|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Creationism in Schools | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LudvanB Inactive Member |
I think that creation teaching would be an interesting class to take in school,although it should be an optional one,like evolution i guess. And it should be a course teaching the many creation MYTHS to give an insight of the imagination of earlier,more primitive culture. We had such a class in high school in my younger days and it was very interesting,although the teacher,a nun,was convinced that she was actually giving us an historical account of factual events. i guess it was required for her to believe that to be a nun...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
KingPenguin Member (Idle past 7912 days) Posts: 286 From: Freeland, Mi USA Joined: |
quote: they should have had those rights to begin with is what i was going at. we made some huge mistakes at the beginning and it took an entire war to convince the south otherwise. i was making fun of prohibition mainly and now the government is allowed to look at any information it wants on the internet without warrants, it suppose to be for stopping the evil taliban but im sure they abuse it. also granting corporations the same rights as a person was a monumentally stupid decision, check out www.adbusters.org and im sure youll find all sort of weird stuff thats anti anything capitalist. ------------------"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5223 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
quote: Well, the US civil war didn't convince anyone of anything, that was why there was a war. Will was imposed by force. I strongly suspect that after the war, if a poll was taken, the same people would be pro slavery as before the war. As regards us having less rights now, I don't agree. I'm in the UK, & suspect the trends here have been similar in the US. 50 years ago a policeman could use physical violence on you to chastise you. The folks over here lament the loss of a coppers "right" to clip a youth around the ear. Nowadays, at the very least, the policeman would lose his job. If anything the states rights over individuals have diminished. This side of the pond, we have the European Court Of Human Rights, which every EU country is signed to. This court has the power to overrule individuals countries laws if it finds them unjust (by & large, I approve). Currently there is a case where a lawyers (who else?) car was caught on camera exceeding the speed limit. The magistrates court/police informed him & attempted to fine him. The lawyer objected on the grounds that the police hadn't proven he was driving. They asked him if he was driving the car, & he used his right to silence. They can't prove he was driving the car (& to be fair, he never denied it), so as far as he's concerned ,it's innocent until proven guilty. If the police can't prove he was driving, he's innocent, they can't ask him anything because he may incriminate hinself. The magistrates having none of this, fined him anyway. He refused & took it to the Court Of Human Rights Because his right of innocence until PROVEN guilty had been violated. 50 years ago this would never have been entertained. They would have fined him, if he had refused to pay, they would have imprisoned him, despite not being able to prove he was driving. The case is pending. Also, in Europe anyway, no one can execute you anymore for a crime you didn't commit. Mark ------------------Occam's razor is not for shaving with. [This message has been edited by mark24, 02-17-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
KingPenguin Member (Idle past 7912 days) Posts: 286 From: Freeland, Mi USA Joined: |
that wasnt my beef. im saying that corporations have gained way too much power, just look at that exxon thing. they had the majority of the us governments senators in their pockets and they screwed over a lot of people.
------------------"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
No one likes responding too much toward my posts as much as KP's and such. Hows come?
------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
toff Inactive Member |
quote: No offense, but that is complete nonsense. To teach creationism, one MUST teach religious beliefs as fact (ie., that there is a god, that he created the world, etc.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: What does campaign finance have to do with the amendments to the bill of rights, then? I suggest that you require a bit more precision of yourself when conveying your thoughts.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: In addition, WHICH creation 'science' do you teach? YEC? OEC? ID? There is no cohesive Creation "science". Also, Creation "science" is a peculiarly American phenomena. There are not any Creation "Science"movements in Europe or Asia that I am aware of. If Creation "science" was really scientific, why aren't there adherents all over the world, and why do Creation 'scienctists' all have to be Christian? ------------------"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow- minded." -Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"No offense, but that is complete nonsense. To teach creationism, one MUST teach religious beliefs as fact (ie., that there is a god, that he created the world, etc.)"
--Thats the point I was making, you don't have to teach Creationism, teach creation science (without the biblical creation if you must), or The Theory of a Young Earth. ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"In addition, WHICH creation 'science' do you teach? YEC? OEC? ID?"
--YEC basically, teach that the evidence doesn't allways point towards an old earth. To teach the Creation (as obviously there are many religions with different creation accounts) or ID would rather be more of the Teachers decision most likely. Teach anything that is scientific. "There is no cohesive Creation "science"."--Then teach it like it is braud, ie, there are many creation accounts, etc. "Also, Creation "science" is a peculiarly American phenomena. There are not any Creation "Science"movements in Europe or Asia that I am aware of." --Well isn't that unfortunate. I think there is one in Australia but I don't know about the others. "If Creation "science" was really scientific, why aren't there adherents all over the world, and why do Creation 'scienctists' all have to be Christian?"--They don't all have to be Christian, there are muslim and buddhist creationists, a more specific approach I am looking for to what would be taught is that the earth could be young, and simply that it could have been created on top of that. Instead of the schools trying to rip everyone's faith to shreads, with first-hand experience, it is a frequent happening, a typical product of indoctrination. ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LudvanB Inactive Member |
quote: [This message has been edited by LudvanB, 02-18-2002] [This message has been edited by LudvanB, 02-18-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
no2creation Inactive Member |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TrueCreation:
"Furthermore, why doesn't the bible make any mention of bacteria or even reference to microorganisms? You must know how important bacteria is in everyday life. We could not live without it, yet there is no mention of this in the Bible." --What would people think of it if they were to read in a book anything resembling bacteria? - Not sure, what? A couple hundred years ago people saw mold growth as proof that nothing can become somthing, and abiogenesis, untill someone came along and shown its fallacy.- Its too bad that had to happen. In the bible there is, however, an inquiry on the subject of sanitation, which is greatly contrasting with the effects of disease by micro-organisms.- The explanation of sanitization in your post seem very vague to me. Genesis accounts for the creation of plants, and animal life, but no where does it indicate a creation of bacteria and lifeforms not visible to the naked eye. Yet the life that is not visible to our own eyes, is a requirement for the survival of Earth.[QUOTE] [This message has been edited by no2creation, 02-18-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"LUDk but which brand of YEC's? christian? Norse? Algonquin? Mayan? Australian aborigenal? they're all different and i'm sure their proponents could show you evidence on why THEIR version is the correct one. Or is this whole creasionism movement just what i suspect it to actually be...a means by which christians can proletyse under the guise of legitimate science..."
--That the Earth could be young, and that Evolution isn't the only answer. What you want to branch off from this is the students choice. "LUD:As i said,this i could agree with...as an optional course in school."--Yes, so should the concept of Evolution. "LUD:Well...maybe the rest of the world know something that the americans dont...ever thought of that? After all,Europe experienced first hand the horrors that can be engendered by mass religious histeria."--Sure I thought of it, never seen it though, and I thought the web was world-wide? They must like it to be kept a secret. "LUD:I think you got it backward there TC. The US is probably the most rabidly christian nation in the world...THAT was the result of 150 years of indoctrination."--We dont' need to change the direction of the subject. I remember passing out fliers for my church after the 9-11 attacks, I encounterd a girl that was my age. Very sarcastic, she told me she wouldn't accept the flier because I said I wasn't a 'holy priest'. I asked her a question of why she considered herself athiestic. Wouldn't you guess that her answer was 'have you ever heard of Evolution'. Obviously there is something seriously wrong with that statment isn't there. Such is the teaching of evolution in our schools today. "In the '20,during the infamous monkey trials,where a teacher was suspended for teaching darwinian evolution to his class,this fact became self evident,as the teacher was relying on hard science and his prosecutors were doing nothing but proletysing to the jury,just falling short of claiming in open court that the teacher was nothing less than the Anti-Christ. The judgement of the school stood,even if the teacher had proven his case and it took 40 years before someone in the legislative bodies woke up and said "hey...maybe there's actually something to this whole evolution thingy after all"."--you take the 'monkey trial' to its extremities in sarcasm. "Christianity is not on the verge of disapearing in the US...far from it. But it has always fought viciously the establishement of differing points of views,which is why religion was removed from mandatory teaching in schools...Some people actually took the time to read the constitution and realized that it said FREEDOM of religion and NOT "freedom to be a christian or else..!!!."."--As far as I am aware, it doesn't say anything about being unable to teach creation in the public schools either. "Science educates,it does not indoctrinate."--Wish that was true. "In science class,you are not punished for questionning a logic that appears faulty...you are praised for it(unless the science teacher is a real self centered jerk)...Tell me,to the best of your knowledge,how long could you question the doctrinal teachings in a christian school before you got yourself expelled?"--Most likely wouldn't get expelled, but what would I know, Im not in a private school. Also, not every christian school is against Evolution. ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lbhandli Inactive Member |
The 1st Amendment does not allow the government to promote any particular religion. Given that you are unable to provide a coherent theory of creationism, it isn't science, but religion and therefore inappropriate for public school science classrooms. If you disagree, I would suggest you respond to Gene in the thread that concerns your theory.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"Not sure, what?"
--It would be like teaching water flows up-river, especially with any skeptical mind-set in the time. "- Its too bad that had to happen."--Such is the strenght of science, not its fall-back. "The explanation of sanitization in your post seem very vague to me. Genesis accounts for the creation of plants, and animal life, but no where does it indicate a creation of bacteria and lifeforms not visible to the naked eye."--Genesis 1:20 - And God saith, `Let the waters teem with the teeming living creature --This could include micro-organisms. See below. "Yet the life that is not visible to our own eyes, is a requirement for the survival of Earth."--Colossians 1:16 - For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible," ------------------
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024