quote:

---

the assumptions are yours, the assumption that to accept evolution means no god, when you haven't proven anyway. your beliefs
mainly evolution =! god
which isn't true

---

The assumptions are yours. As for God, unless you believed in Him, why even bring up the Guy?

quote:

---

don't change the definition when he refutes your arguement using it

---

Brace yourself. I didn't write the dictionaries.

quote:

---

evolution isn't a belief doctrine its a scientific theory.

---

Well, a doctrine is a few things, like this..."Something taught; a teaching"
Doctrine - definition of doctrine by The Free Dictionary

quote:

---

no one has heritage beliefs

---

"something transmitted by or acquired from a predecessor : LEGACY, INHERITANCE b : TRADITION
3 : something possessed as a result of one's natural situation or birth : "People do possess beliefs that result from transmission of their predesessors. In some places a majority of a country inherited Christian heritage, which was paid for in blood by their forefathers. Whatever are you talking about, so far in left field here?

quote:

---

evolution isn't a belief doctrine its a scientific theory.

---

It is taught, and where it deals with some far fetched long gone past, some belief is involved, sorry you don't seem to like this fact.

Most muslims and Christians are nominal believers, and do not believe the koran or the bible in any meaningful way. Nevertheless, a majority in the US still believe in the bible as true. So, if we focus on one country, we see that most are not nominal Christians there, because most believe in the flood. Yours stats likely are worldwide stats, not US.

quote:

---

The assumptions and conclusions of the Theory of Evolution is supported by fantastic amount of evidence in all the disciplines of biology and geology and with a wide variety of different experimental and observational methods.

---

Most of which is assumptive, when it comes to beyond Eden.

quote:

---

No. The problem is when a person cannot choose a single definition and stick with it during her argument. That is the fallacy of equivocation. Look it up; it is a well known logical fallacy.

---

Words can have many applications, not just the one you love.

quote:

---

Religious doctrines are religious doctrines. Taking offense does not change the fact that creationism is a religious doctrine.

---

Religious doctrines are religious doctrines. Taking offense does not change the fact that evolution beyond creation is a religious doctrine.

quote:

---

If I were advocating belief doctrines, then you might have a point. However, I am advocating teaching children the current state of scientific thought that is backed by evidence.

---

Your minority take on the evidence, which means nothing.

Actually, I am wary here, and will tread softly until I feel confident that the moderation is fair. Otherwise, I might walk into a trap, where the deacons of what is allowed as a definition of science, misuse that priviledge. I like the lights on, before I proceed into battle.

My forefathers loved and helped the natives. Sorry if you have some pang of guilt.

My ancestors were Christians. They gave the gospel and love to the natives. Not the blue coats, or whiskey traders, etc. Those who did bad things were not my fathers.Matt 23:30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.

You are right. In a fair fight, it would be a slaughter. I bide my time, and look around, and see if fairness is the order of the day here, or no.

My ancestors were the good guys. Like Jesus pointed out to the scribes when they said "our" fathers killed the prophets. He razed them for being children of those killers. Point is if we are believers, our fathers are those men of God and faith.

quote:

---

You claimed that the "majority" would decide to eviscerate biology to the point of irrelevancy, render geology impotent, throw out most of modern cosmology, physics, etc, because they disagreed with it on religious grounds

---

If the teachings were in line with this belief in the bible, many things would be changed. So the question becomes what does the majority actually believe? Also, what beliefs are inherant in the teachings we do have? Then, we simply bring the two into line as needed.

quote:

---

Since you apparently are now aware that "majority" rule would be against your view, you appear to be backing off from that initial claim. Am I reading you correctly?

---

If you mean a majority that believes in the bible and the flood, I don't think my views are that different. As I see it, reflecting a belief in the flood would impact geology. Reflecting a basic belief in creation would impact cosmology. And so on. A habit of prayer would impact things as well, showing it was cool to be a believer. A biblical orientation would impact medical practices and teachings as well, ie abortion. It would be like an education system heart transplant.Edited by whisper, : No reason given.